The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-05-2025 Planning & Zoning Commission - CancelledPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Wednesday, February 5, 2025 Formal Meeting — 6:00 PM Emma Harvat Hall Iowa City City Hall 410 E. Washington Street Agenda: ** Meeting Cancelled Due to Weather ** 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda ❑evelonment Items 4. Case No. REZ24-0016 Location: North of Melrose Ave. and East of Camp Cardinal Blvd. An application for a rezoning of approximately 7.2 acres of land from Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone. 5. Case No. REZ24-0001 Location: 900, 902, 906, and 908 N. Dodge St. and 905, 909, and 911 N. Governor St. An application for a rezoning of approximately 5.49 acres of land from Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone, High Density Single -Family Residential (RS-12) zone, Medium Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-20) zone, and Multi -Family Residence (R313) zone to Medium Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-20) zone and High Density Single -Family Residential (RS-12) zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD). 6. Consideration of meeting minutes: December 4, 2024 7. Election of Officers 8. Planning and Zoning Information 9. Adjournment If you will need disability -related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact Anne Russett, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5251 or arussett()..iowa-citv.ora. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Formal: February 19 / March 5 / April 2 Informal: Scheduled as needed. STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ24-0016 Parcel: 1007351003 Owner/Applicant: Contact Person: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Location Map: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Prepared by: Madison Conley Associate Planner Date: February 5, 2025 St Andrew Presbyterian Church 140 Gathering Place Ln Iowa City, Iowa 52246 Michael Welch Shoemaker & Haaland 160 Holiday Rd Coralville, Iowa 52241 920-475-8060 mwelch(o)shoemaker-haaland.com Rezoning of 7.2 acres from Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID - IRS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone. To rezone to a zone that allows development as opposed to the existing interim development zone. East of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and north of Melrose Ave. 7.2 Acres Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) North: Religious/private group assembly uses, Low Density Single -Family K Comprehensive Plan: Public Meeting Notification: District Plan: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) South: Single -Family, Low Density Single - Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) East: Single -Family, Rural Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OP/RR-1) West: Highway 218, Governmental Purposes, Institutional Public (P2) Office Commercial Property owners and occupants within 500'of the property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. A rezoning sign was posted onsite at Camp Cardinal Blvd & Melrose Ave (Parcel 1007351003). None December 23, 2024 February 6, 2025 The owner, St Andrew Presbyterian Church, is requesting approval for the rezoning of 7.2 acres from Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone for land located east of Camp Cardinal Blvd and north of Melrose Ave. Both Camp Cardinal Blvd and Melrose Ave are arterial streets which are in close proximity to Highway 218. Portions of the property's northern edge border sensitive areas such as woodlands, wetlands, and regulated slopes, which are also found on the St Andrew Presbyterian Church property directly to the north. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan's future land use map originally identified this area appropriate for 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre. In 2016, St Andrew Presbyterian Church submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that changed the future land use designation from 2-8 Dwelling Units per Acre to Office Commercial (CPAI 6-0000 1, Res No. 16-129). The Office Commercial land use designation is assigned to areas intended to provide the opportunity for a large variety of commercial uses that serve a major segment of the community. The subject property is currently for sale. The owners have expressed an interest in rezoning to provide more clarity and certainty to future buyers regarding development potential. Attachment 3 includes the applicant submittal materials such as the Rezoning Exhibit and the Applicant Statement which describes the rationale behind the request. The applicant has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on January 23,2025. ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The property is currently zoned ID-RS. The ID-RS zone provides for areas of 3 managed growth in which agricultural and other nonUrbanuses ofland may continue until such time @Sthe city iSable tOprovide city services and urban development can occur. The land uses allowed iOthe |[}-RGzone are limited. The only permitted use iOthe |0-R8zone iSplant related agricultural. Detached single-family dwellings are allowed but require @ minimum Of5acres. Limited commercial uses are allowed and subject t0use specific standards. For example, the |D-RSzone allows general and intensive animal related commercial uses; however, any outdoor facilities associated with these uses are required t0hesetback 8tleast one hundred feet from any lot line. Proposed Zoning: The applicant is requesting that the property to be rezoned to the MU zone. The purpose of the MU zone is to provide a transition from commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. The MUzone allows 8mix Ofuses, including lower scale retail and office uses, and 8 variety Ofresidential US8S. This [Dix of uses requires special COOSiden@U0O of building and site design. Table 1 outlines the uses that are 8|kJvv8d in the MU zDO8. i.e. [DUlti-h3O0ik/ office uses, C0DlrDuDitv service, etc. The MU zone does not allow for drinking establishments (8.g. b8[S), quick vehicle servicing uses (e.g.gas stations and car VV8Shes)'O[any industrial uses. Table 1 — Uses Allowed in MU Zone Assisted group living Attached single-family dwellings 08t8Ch8d single-family dwellings [>8t8Ch8d zero lot line dwelling Duplexes Group Households Multi -family dwellings Eating establishments Office Uses —General &Medical/dental Redemption center Alcohol sales oriented retail Hospitality oriented retail Personal Service oriented [eL@i| Sales oriented Tobacco sales oriented Community service -shelter General community service Daycare Educational facilities —General & Specialized Parks and open space Religious/private group assembly | CD[n0OUOiC@UOO L[aOSnOiSSiOO facility P=Permitted PR = Provisional S=Special exception Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 91 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The Northwest Planning District does not have @district plan, SOthe proposed rezoning iSreviewed using the /C2030Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Map Ofthe Comprehensive Plan was amended in2O10changing the subject property's |@Dd use designation from 2-8 dwelling UDU3 per acre h3Office Commercial (CPA16- 0001). The resolution noted that the amendment was warranted due to the subject property's close Dn}XiM0ib/ to Highway 218. It also stated that the g8O8[G| p[iDCiD|eS of the C0OlD[8heDSiV8 P|GD encourage buffers between residential development and major highvv8yS.Th8[8sO|UbOD8|GOst@teG that the CC)-1 zone is an appropriate zone near residential neighborhoods and an appropriate transition tOmore intense uses. Although the resolution indicates CO-1 as an appropriate zoning designation for the subject property, staff finds that the proposed MU zone aligns with the intent of the comprehensive D|aD GO0eOdO0eD[ as well. Both the C(]-1 zone and the MU zone allow nBSid8DU@| and |8SG intensive CO0O0e[Ci3| uses. Similar to the C[)-1 zOD8. the MU zone dD8S not allow drinking eGt@b|iSh[D8DtS, quick vehicle servicing uses, and outdoor storage and display oriented retail. In addition, the MU zone does not allow d[ive-thrOUghS. Furthermore, the following Comprehensive Plan goals and strategies are supported by the rezoning request: Encourage compact, efficient development that iscontiguous and connected tOexisting neighborhoods k}reduce the cost Ofextending infrastructure and services and UJpreserve farmland and open space @t the edge Ofthe city. o Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. Encourage 8diversity Dfhousing options iOall neighborhoods. o EDSu[O @ mix Ofhousing types within each neighborhood, to provide options for households of all types (singles, families, retirees, etc.) and p8Op|8 of all iDCOnl8S. o Identify and support iDfi|| development and redevelopment opportunities in 8F8@S where services and infrastructure are already iDplace. The p[ODOSed [eZODiDg aligns with the C0rOp[8h8DsiV8 Plans AO@|8 that eDCOU[Rge iOfiU development and a diversity of housing types throughout the community. The subject property is surrounded by developed land and the site is currently served by city services. In terms of housing diversity, the MU zone allows a diversity of housing types, including single-family, duplex, and multi- family residential. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The land uses surrounding this property include St Andrews PrBSbVt8h@O Church to the north, single-family residential to the 8@st. DlUUU- f8nOi|y residential to the ODdhvvest` and Highway 218 to the west. G8Oen8Uy SpeakiOO, the neighborhood is 8 mix Of both SiDg|8-f@Dli|y and multi -family n9Sid8nti8|' as well as in5[UUbOn8| uses with the church. The neighborhood also includes a number of regulated sensitive features. The subject property, specifically, includes VVOOd|8OdS @|OOg the eastern portion of the property that abut the existing single-family homes iOWalnut Ridge. Additionally, there iB83U'pipeline easement that runs north and south 8|DOg the eastern bOnd8[ of the subject property. No dev8|DpnlBDt vvOU|d be @||Ovv8d within this easement. Given the regulated sensitive features and the restrictions OOdevelopment placed by the pipeline easement O@tU[@| buffer should F80@iO between any development and the single-family land uses tOthe east. FUrtheOmOre, future development on the subject property must comply with the Mixed Use Site 5 between surface p@ddDg and neighboring p[Op8rh8S. Buildings SC8|e is also [egU|@i8d, and 8rtiCU|8LiOO standards are required to 8OSUF8 that buildings are bFDheD Up in DlOdU|eS. The pU[pOS8 of these St@Od8[dS is to eOSU[e that building sites are designed to be iOViUDQ for ped8SL[i8OS by orienting buildings toward the street, requiring that buildings be constructed with SLr88t level storefront windows and clearly demarcated pedestrian entrances; and by requiring that parking belocated away from the street and screened bylandscaping. Regarding lighting, the mixed use zone is in the RlediVnl illumination district. This district vvoU|d 8UOVV more lighting than 8 single-family zone; hOVVeVB[, the light trespass St8Dd@ndS require that lighting fiXiUn2S are shielded in such G Say that the bulb is not directly visible from any adjacent r8Sid8Db3| use. (}ve[aU' the lighting standards [8gU/8L8 light fixture shielding, directional ContnJ|' and height of fixtures to prevent light from one property extending beyond the property line ODtO adjacent properties. Staff finds the pnJDOSed rezoning request is QDOSistGrt with the Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the existing neighborhood character. Transportation & Public Infrastructure: The property has 8CCeSs from Camp Cardinal B|vd, which COOt8iOS @ nO8di@O that limits iOg[8SS and egress to the site. The[efDme, staff is [8COnl[n8DdiDg G condition that the Owner reconstruct the median tDallow full access tDthe site. This will also require the CODStrU[tiDD of dedicated |e0-tU[O |8n8 On Camp Cardinal Blvd. Sensitive Areas: The subject property contains regulated sensitive features. Asensitive areas d8v8k]p[n8[d p|@O is not required at the time of rezoning. AS8OSitive @[8@S development p|8D will be required either @[subdivision or site p|8O review. /# that time, the applicant will be required to submit a sensitive areas development plan showing regulated sensitive features, proposed impacts, and construction limit lines. Upon r8COFnnOend8U0n from the Planning and Zoning COOl0lis3iOn' 8 public h8@hOg will be scheduled for consideration by the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff F8CDrDDl8OdS 8pp[OV8| Of REZ24-0018' 8 pFDpOS8d rezoning to [RzOOe 7.2 acres of the property located east Of Camp C8ndiO@| Blvd and DOdh Of Melrose Ave /P8[C8| NU0b8[ 10O7351O03\from |O-F|S zone k}yNUzone subject k}the following condition: * Prior to iSSU8OC9 of building permit the Owner shall reconstruct the median to 8||Ovv 8CC8SS and also COOStrUCt 8 dedicated |eK-tU[D |8De OO Camp C@[diDG| Blvd subject to review and approval bythe City Engineer. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Applicant Submittal K4GtehG|S Approved by: Danielle 8itznn8n.A|CP. Development Services Coordinator Department DfNeighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map r ' 1"F CITY OF epared By: Rachael Schaefer late Prepared: January 2025 \\Vey • • a ATTACHMENT 2 Butternut Gt Place N, } =-6 °CampCardmai Blvd _ ON- 7MIDIRS = - - - - s_� 1elrose Ave to 21g P2_ Rl IL 29 _ - Melrose Ave -_ — An application to rezone 7.3 acres of land arras - pL T I from Interim Development Single -Family eA` to 21g Residential (ID-RS) to Mixed Use (MU). r CITY OF epared By: Rachael Schaefer late Prepared: January 2025 AcoM C � '' —KennedyY-` occ ca!Ivey Ct- za 6 LA `; t ATTACHMENT 3 Applicant Submittal Materials —Rezoning Exhibit & Applicant Statement COPYRIGHT PROTECTION UNDER FEDERAL LAW (TITLE 17, U.S. CODE) Above law limits the use of this document (drawing/data) to this specific project only, and duplication whole or in part for use on other than this project is prohibited. Ile 11 ?6, 0 0�101 X's , Z", Oj op, , � `"finnan � � ^^�t.. j �, n�I ' "Jill V Ili ulhdlllihllm J"Cdil Hh: ;IM jii�Ru 1111 0 "I"OP U) _w ~ 0- \\\ \', \,' I k' Im } 'uV, ~"L,L . .. ... ---- cv..1 /y`ol 1' CL \ IY'II'' Ii// Il ll 1 ; i j 11 L.L_ L.L II f III i 1'II ,lI Iili IIII II 'I Il l�/�� ll l'I lA) �II � CW � 1 II v 1^ I IIII IIII III , i %ii llfi I/II i' I I wol / / 1 I f APPLICANT'S ��U�UK�� o o ��v��o�n ~x.xv��uo-o�vo-o�/ FOR :v�u-v�o�no�� St. Andrew Presbyterian Church Parcel Nurnber1UD7351O03 Please accept the following Applicant Statement submitted on behalf of St Andrew Presbyterian Church. St Andrew Presbyterian Church has owned the property located near the intersection of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and Melrose Avenue since 2009. This property isidentified asParcel Number 1OO7351003oras Auditor's Parcel 2O12061. This property was acquired along with the property located at 140 Gathering Place Lane where the StAndrew Presbyterian Church islocated. The parcel isphysically separated from the Gathering Place Lane property byawaterway and awooded ravine. St Andrew Presbyterian Church is seeking a Mixed Use (MU) zoning designation for the property. The property iscurrently zoned Interim Development Single -Family (ID-RS). According tothe City Code, the |D'RS zone is intended "to provide for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and non -urban uses of land may continue until such time as the city is able to provide city services and urban development can occur." This property is surrounded by developed properties and city services are currently available. StAndrew previously pursued a comprehensive plan amendment to allow for a commercial use on the property. Since making that change to the comprehensive plan, the market for commercial properties has changed and St Andrew has not been able to attract a buyer interested in developing the property for a commercial use. The Mixed Use is a commercial zone that is intended to "provide a transition from commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. The MU zone permits a mix of uses, including lower scale retail and office uses, and a variety ofresidential uses. This mix ofuses requires special consideration ofbuilding and site design." The Mixed Use zone is well situated at this location to provide a transition from Highway 218 to the west and the large -lot residential properties within Walnut Ridge to the east. St. Andrew has not determined a final use nor do they plan to be the developer of the property. Their goal in rezoning the property is to remove a barrier for a potential buyer and position the property to the ready for development when abuyer isidentified. The site iscurrently served bycity water and sanitary sewer. Any future development will need to comply with applicable city codes, including the sensitive area ordinance and storm water management. Thank you for your consideration of this rezoning application. Michael J. Welch, PE Shoemaker To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Item: REZ24-0001 911 N Governor St & Date: February 5, 2025 Surrounding Properties GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant/Owner: TSB Holdings, LLC tracva.barkalowhomes.com Co -Applicant: The City of Iowa City Neighborhood & Development Services Department 319-356-5230 Contact Person: Jon Marner MMS Consultants i. marner(a-)mmsconsultants. net Requested Action: Rezoning to High Density Single - Family Zone and Medium Density Multi -Family Zone with a Planned Development Overlay 2= Location: Location Map: Size: Existing Land Use; Zoning: Redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties along N. Governor St. 900 N. Dodge St, 902 N. Dodge St., 905 N. Governor St, 906 N. Dodge St., 908 N. Dodge St., 909 N. Governor St., and 911 N. Governor St. 5.49 acres Single-family, two-family, and multi -family residential and vacant office building; Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8), High Density Single -Family Residential (RS-12), Medium Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-20), and Multi -Family Residence (R3B) 9 Surrounding Land Use; Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: District Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District: Public Meeting Notification: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: North: Single-family and kwO4anOily; RS-128Dd RS-8 South: Happy Hallow Park and SiDg|e-haDlik/, Neighborhood Public (P1)and RS-8 East: Sing|e-harni|y, RS-8 West: Single-family, RS-8 2-8DU/Acre and 16-24 DU/Acre Central District Plan C1 Property owners and occupants within 5O0'Ofthe property received notification Ofthe Planning and ZOOiDQ C000[OiSSiOD public meeting. TVVD [8zOOiDg signs were posted along N.Governor St. and two were posted along p].Dodge St. The applicant, TSB Holdings, LLC, is requesting @pp[OV8| for the [gzOOiDg of @pp[nXiDl@telV 5.49 GC[eS of land from Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone, High D8DShv Single - Family Residential /RS-12\zDDe. Medium []eOSitv Multi -Family Residential /RM-20\zOOe. and W1u|U-F@Dli|y Residence (R3B) zone to Medium OgD8ib/ W1u|U'F@0i|y Residential /RyN'20\ zone and High Density Single -Family Residential (RS-12)zone with @ P|@OD8d Development Overlay (C}P[J). The City is joining the property owner 3s @ co -applicant on this rezoning. The proposed development would allow for the d80O|itiOD and [ep|8Ce0eD[ of buildings 8|DDg N. Governor St, including the existing, v8C8Ot CODlDl8nCi8| nffiDB building. The PnB|iO0iO8ry P|8DO8d Development Overlay and Sensitive Areas Development P|8D' Building BeV8UOnG' Rezoning Exhibit, and Applicant's Statement are attached. [Attachments 2'3.4.and 5l The western portion of the subject property is part of the Subdivision of the SE 1/4 Section 3 Township 7SRange 8Final Plat approved iO1873.The eastern portion Ofthe property iSpart Ofthe BG0VO'G Subdivision CfB|k 1 DHvvey'GAddibOO also approved in 1873. The zoning of the property in question has been the subject of significant past litigation. A portion Ofthe subject property was 8tissue iD81887decision Ofthe Iowa Supreme Court, /AeD7lifKCdy of Iowa CitK 402 N.VV.2d 393 (|Ovv@ 1987). |Dthat case, @ developer had purchased @fOuF8cFG tract comprised 0fsix |OtS—LokS8-1Oalong Governor Street and Lots 49-51along Dodge Street. /# the time, all of these |OtG were zoned R3B. @ C|@gSifiC8tiOD permitting office buildings and high - density multi -family residential units. The developer had completed construction of an office building and had begun construction of an apartment building when the City revoked the building permit for the apartment building. The City subsequently rezoned the property to permit commercial office and multi -family residential uses On portions Ufthe tract, while limiting the remainder [Usingle-family and duplex development. The court concluded that the decision k}rezone the undeveloped portions Of the property to permit only single-family and duplex units was unreasonable due to the economic unfeasibility Ufsuch limited development. AS8result Ofthis litigation, Lots 1D'40.51'and part Of LOt5O reverted tOthe R38zoning classification in effect in 1978. This classification was tUremain in effect until @ use had been established on any of the |0tS' after which time further development 3 or redevelopment of that lot would be subject to current zoning regulations. Since the court ruling ODuses have been established ODthe lots iOquestion. In 2011, the City received a rezoning application (REZ1 1-00016) for a portion of the subjectproperty along N. Governor Street UJ rezone the property from C[}-1 (Commercial Office) zone k} FlW1-12 (LOVV [)8DSiiy Multi -Family Residential) zone. At the time rezoning VVOU|d have @||DVVed 8Dpr0XiOQ8t8|V 18 rDU|[i-f8[Di|V rHSid8Dii8| units. This rezoning nSC8iVed @ significant 8rDOUni Of opposition from neighborhood residents and failed at Council by a vote of 0-6. After the failed rezoning attempt the City Council directed staff tDexamine the comprehensive p|@O'S land use policy vision for the property and explore designating the property b}nDlonger allow multi- family residential uses. The City initiated 8comprehensive plan amendment /CPA12-O0004\which proposed Gnamendment tOthe Central District Plan tDchange the future land use designation from Low tO Medium Density Multi -Family to Single -Family and Duplex residential for pnJp8di8S |OC@h3d @t8O5.8O8.and 911 N.Governor Street and property between SO6N.Dodge and 91OM.Dodge SL[g8L This CO[OpP8hgOSiV8 p)@O amendment was 8CCO[Op@Oied by three City initiated ngzOOiOgS (REZ12-OOO10.REZ12-O0O18.and REZ12-O0019). (][diD@DCe 13-4518 rezoned |GDd from R313 and [|C)-1 to RS-12 (High [}8DSib/ Single -Family Residential) zone. After the rezoning the property owner submitted @ site p|@D proposing 8 multi- family residential building. Adthe time, Lots 10.49, and 51 remained undeveloped. The City denied this site plan b8C@USe multi -family uses are not allowed in the R8-12zDne. The owner appealed the decision tOthe Board OfAdjustment. The Board upheld staffs decision, and the owner appealed this d8CiSiDD tOdistrict court seeking to invalidate the rezoning. The C8Se eventually made its VV@y to the |Ow@ Supreme [|OUrt as TSB HOldYOcl8, LLC K Board of AOVuStD8ntfor CityOfIowa City. 913 N.VV.2d 1 (|ovv8 2018). The court found that the ngzODiDg DR]iD8DCe was 8 lawful exercise of the City'S zoning authority. However, the COUd held that the Kempf decision prohibited the City from enforcing the new zoning ordinance @8tOLots 10. 49' and 51. AG@result, the property owner was permitted 1Omove forward with construction Ofmulti-family housing OO these |OtS consistent with the fD[FUe[ R313 zoning classification. TO date, this development has not occurred. In short, these properties have 8 |ODg and CO[np|iC8bed zoning history. At present the properties [O[O3iD 8 DliX Of both SiDQ|e-f8OOi|y and UlUki-f8Oli|y zoning. Some of the DlUUi-f8OOi|y zoning that applies t0the property is the zoning d8SigDGUOn from the 19708 (R3B)d8t8[O0iDed by the courts. The City is acting as 8 co -applicant for this rezoning for S8v8n8| r8GSOnS. FimSt, due to the hOdge pOdge of zoning designations this rezoning helps to eOSUne B cohesive d0Ve|OpDleOt p8Me[D as opposed to that which would be @||Ovved under current zoning. Second, the proposed FHz0DiDg vvOV|d require CO0p|i8DCe with the City'S 0Od8[D zoning [8gU|8U0OS as opposed to zoning regulations adopted in the 1870S. Third, the City COUOCi|'S Strategic M8O speaks tOworking On establishing partnerships and CD||8bOn@tiODS within the COOl[OUOitv, VGdiCU|8r|y in the interest Of advancing housing goals. Good Neighbor Policy: The applicant held a good neighbor meeting on August 13, 2025. Approximately 20 individuals attended the meeting. A SUD1018ry Of the Ole8UOg is attached. A#18Ch[Dent Ol In addition to the good neighbor Dl8eUOg. City staff, F8pneSeDtBUveG Of MMS Consultants, and three neighbors met to discuss additional concerns on September 25, 2024. ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The subject property is zoned Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS- 8) zone, High [}8DSitv Single -Family Residential (RS-12) zone, Medium O8DSib/ W1U|U-FanOi|y 91 Residential (RM-20) zone, and Multi -Family Residence (R3B) zone. The existing R313 zoning is a zoning designation from the 1970s. See Figure 1. Properties zoned RM-20 allow multi -family residential. Properties zoned RS-12 and RS-8 allow single-family and duplex residential. RS-12 also allows townhome style multi -family up to six units attached. The maximum height in these zones is 35'. The R313 zone also allows multi -family residential at a minimum lot area per unit of 750 square feet. This equates to approximately 58 dwelling units per acre. Given the land area zoned R313 the existing zoning would allow a maximum of 84 dwelling units. The maximum height in the R313 zone is 45' and 3 stories. See Table 1. Table 1. R313 Zoning Summary Minimum Lot Area Per Unit Approximate Maximum Density Maximum Height 750 square feet 58 du/ac 45' and 3 stories Figure 1. Current Zoning Proposed Zoning: The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to High Density Single -Family (RS-12) zone and Medium Density Multi -Family (RM-20) Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD). The OPD is required due to impacts to sensitive areas. No waivers from development standards are being requested. 5 � ` _ Figure 2. Proposed Zoning ^ � POINIm The owner is proposing to demolish and replace the buildings along N. Governor St., vVhidl will include the d80DO|0OD of two single-family hOOO8S and the v8Q3rt Office building to @CCorDDlOd@te the development of two multi -family residential buildings each containing 42 units. A total of 84 units are proposed, which is the maximum allowable number of units under the current R313 zoning. The [DGxiO0uO0 dgDSib/ iDthe OPO/RyW-2Ozone iS24 dvv8||iDg units per net acre. See Table 2. There is OD [RdeVe|ODOOeDt planned along N. Dodge St. at this time; however, redevelopment is possible. Any future redevelopment must demonstrate substantial compliance with the Preliminary OPID Plan @siSdefined bythe zoning onjiDaDC8. The rO8xiDlUDl @|k}VV8b|e height in the proposed zoning d8siOO8tiOOS in 35'. /\dditk]D3Uy. development Ofmulti-family [8SideDU8| in the RM-2Ozone will require compliance with the Cit/8 DlOde[D 0OV|U-f@[Oi|y Site development St@Dd@[dS (which vvOV|d not be required Of dev8|OpUl8Dt under the 1970 R313 zoning). The multi -family site development standards address the |OC8hOO Of parking, landscaping between surface p@[WOg and neighboring properties, the deOO8[C8tiOO of building 8Ot[8DCHS. and building articulation tOavoid monotonous facades. Since the property is located within the Central Planning District, the proposed development is also subject to additional standards that regulate architectural design and building materials. Table 2. OPD/RM-20 Zoning Summary Minimum Lot Area Per Unit Maximum Density Maximum Height � D/8 24du/net acre 35' Since the proposed zoning does not follow existing parcel boundaries, staff is recommending CODdiUOO that OU building permit shall be issued for the proposed Lot 1 UDU| the City COUOCi| 8ppFDVeS 8 final plat [esUbdiVidiOg the subject property to CODfOrO to the proposed zoning boundaries. General Planned Development Approval Criteria: Applications for Planned Development [GzODiOgS are reviewed for CO0p|i@nCe with the St8Dd@[dS @CC0ndiOg to Article 14-3A of the |8w8 City Zoning Code, except for sensitive areas developments that comply with all underlying zoning and subdivision regulations. Since the proposed planned development iSrequired due tOsensitive @n88S and no D10difiC8bDDS are being F8qU8Sted' the proposed rezoning is SUbiB(t to the StGDd@nd M. rezoning review criteria: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan: The proposed rezoning isreviewed using the |C203O Comprehensive Plan and the Central District Plan. The Future Land Use Map of the IC2030 plan identifies much of the subject property as appropriate for 0U|ii-f@0i|y rgSid8Dii@| deV8|Op08Ot at 16-24 dwelling UOiiS per acre. The area along N. Governor @tiSidentified @Sappropriate for residential development 0f2-8dwelling units per acre. The Central District Plan identifies the area 8Sappropriate for Single -Family and Duplex Residential, Open Space, and Low to Medium Density Multi -Family with a development density of 8-24 dwelling units per acre. The Future Land Use Map functions @8a conceptual future vision. Both plans envision this area @s allowing multi -family development. See Figures 3 and 4. Furthermore, the rezoning is supported by plan goals and strategies that are outlined below. Figure 3.KC2030 Future Land Use Map Figure 4. Central District Plan Future Land Use Map The |C203OPlan also include @ number Ofgoals and strategiesthat support the proposed rezoning: Land Use Goals andStrategies: 0 Encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connection to existing neighborhoods b]reduce the cost Ufextending infrastructure and services and t0 preserve farmland and open space @tthe edge Ofthe city. o Ensure that iOfi||development iScompatible and complementary i0the surrounding neighborhood. Housing Goals andStrategies: � Encourage 8diversity Ofhousing options iOall neighborhoods. o Ensure 8mix Ofhousing types within each neighborhood, hJprovide options for households Ofall types (SiOg|8S.families, retirees, etC]and people Ofall |OCO[DeS. o Identify and support infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas where services and infrastructure are already in place. 7 Environmental Goals andStrategies: * Recognize the essential role our land use policies play iD preservingnatural resources and reducing energy consumption. o Encourage compact, efficient development that reduces the cost of extending and maintaining infrastructure and s8n/iC8S. o Discourage sprawl bypromoting small -lot and iDfi||development. Parks and Open Space Goals and Strategies: 0 Improve overall access b}and awareness Ofparks. GOB| 1 Ofthe Central District P|Gn'SHousing and Quality OfLife element states "Promote the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging reinvestment in residential properties throughout the district and by supporting new housing opportunities" Although the p[OpOg8d redevelopment is not FeiOV8st[D8Dt in existing [esidgDd8| property it is an iOV8StDl8Ot in the neighborhood and will 8||Ovv the for the n3rD0v8| of the blighted, v@C@Ot office building and 8||OvV for the development Ofmuch needed housing units. The Central District P|@O also includes @ CODlpODeDt related to open space. |1envisions the possible eXp8DSiOD of Happy HD||DVV Park tOthe west and 8 bit iothe north, including one parcel OD the SUNeCt property. The area of the subject pnOp8dv identified in the plan as appropriate for open space is zoned R313. Given the court rulings protecting development rights and the current zoning dHSigD8UOO, expanding the public park in this manner is uO[gG|iSUc. The topography also makes expanding the park tOthe north challenging as any northern expansion vvOU|d likely be iD8CCeQSib|e to Dl8OOb8FS of the public. FiD8||y. the CQDt[8| District P|2O also St@iGS the fO||OvViDg: "Another pocket of 0V|1i-f80i|y development in the northern part of the district along Dodge 8inBet is zoned R313' which is an obsolete zoning designation no longer used in the City Code. This area should be rezoned to a valid designation such as RM-20. which acknowledges the density Of the existing Olu|U-f8Oli|y development DDthe prOpDdv" In summary, the proposed rezoning to OPD/RM-20 with a small portion rezoned to OPD/RS-12 is consistent with the |8Od use policy direction of the Citv'S adopted p|8OS. The p|@DS 8DviSi0D the development Ofmulti-family residential iDthis area, make note Dfthe importance Vfaccommodating a diversity of housing types to meet a variety of needs, and highlight the benefits of infill development for environmental and infrastructure reasons. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: In terms of the surrounding neighborhood, Happy Hollow P8d{ is directly south of the proposed development. Single-family homes are located 8Cn3SS the N. Governor Street righi-Of-w8ytOthe east. To the north is a mix of duplex and other [eSideDU@| US8G. To the west of the proposed development on the SUbi8Ct property are two existing multi -family residential buildings containing 12 and 29 units respectively. TO the south of the existing DlUUi-fe[Oi|y buildings is 8 duplex (to be converted to 8 SiDg|8-f8[Oi|y hU[D8) with single-family hO0D88 further to the south. The neighborhood is @ DliutU[8 Of housing types ranging from detached single-family homes to larger scale apartment buildings. The major amenity for residents is Happy HO||OVV Park. The Preliminary Planned Development Overlay Play was developed b}fit into the existing mixture of residential buildings that the neighborhood contains. It proposes two multi -family buildings along N.Governor Street. Each building contains 42 dwelling units for a total of 84 dwelling units. The two block -scale buildings front N.Governor St. iD8manner that aims tOreduce their visual impact from the public right-of-way. The northern building is p0Sih0D8d in such 8 way that the shortest end Of the building hDOtS N. GOVe[OO[ 8t. The width of this end of the building is 70 feet wide COOOp8Fed with the length of the building, which is ~236 feet. /\ddib0Da||y' the SUUth8[D building is pDSihnD8d F-,� at an 3Dgl8. which 8JkovvS the longest side Of the building to be positioned further @vv8y from N. Governor St. This site layout also provides for 8 large open space area south of the building /OOdh of Hmoux HO||0vv Park) for the residents Of the building. The pn}DDSed development nnUS[ COrnp|y with the private open space standards outlined iOsection 14-2A-4E0fthe Zoning Code. The proposed multi- family buildings with 84units containing 132bedrooms requires 1.320square feet Ofprivate usable Op8D space (10 square feet per bedroom). The pnJpDS9d development shows adequate private UpgO space featuring an outdoor seating area. Excluding the designated private Op8D space area, much of the remaining area OO the proposed Lot 1 will be used to retain StO[0vv8t8[ and protect sensitive features. Both buildings are proposed to meet the 35O0axiDlUDl height |iOlb in the zone. NOwaivers from the height standard have been requested. Parking is accommodated DD surface lots that are |OC@tgd behind the building, as well as internal structured parking. |Oterms Oflandscaping, th8 proposed development would maintain 15existing mature trees along the southern property line abutting Happy Hollow Park. Additionally, 54 new trees will be planted on the site, including A street trees along N. Governor St. The |@DdSC@piDg plan also ShOvVS that the surface parking will be screened to neighboring property owners to the south and west. AlongN. Dodge St. there are two existing duplexes and two existing multi -family residential buildings. The p|@DS show that the Owner D|@D8 to convert the sOUthgnl dVD|8X at 900 N. Dodge St. on the proposed Lot 2 to a single-family home. This is needed in order to meet the density requirements of the zone. Staff is FeCO0DleDdiDg @ condition that prior to Final Plat approval that the duplex is converted. Although there are DOplans for redevelopment along N.Dodge St. (with the exception of the duplex CODVerGiOO 8t8OO N. Dodge St.), the rezoning VVOU|d 8UOVV redevelopment in the future. Any future redevelopment of the proposed Lot 2 will be required to SubSt@OdG||y comply with the Pn3|iDliD@n/ {JPD Plan. The rezoning vvOu|d not 8||0vv any more dwelling units than CU[[eDUy exist. AdditiOD8||y, the existing development pattern provides a transition from the detached single-family homes to the south to the existing @p@rt[D8Ot buildings 1Othe north. Future n3dev8|OpO08Dt would need to ensure that this transition is maintained similar to the existing context. Transportation and Public Utilities: The proposed rezoning is bordered on the west by N. Dodge St. and ODthe east bvN.Governor St. Both are one-way streets with N.Dodge St. running south and N.Governor St. running north. Both streets are also considered arterial streets per the City's streets plan and are highways under the authority of the Iowa Department of Transportation. Regarding capacity, 2O23data from the Iowa DOT shows 8DADT daily traffic) Of5,8OO for N. GOVeOlO[ St. The theoretical capacity is approximately 15,000 to 18'000 per day. TnBDSp0rt@UOD p|8DDiDg staff have reviewed the plans and have found that there is sufficient capacity on N. Governor St. to accommodate the new development. The current public right-of- way varies in width and is less than @ b/piC2| 8rt8[i8| right-of-way width. As forN. Dodge St. the existing conditions will not be changing with the proposed rezoning. That said, 2O23data from the Iowa DOT shows 8OAOTOf8,2UOalong N.Dodge St. Like N.Governor St.' N. Dodge St. CGO @CCOOO[DOdGLe between 15'000tO 18'000 per day. The Site is also served by Iowa CityTranSit's North Dodge Route. Transit stops are located adjacent to the subject property along N. Dodge St. heading south and along N. Governor St. heading north. Staff iSrecommending two conditions related to the transportation system. First, that public right- 8|ODg N. Governor St. and easements b8dedicated k}the satisfaction Ofthe City Engineer to allow the iOst8U8dOO of 5' sidewalk. 88COnd. that 8 heDlpDF@[y COOSinUCUOO e8S8[D8Dt be QF8OLed OD the vV8StB[D 10' Of the SUN8Ct property abutting N. [>Od0g St. This t8rDpO[@ry CDOSt[UCtiOD e@SGDl8nt is needed to for the Dodge Street PeCODSt[UCtiOD project that is planned between Governor and Burlington Streets. The project will be done in partnership with the |Ovv8 OC)T and includes new street p@Ve[D8Ot. Sid8VV8|k. Ub|ih/ improvements and other associated VVO[k. Both CDOditiODS will he addressed at final platting. The site also has access is the Citv'a existing sewer and vvo[ar system. An 18^ sanitary sewer i[UDk |iO8 runs through the property. Public Works staff has reviewed the p|GOS and have OD CDOC8[DS regarding S@Di1@n/ S8VVe[ capacity for this area as it would [e|@t8 to this project. Staff iS [8corD08DdiOg 8 condition that the existing water services for S02, 804. and 908 N. Dodge St. that are tapped off of the water main in N. Governor Street shall be abandoned, and new services for 002. 904' and 908 N. []Odg8 Street Sh8|\ be installed that are tapped off Ofthe vv@t8[ Ol@iO in N.Dodge Street subject iOreview and approval bythe City Engineer. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The subject property contains regulated slopes and groves of trees. The applicant submitted 8 PPg|iD1iD@ry G8DSiUve Areas Development P|GO that shows critical S|OpeS being impacted beyond the 35% which can he @ppn3V8d 8dOOiDist[@UVe|y and triggering the C)P[} rezoning. Specifically, the proposed development VVOU|d impact 88% of the C[iUC@\ S|Up8s OD the pPDp8dm. Although gR}VeS of trees are present OD the SUhieCt property DD woodlands exist; and therefore, the proposed development is not subject to the woodland retention requirement. Neighborhood Open Space: According to section 14-51K of the City code, the dedication of public open space or fee in lieu of land dedication is addressed at the time of final platting for residential subdivisions. Based on the proposed rezoning, the Owner will be required to dedicate approximately 0.067 acres tOthe City or pay afee in -lieu of land dedication. The (lVVOer has requested to D8V B fee in -lieu Of@public open space dedication. Staff has accepted their request for 8payment in -lieu of land dedication. Storm Water Management: The Preliminary OPD Plan includes an area to accommodate storm water. Public Works staff will review all stormwater management plans as part of the site plan review NEXT STEPS: []pVD ReCDDlDleDdaUoD from the P|@DDiOg and Zoning CODlOOiSSOO. @ public h88hDg will be scheduled for COOside[@UOD by the City COUDCii The OvvD8[ also has three other pending applications related tOthis rezoning: 1\Afinal plat application which will bereviewed byCity Council; 2\ A Site p|GD 8pp|iC@UOD which will be reviewed by City staff, and 3\ A design review 8pp|iC8UOD which will be reviewed byCity staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval OfREZ24-O0O1.@proposal k]rezone approximately 54Sacres Ofland between N. Dodge and N. GOVe[OO[ Streets to (]P[VRG-12 (approximately 0.17 GCr8S) and OPD/RM-20 (approximately 5.32 acres) subject to the following conditions: 1. |Dconsideration Ofthe Cit/Srezoning the subject property, Owners agree that DObuilding permit Sh8U be issued for Lot 1 as ShOVVO On the Preliminary Planned [}eVe|OprO8Ot Overlay Plan until the City Council approves 8final plat F8SUbdividiOg the subject property 1Oconform iOthe zoning boundaries established bythe rezoning ordinance tOwhich this Agreement isattached. 10 2. Prior to the approval of the Final Plat, the Owner shall convert the existing duplex as shown on Lot 2 of the Preliminary Planned Development Overlay Plan to one dwelling unit to ensure compliance with the maximum density standards of the zone. 3. As part of Final Plat approval, the Owner shall dedicate public right-of-way and easements along N. Governor Street consistent with what is shown on the Preliminary Planned Development Overlay Plan subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 4. As part of Final Plat approval, the Owner shall grant a temporary construction easement on the western 10' of the subject property abutting N. Dodge Street. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for Lot 1 as shown on the Preliminary Planned Development Overlay Plan, the existing water services for 902, 904, and 906 N. Dodge Street that are tapped off of the water main in N. Governor Street shall be abandoned, and new services for 902, 904, and 906 N. Dodge Street shall be installed that are tapped off of the water main in N. Dodge Street subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location & Zoning Maps 2. Preliminary Planned Development Overlay and Sensitive Areas Development Plan 3. Building Elevations 4. Rezoning Exhibit 5. Applicant's Statement 6. Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting Approved by: N'nielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location & Zoning Maps 1 � 1 ttw QW MW=1Q - %AAI_ CITY OF IOVVA CITY IM t65 W- - M-ft N Summit St 10 R812 - W -XV °B =°L 88 him — ` -- - _R 2 88 -- - - -- 1 _ _La cyAw- `= - =F r An application to rezone approximately 5.49 acres of land R8 k Zan from Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8), High = Density Single -Family Residential (RS-12), Medium Density X r Multi -Family Residential (RM-20), and Multi -Family Residence (R3B) to RM-20 (-5.32 acres) and RS-12 (-0.17 - acres) with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD). _ K_ -- - - 1 � 1 QW 0W=1Q - %AAI_ CITY OF IOVVA CITY RS8 N Sum_ mit St ATTACHMENT 2 Preliminary Planned Development Overlay and Sensitive Areas Development Plan LOT 1, SCARLETT POINT, IOWA CITY IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF IN THE PLAT OF RECORDS OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. PROPOSAL APPLICANT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT 2 BUILDINGS FOR MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE ON 3.5 ACRES. DEVELOPMENT 5CHEDULE APPLICANT PLANS TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION IN SPRING 2025, LASTING THRU SPRING 2026. DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS PROPOSED ZONING IS OPD jRM-20 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT YARD' SIDE YARD REAR YARD MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE LOT FRONTAGE LOT WIDTH MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT LOT CHARACTERISTICS LOT AREA BUILDING AREA - PROPOSED PAVING AREA - PROPOSED GREEN SPACE AREA PARKING REQUIREMENTS 36 ONE BEDROOM UNITS 48 TWO BEDROOM UNITS TOTAL REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED GARAGE PARKING PROVIDED OUTDOOR PARKING TOTAL PROVIDED PARKING REQUIRED PROVIDED 10.55 FEET (MAX) 21 FEET 10 FEET 14 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET 5,000 SF 152,461 SF 40 FEET 40 FEET 60 FEET 353 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 152,461 SF (100%)(3.50 AC) 32,684 SF (21.67.) 35,430 SF (23.4%) 84,347 SF (55.3%) 36 SPACES 96 SPACES 132 SPACES (5 ADA) 82 SPACES 50 SPACES 132 SPACES (5 ADA) REQUIRED BIKE PARKING - (1.5 X 84) + (76 X .75) = 107 SPACES PROVIDED BIKE PARKING = 107 SPACES (98 GARAGE, 9 OUTDOOR) UNIT DENSITY REQUIREMENTS MAXIMUM DENSITY (OPD jRM-20) 24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE 3.50ACX24=84 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS 84 UNITS DWELLING UNITS PROVIDED 84 UNITS LOT 2, SCARLETT POINT, IOWA CITY IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF IN THE PLAT OF RECORDS OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS PROPOSED ZONING IS OPD/RM-20 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT YARD SIDE YARD REAR YARD MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE LOT FRONTAGE LOT WIDTH MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT LOT CHARACTERISTICS LOT AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA BUILDING AREA GREEN SPACE AREA PARKING REQUIREMENTS 42 TWO BEDROOM UNITS TOTAL REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED GARAGE PARKING PROVIDED OUTDOOR PARKING TOTAL PROVIDED PARKING REQUIRED PROVIDED 40 FEET 20.80 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET 5,000 SF 76,231 SF 40 FEET 319 FEET 60 FEET 290 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 76,231 SF (1007.)(1.75 AC) 40,339 SF (52.97.) 12,330 SF (16.27.) 35,892 SF (47.1%) 84 SPACES 84 SPACES 2 SPACES 56 SPACES 58 SPACES TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE LOT AREA 76,231 SF BUILDING FOOTPRINT 12,330 SF BUILDING COVERAGE PERCENTAGE(MAX 50%) 16.2% OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED: 84 BEDROOMS X 10SF/BEDR00M = 840 SF OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 900 SF OPEN SPACE LOT 3, SCARLETT P RECORDED PLAT TH JOHNSON COUNTY,I rpiwwolaffiraffolm SETBACK RFOUIREMEN BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT YARD SIDE YARD REAR YARD MINIMUM LOT REQUIRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE LOT FRONTAGE LOT WIDTH MAXIMUM BUILDING HEI LOT CHARACTFRISTICS LOT AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA BUILDING AREA GREEN SPACE AREA PARKING REQUIREMENT 2 TWO BEDROOM UNIT'. TOTAL REQUIRED SPAC PROVIDED GARAGE PAf PROVIDED OUTDOOR P TOTAL PROVIDED PARK TOTAL BUILDING COVEF LOT AREA BUILDING FOOTPRINT BUILDING COVERAGE PI Mil . .-�• -V NOTES: 1 FRONT SETBACK OF 10.55' WAS CALCULATED BY SETBACK AVERAGING OF ABUTTING LOTS. A MINOR MOD WILL BE REQUESTED TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM FRONT SETBACK ON LOT 1. TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE 2 ON LOTS THAT CONTAIN MULTI -FAMILY USES OR GROUP LOT AREA 152,461 SF LIVING USES DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE MUST BE NO LESS BUILDING FOOTPRINT 33,225 SF THAN 400 SF. PRELIMINARY SE ��N�i�[��G�� i� Q�U ��M i�G�Gr�� i� Q� oOC� EC7 ON 31=1 0 �l 7 '5 342.88 24,6.17'- N89-37'5�7"E�� 2 749.00WT--. PRELIMINARY SE ATTACHMENT 3 Building Elevations ITALIANATE STYLE A POPULAR AMERICAN ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IN THE LATE 19TH CENTURY BORROWED FROM CLASSICAL ENGLISH DESIGNERS INSPIRED BY VILLAS AND PALACES OF ITALY. CHARACTERIZED OFTEN AS A ROMANTICIZED INTERPRETATION OF ITALIAN RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE. TYPICAL FEATURES INCLUDE FLAT OR LOW PROFILE ROOFS, LARGE OVERHANGING EAVES, DECORATIVE BRACKETS, CORNICE BOARD WITH LARGE FREEZE BAND, TOWERS, TALL NARROW WINDOWS AND DOORS WITH TRIM ALONG WITH BALUSTRADED BALCONIES AND PORCHES WITH SLENDER COLUMNS AND BRICK & CLAPBOARD SIDING. THIS BUILDING STYLE BECAME HIGHLY ADAPTIVE TO INCLUDE HOUSES AND ESTATES, HOTELS, APARTMENT BUILDINGS, BANKS, RETAIL AND OFFICE BUILDINGS TYPICALLY TWO STORIES ON UP TO FIVE BY THE END OF THE 1800'S. IN LINE WITH THE TRADITION OF ITALIANATE ARCHITECTURE, OUR PROPOSED DESIGN SEEKS TO HONOR THE ESTHETIC PRINCIPALS OF THE STYLE AND PROVIDE A FUNCTIONAL MULTI -FAMILY HOUSING COMPLEX. BY INCORPORATING ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, ORNAMENTATION, SPECIAL DETAILING, AND APPROPRIATE PROPORTIONS, WE AIM TO HARMONIZE WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND PAY TRIBUTE TO BEAUTY OF THE ITALIAN DESIGN. SPECIAL ATTENTION HAS BEEN MADE TO MAKE THE BUILDING ENTRIES APPROACHABLE AND THE SCALE OF THE BUILDING BROKEN DOWN INTO ROWHOUSE LIKE MODULES. THE OPEN SPACE, SCREENED PARKING, WALK WAYS, SITTING AREA, AND LANDSCAPING WILL MAKE A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO THE COMMUNITY. R-8" MODULE "A" 24'-4" MODULE °B" 3 SEASON SCREENED PORCH ATTACHMENT 4 Rezoning Exhibit LEGEND AND NOTES — CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, FOUND t\ — CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, REESTABLISHED A — CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, RECORDED LOCATION • — PROPERTY CORNER(S), FOUND (as noted) O — PROPERTY CORNERS SET (5/8" Iron Pin w/ yellow, plastic LS Cap embossed with "MMS" ) 0 — CUT "X" — PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES — — CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES — RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES — — CENTER LINES — LOT LINES, INTERNAL — LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — — — — EASEMENT LINES, WIDTH & PURPOSE NOTED — EXISTING EASEMENT LINES, PURPOSE NOTED (R) — RECORDED DIMENSIONS (M) - MEASURED DIMENSIONS C22-1 - CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND HUNDREDTHS ;T-E 0 5 25 50 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=50' - PROPOSED OPD/RS12 ZONING I— PROPOSED OPD/RM20 ZONING 1 Pa-fZ-AT J"SON & ffFT-0 I WILY REV06Ai3LE �TRLrOT/ POINT OF BEGINNING REZONING PARCEL #2 NENNETT J b� TUo©oWoSoOH TFU[HENUUHcASU WARUER SEMON 311-779H-ROK IN AGGCRP.ANGE VVITH THE PLAT THERECP R L'RDEP IN t500r\ I AT PACE I ✓"F T F REGORPS Cr Ti1E JC"NSCN r, iAJNTY REGCRPER'S 6"FFILE. r DESCRIPTION - REZON BEGINNING at the South Office; Thence S89°33'0t accordance with the Plat of North Dodge Street; TI N89°23'45"E, 130.27 feel along said North Line, 24 to the Southwest Corner Lot 8, a distance of 172.0 Right -of -Way Line, 186.7 is subject to easements BEGINNING at the North Records of the Johnson I S89023'45"W, 130.27 feE BEGINNING. Said Rezor t W05 ETOM RENTALS, LLB I L C7005UOVVN RENTALS, W, N89037'57"E N89037'57"E 96.71' �0 NV �3 ATTACHMENT 5 Applicant's Statement L V) .9 ajt.j CL Ul) 3 C: U E C 2 to U C TAI Q) 0- '0 Ln .0 C: 00 C U-i 3 (D MMS Consultants, Inc. December 31, 2024 City of Iowa City Neighborhood and Development Services 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: Scarlett Point Subdivision 1917 S. Gibert Strect Iowa City, Iowa 522,40 319.35L8282 On behalf of the applicant, MMS Consultants requests a rezoning of the properties located at 905, 905 1/2, 909, 911 N. Governor Street, 900, 900 1/2, 902, 906, 908 and 910 N Dodge Street, from the current mixed zoning of RS12, RM20, RS8, and 11313, to RM20 and RS12. Respectfully submitted, Jon D. Marner MMS Consultants, Inc. 9200-006Ll.docx ATTACHMENT 6 Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting Project Name: Scarlett Point I k I -'r CITY OFlOVVA CITY Project Location: 905-911 N Governer& 900-910 N. Dodge Meeting Date and Time: August 13, 2024 7:00-8:00 P.M. Meeting Location: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center Social Room Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Jon Marner & Scott Pottorff(MMS Consultants) Kim Sleege(Select Structural) Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Anne Russett Number of Neighbors Attending: 20 Sign -In Attached? Yes X No General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - See attached summary. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - See attached summary. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: Efforts to minimize impacts to existing trees to the extent possible while still meeting city requirements for stormwater detention. Consideration of type and appearance of landscaping adjacent to the park. Staff Representative Comments Concerns related to access location and sanitary sewer capacity have been reviewed on a preliminary level by staff and a detailed review will take place as part of a formal Site plan submittal. Mention of legal rulings that apply to the site with regard to standards to be met and units. L V) .9 ajt.j CL Ul) 3 C: U E C 2 U C V Q) 0- '0 Ln .0 C: 00 C U-i 1917 S. Gibert Strect Iowa City, low 522,40 MMS ConsultantsInc. 319.35L8 , 282 �'Ti rnsconSU I ta ritsne, t: Experts in Planning and DeveNcrjement S;nce 1975 s1 1 rns@R1 f T1SC(A1SL'11U.:1 rits.rict Good Neighbor Meeting summary notes: Rezoning Amendment and Preliminary Plat for property located at 905, 905 Y2, 909 and 911 N. Governor Street, and 900, 900 Y2,902,906, 908 and 910 N. Dodge Street (Scarlett Point) 1. Concern regarding impacts to trees and construction work near Happy Hollow park. 2. Traffic concerns along Governor and Dodge, specifically as follows: a. Location of entrance. b. Number of additional cars. c. Current issues with speeding that is not enforced consistently. 3. General concern and dissatisfaction with the total number of new units and buildings. 4. Questions regarding the choice of architectural design elements selected for the buildings. 5. Questions why nothing is being done with the vacant building. 6. Impact to Horace Mann Elementary School. 7. Questions regarding the total number of new residents and the parking required. 8. Questions regarding sanitary sewer capacity. A follow up meeting with three representatives of the neighborhood was held at MMS at their request with the same MMS and City staff present as the Good Neighbor Meeting held at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center. The neighborhood representatives are included with the accompanying sign -in sheets. 1. Requested to zone to RM-12 or approximately 54 units. 2. Additional mention of sanitary sewer capacity. 3. Pedestrian safety concerns specifically related to no sidewalk along the west side of N. Governor, and people cutting through properties. 4. Question regarding use of park by the new tenants, and whether there could be a sidewalk directly to the park for the proposed site. 5. Mention of a dedication of additional ground to the City for Happy Hollow Park. ILL 0 110 ^��,,�„mmw� �y �l go e I r° wul �..... � ��rv�,mm uuuw ww r. u � " I, ICI ill mu uu A�. 'It nNul d�^•'wog �. �u �V �, � ��"°VW � �, � °4�''�.��u µo.•m�. ��n�W'' �� u� � 'llu�,,,yum,„�w�'' t FAMOSIUMM Wm Sul u, mm � ,..., I�uW, u„��Im��,��,� yd �� xNb a �✓, �W v " .^ ^�u lm I �� md� w Ix u 0 i � w 00# rvw• Y Ile. V Hu"' '�Nxin Im /I . III III .Io.��w. � Iml o wwwo W' °'u ui. N . I . A I� "wl16w 11 MI Iuww ��MV m �..�mrw,u,,�, tYl .II I u I WN nb , ........... ... . _ ..._. ..._ w.,...... ,. All �I��w'riW,� I MMwyw�wuww.lu. uNlFm u I �ql �VV�^�wv"W� lull Po�I iwJi uIVN xw h HIV a 1��ww��,' �m w.wlwl� I '�u�np pp I'� I, j✓V''lIW I� qx ��I Wlr V IIVIIWI, �i �JM M u u ImN l Jon Marner M____ ... From: Kim Stec Sent; Friday, S To: Jon Ma. Cc: Scott Pa Subject; RE: Goo., Categories: Save ... ,i .......... ......W.'IrM 01 i { ..... ........____—_ _yu.a�a.... .... .. 3s: MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 4, 2024-6:00 PM— FORMAL MEETING E M MA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Steve Miller, Scott Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Eric Bigley, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Gina Landau, Brian Vogel RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ24-0010, a proposal to rezone approximately 27.68 acres of land located east of Camp Cardinal Blvd and west of Camp Cardinal Road from Low Density Multifamily Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) zone to Low Density Multi -Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-1 2) zone subject to the following condition: 1. Prior to issuance of building permit, Owner shall contribute 50% of the cost of upgrading Camp Cardinal Road to City standards. This contribution shall include 50% of the cost of construction of the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. 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. REZ24-0010 Location: East of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and West of Camp Cardinal Road An application for a rezoning of approximately 27.68 acres of land from Low Density Multi Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) to Low Density Multi Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12). Russett began the staff report showing an aerial of the subject property, it's located east of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and west of Camp Cardinal Road. The property is currently zoned RM-12 with a Planned Development Overlay, the land to the west is also zoned RM-12, with a Planned Development Overlay and that site is currently vacant. To the south, it's zoned Community Commercial, to the southeast there's more RM-1 2 zoning and two existing apartment buildings. To the east is the land that the Commission discussed at the last meeting, the proposed Western Homes development that was zoned RS-8 with a Planned Development Overlay. In terms of background, this property was originally rezoned to OPD RM-12 in August 2022, after that rezoning approval went through the applicants moved forward with the subdivision process and their final plats for Cardinal Heights, Part One and Part Two were approved in February 2023. Russett shared the proposed OPD plan and explained this request does not change the proposed land uses or building types that were originally approved with the rezoning from August Planning and Zoning Commission December /,20Z4 Page 3of7 2O22nor does itchange anything regarding the Sensitive Areas Development Plan O[the conservation easements that were approved as part of the subdivision process. The purpose of this [8zODiOg is to request two waivers from zoning S[3Dd8nJS' and these F8qUes[S can only be approved through a Planned Development Overlay process. The first request is a 5' reduction in the minimum front yard setback from 28`tO15'and the second request iS@7'increase iOthe nl8xiDlUrn building height from 35' to 42' F|USSeit also pointed out the r8qU8S1S are only for the one multifamily building. Russett shared @few photographs of the site. She noted again the current rezoning is OPD/RM- 12 and the p[ODOSed rezoning is [)PD/RK4-12 and the request is to allow some flexibility in zoning standards. The total number Oflots, which is 23. is not changing. There will be 22 duplexes, four tVvVOhVDlestyle units and one 3O-UDitmultifamily building. Deer Creek Road will be extended through the site, there will beone CU|-de-S8CtOthe north and 8loop street tOthe south where all Ofthe duplexes would be. For [ezODiOgSthere are specific approval criteria along with the general approval criteria. The first standard is related to the design density and whether or not it's compatible with adjacent developments. The proposed land uses dnfit with the existing developments and the proposed development k}the east, the development and intensity transitions from lower scale on the west side with the duplexes and increases to the east, which aligns well with the proposed multifamily that Western Homes is proposing OD their site. FlUsOett noted an error in the staff report @s it stated that the garages for the duplexes will need to be recessed from the front facade of the building but since this iS8RM-12 zone the duplexes dOnot need LOmeet that standard 8Sthat iS for certain single-family zones. In ie[0S of open Sp8Ce' there is 8 lot of open space OD the Site due tOthe sensitive areas. |Dterms Oftraffic circulation, the property would b8accessed off of Camp Cardinal Road and there iS@proposed traffic circle @t the intersection DfDeer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. Staff iS FeCO[O[OeOdiOg that the CODlFDiSSiOO Dl@iDt8iD that pR3ViOUS|y approved condition that requires the owner to contribute 50% of the cost of the construction of Camp C8[diD@| Road as well as the traffic circle. The second criteria is that the development will not overburdening existing utilities and Russett explained this iS@DiDfiUsite and the subject property has access kJsanitary sewer and water, and the developer iSalready installing infrastructure OOthe property. The third criteria iSthat development will not adversely affect views, light, @i[' property values and privacy, @Smentioned previously, there are existing conservation easements ODthe property that will bemaintained with almost 17acres Ofland that will not bedeveloped and will be preserved. Also, there's not a lot of development around the subject property, there's some duplexes tOthe north, there's the existing apartments t0the southeast, and there's Saint Andrew Church tOthe east SOthis development will not impact neighboring residents more than conventional development would. The fourth criteria is that land use building types and the proposed variations from zoning requirements will be in the public interest. RUS8ettreit8[8ted regarding the waivers, they are jUSL for one building and the applicant has requested 8reduction iDthe front setback from 2O'tO15' due tDsite terrain, sensitive features and the existing conservation easements iDthe area. Additionally, the fire department requested that the applicant move the building closer to the street to address fire code COOCe[OS. The @|te[D8iiVe of moving the building was to provide @fi[8 truck turn around behind the building, which was not practical given the conservation e@S8[D8Dt Planning and Zoning Commission December /,20Z4 Page 3of7 and the site constraints but moving the building forward requires approval of the setback reduction. Staff finds this request to be @CCeoiah|e as Dl8Dy other residential uses have 8 15' setback and the requested variation will still @CQDnOnOOd8t8 light, @i[' p[iV8Cy. as well @SOO9ite open space. The second request iSb}increase the building height Ofthis building tO42'and the applicant has requested this modification due k3site topography. Staff measures building height based on the average grade to the top of the roof line so due to the sloping nature of the site, the building exceeds that 35' height maximum, however from the front of the building, it will appear to b835'and @ithe rear Ofthe building itwill appear taller than 35'because of the sloping grade on the site. The rear portion of the building that will look taller is adjacent to an outlot, which is wooded, and so visually will have no impact of passerby's on the street so staff finds this request tObereasonable 8Swell. Additionally, the proposed increase iOheight will still accommodate sufficient light and air and open space, and the building will still appear tObe 35'frO0Othe front. Russett shared some elevations that were provided by the applicant of the multifamily building. In terms of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use Map envisions this to be between eight and 16 dwelling units per acre and the proposed development is under that at three, but the site is COOSiF8iOed significantly by the SeOSiUVe features. The 8pp|iC8DtS are incorporating a diversity of housing types and preserving woodlands, wetlands and slopes on the site. Regarding the environmentally sensitive areas the conservation easements have been put iDplace tDprotect the sensitive areas and that will not bechanging. |Dterms Ofnext steps, after a recommendation from the Commission, City Council will set a public hearing, likely at their next meeting on December 10, and the public hearing would then be OOJanuary 7. Staff recommends approval OfREZ24-OO1O.8proposal tOrezone approximately 27.6Oacres Of land located east OfCamp Cardinal Blvd and west OfCamp Cardinal Road from Low Density Multifamily Residential with @ P|@DD8d Development Overlay ([}P[)/F{M-12) zone to LOvv D9DSib/ Multi -Family Residential with 8Planned Development Overlay ([}PO/RW1-12) zone subject to the following condition: 2. Prior k}issuance Ofbuilding permit, Owner shall contribute 5O%Ofthe cost Ofupgrading Camp Cardinal Road tUCity standards. This contribution shall include 50% of the cost of construction of the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. HeDsch noted one of the criteria iSthat the development, or the change, doesn't impact views and that always seems sOsubjective, the view for one person could be fine and b]another person it is horrible and for no reason other than personal opinion. Are there any objective criteria regarding that O[iSitsubjectively interpreted. F(USSettconfirmed itiSsubjective and for this property, in terms of views, the only [e8| neighbors are to the OOdh and they're still QOiDQ to have a creek and a woodland in their backyard and that won't change with this development. {]U8UhO[Stnoted iDthe report the applicant held 8Good Neighbor DlHehOg'whQt was the result Orfeedback that was obtained GSGresult Dfthat meeting. RUSseUexplained they held the Good Neighbor meeting for the original rezoning iD2022and there was 8significant amount Vf feedback from that Good Neighbor meeting and the public hearing process for that, but with this rezoning, staff hasn't heard anything from neighbors, and they were notified of the meeting tonight. Planning and Zoning Commission December /,20Z4 Page 4of7 Craig asked about the traffic circle and does bgObetween the two developments. RUSSett explained the traffic circle does gOinto the Western Homes development and they are also required LO CDO[[ibU1H 50% of the COS[ of that CODSt[UCtiDD of that traffic CiP:|8. HeDgchopened the public hearing. Gina Landau (Navigate Homes) stated nDihiOg'Sreally changed from the very beginning 83far as the intention of the development it was just as they started designing parking lots and parking underground areas, they ran into a couple glitches and realized they would need the waivers. Hensch asked if moving the setback in the front was primarily because of the fire department's request. Landau confirmed they met with the fire department, and itwas their requirement for safety. And then regarding the additional height' that's primarily related tOthe topography OO the site because the intention is to have parking underground, and the back part of the building will appear as 8 four story and the front is only @ three StVn/. There will he 8 little bit of outdoor parking just to hit the [eqUiR3DleDtS, but the majority of the parking will be underground. Craig asked who's the target audience here @Si1seems like Gnice development for families but where are the kids going tOplay. Landau stated she iSnot the sales and the marketing person but these will be condos, not an apartment building and typically, most condos are first time home buyers who eventually will maybe move into a duplex, which is what the rest of that deV8|OpOleDt is. Residents may possibly have Chi|dFHD, yes, but Dl8yb8 just starting their families, and while there's DOstructured play area there's lots Dfopen space with the conservation areas around it. Landau noted all Ofthe open space with the OuUOtGwill bemaintained by@OH{]Aand they've been working with the attorneys to get those set up to make it equitable for everyone. HeOGChasked how many acres Ofopen space are iDthe Conservation Reserve. Russett noted it's almost 178CneS. Craig noted H{]ASdon't always take care Oftheir open spaces well, SOif there's 8way t0make HOAs more responsive to the maintenance of their responsibilities that would be appreciated. Townsend asked ifthere are affordable units iOthis development. Landau stated there's nothing designated as true @fh]nd@b|e housing according to City [eqUi[808OtG' but these are not luxury units, they are all one- and two -bedroom units in the 30-plex and they are trying to keep the price point down where someone can actually afford to buy it as a first time homeowner. Townsend asked given the extra height waiver is there any reason why they couldn't have asked for some affordable units iDthese buildings. RUSSettnoted this area doesn't require income restricted units and the Commission would have add 8condition t0the rezoning and denlODS[[@t8 that this rezoning Cn8@teS 8 public Deed for those iDCO0O8 restricted units. RUGSettalso noted regarding the height waiver, it's really 8topography issue. The height iS calculated from the average grade and from the front i1iSgoing tOb835'but the code measures height from the middle which is 8 0UCh lower grade OO this Site. Planning and Zoning Commission December 4, 2024 Page 5 of 7 Hensch noted in this area there's a history of neighbors complaining about view interference with their view and so he just wants to make sure they address that. Brian Vogel (Engineer, Hall & Hall) explained he doesn't know the distance from other buildings and the views, but as far as the height the front of the building is going to be 30' not even 35' but then as the grade slopes away to get to the back it will be the 40' height. There is about a 12' change in grade due to the slope from front to back. Hensch closed the public hearing. Elliott moves to recommend approval of REZ24-0010, a proposal to rezone approximately 27.68 acres of land located east of Camp Cardinal Blvd and west of Camp Cardinal Road from Low Density Multifamily Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM- 12) zone to Low Density Multi -Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPDIRM-12) zone subject to the following condition: 3. Prior to issuance of building permit, Owner shall contribute 50% of the cost of upgrading Camp Cardinal Road to City standards. This contribution shall include 50% of the cost of construction of the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. Wade seconded the motion. Elliott stated it seems like a simple request, the fire department requests the setback, and the height seems to be reasonable based on staff recommendation. Wade noted it's a safety request based on the fire department and the law of averages for the topography. Hensch stated he thinks this is a pretty reasonable request and any chance to increase the number of housing units that are more accessible by Iowa City standards they certainly should do that so he supports this application. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REPRESENTATION ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE STEERING COMMITTEE: Russett reminded the Commission that the City is getting started on the Comprehensive Plan update and have executed a consultant agreement with Confluence, out of Des Moines. The City is in the process of formulating a steering committee for this update and are requesting two volunteers from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The role of the steering committee is to serve as an advisor to City staff and the consultant team as they're preparing the Plan, to provide input and feedback, to review the drafts, to help establish final recommendations, which will eventually come to this Commission, and to be an ambassador for the Plan, to promote awareness throughout the community, to encourage participation and to advocate for the Plan. In terms of level of commitment she explained it would be about a one -and -a -half -year process, and there's probably going to be about seven meetings that will last 90 minutes. These meetings will likely start in January. Planning and Zoning Commission December /,20Z4 Page 6of7 QU8UhO[Stasked ifthere are additional members Ofthe community beyond the two people from the P&ZCommission ODthe committee. RUSS8ttexplained there will b8about 2O-28people from a variety of different stakeholder groups throughout the community. Hensch stated he has been on this Commission for 10 years and is pretty invested in all this and thinks one of the key things is making sure the community understands the Comprehensive Plan. Hereally appreciates the steering committee being @ community ambassador for the Comprehensive Plan, promoting awareness and encouraging participation and advocating for the Plan. He VVOU|d be interested in VO|UOt8e[iDg for this, he does CODle off the CO[DnOiSSiOO in June this year. Waded stated he has an interested, as well. Miller stated vVhi|8 he is new to the CODlDlisSk]O he too would be interested in serving OD this committee. Craig agreed HgOsCh ShOV|d be OD this cOnlDldt8g, his body Of knowledge is GV impressive, he's been doing this for 10 years and he hDUvvG every hole in every plan. It would he @ shame to waste that knowledge and everyone would benefit from him being ODthe committee. RuSsettnoted there could bethree members from the Commission appointed toUlis committee, they are looking for a diversity of individuals for this committee as well. Craig moved that the representatives omthe Comprehensive Plan review steering committee are Wade, Miller and Hensch. Quellhorst seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. CONSIDERATION OFMEETING MINUTES: NOVEK0BER 20.2024: Craig moved k}approve the meeting minutes from November 3O.2024. Elliott seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0-2 (Quellhorst and Townsend abstaining). PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Craig asked about the timeline for the project diSCUSsed8[the|GStrOeetingBtUle/\CT8ne@. Russet stated her understanding is that they wanted to get the rezoning approved so they can start rehabbing those existing buildings. Craig stated itseemed like they were eager t0get going and noted often times they approve something and six months, ayear, six years later it's still not done. Hensch asked if after two years they have to reapply for a rezoning. Russett clarified that the timeline only applied LO [)PD [ezODiOgS and typically most developments meet that timeline by getting 8final plat approved. Townsend moved k}adjourn, (]UeUh0rstseconded and the motion passed 7-O. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023-2024 8/16 10/4 10/18 11 /15 12/6 12/20 1 /17 2/7 2/21 4/3 5/1 6/26 9/4 9/18 11 /20 12/4 CRAIG, SUSAN X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X ELLIOTT, MAGGIE X X X X X X X O/E X X X O/E X X O/E X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X MILLER, STEVE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X PADRON, MARIA 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 X X O/E X TOWNSEND, BILLIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X WADE, CHAD X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member