The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2025-09-02 OrdinanceItem Number: 8.a. a CITY OF IOWA CITY "QF T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance rezoning approximately 1.04 acres of land at 804, 810, and 824 Maiden Lane; 410, 416, and 418 E. Benton Street, and 815 Gilbert Court from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone and Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. (REZ25-0011) Attachments: Planning & Zoning Staff Report Correspondence Rezoning Ordinance STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Olivia Ziegler, Planning Intern Item: REZ25-0011 Maiden Ln. Properties Date: August 6, 2025 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant/Owners: Sheridan Family, LLC 800 Maiden Lane Iowa City, IA 52240 Frank Simon 418 E. Benton St Iowa City, IA 52245 Contact Person: Michael Welch Shoemaker & Haaland 160 Holiday Road Coralville, IA 52241 319-351-7150 Requested Action: An application requesting to rezone from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone and Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Community Commercial (CC- 2) zone. Purpose: To allow the Great Plains Action Society to reuse the existing buildings to allow community focused uses, such as small commercial spaces for start-ups, community meeting space, GPAS offices, healing and therapy space, and green space and gardens. Location: 804, 810, 824 Maiden Lane; 410, 416, 418 E. Benton St, 815 Gilbert Ct. Location Map: :: ��, _ 97 k MCI+ � , r•�4 �� .� x Size: 1.04 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Intensive Commercial (CI-1), Medium K Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Comprehensive Plan: Downtown & Riverfront Crossings District Plan: Public Meeting Notification: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) North: Community Commercial (CC-2) East: Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) South: Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) West: Community Commercial (CC-2) Mixed Use Gilbert District Property owners and residents within 500' of the property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. A rezoning sign was posted at the intersection of E. Benton Street and Maiden Ln on July 25t", 2025. July 9, 2025 August 22, 2025 The owners, Frank Simon and Sheridan Family, LLC, are requesting approval for the rezoning of approximately 1.04 acres of land encompassing the following properties: 804, 810, 824 Maiden Lane, 410, 416, 417 E. Benton St., and 815 Gilbert Court from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone and Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. The affected properties were platted under Lyon's 1st Addition Subdivision in December of 1854. These properties are currently for sale and the Great Plains Action Society is looking to purchase them. Their vision is to re -use the existing buildings to create a community focused space that includes a variety of uses which are currently not allowed under the existing zoning. One of the contingencies of the sale is the successful rezoning to the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. According to their website, GPAS's mission is as follows: "We address the trauma that indigenous peoples and the earth face and work to prevent further violence by building power in disenfranchised communities through rematriation, healing justice, and building a regenerative economy." GPAS intends to repurpose the existing buildings on the subject property to support community focused endeavors such as small commercial spaces for entrepreneurs and start-up businesses, a community meeting space, a cafe, offices, and green space for gardens and outdoor gatherings. The applicant has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on Tuesday, June 10, 2025. Several neighbors attended. Attachment 3 incudes the application materials and Attachment 4 provides the good neighbor meeting summary report provided by the applicant ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The subject properties at 804, 810, 824 Maiden Lane, and 410 E. Benton St are currently zoned Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. The purpose of this zone is to provide for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by 3 outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. Special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from adjacent residential zones (14-2C-1 E). The properties at 416 and 418 E. Benton Street, and 815 Gilbert Ct. are currently zoned Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8). The purpose of this zone is primarily to provide for the development of small lot single-family dwellings. The regulations are intended to create, maintain, and promote livable neighborhoods. The regulations allow for some flexibility of dwelling types to provide housing opportunities for a variety of household types. Special attention should be given to site design to ensure the development of quality neighborhoods. Nonresidential uses and structures permitted in this zone should be planned and designed to be compatible with the character, scale, and pattern of the residential development (14-2A-1C). Proposed Zoning: The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. The purpose of CC-2 zone is to provide for major business districts to serve a significant segment of the total community population. In addition to a variety of retail goods and services, these centers may typically feature a number of large traffic generators requiring access from major thoroughfares. While these centers are usually characterized by indoor operations, uses may have limited outdoor activities; provided, that outdoor operations are screened or buffered to remain compatible with surrounding uses (14-2C-1 F). Table 1 shows the uses that are allowed in the CC-2 zone. It includes a mix of residential and commercial uses, including restaurants, retail, and office, as well as more intensive commercial uses such as vehicle repair uses. The CC-2 zone also allows for some lower intensity industrial zone. For example, light manufacturing is allowed; however, it is restricted to 5,000 sq ft and the manufacturing must be small scale with an on -site retail component (14-4B-4C-1 B). Table 1. Uses Allowed in the CC-2 Zone Use Categories Subgroups CC-2 Residential uses Group living uses Assisted group living PR Household living uses Group households PR Multi -family dwellings PR/S Commercial uses Animal related commercial uses General PR Intensive - Building trade uses PR Commercial recreational uses Indoor P Outdoor S Drinking establishments PR Eating establishments P Office uses General office P Medical/dental office P Quick vehicle servicing uses PR/S Redemption Centers PR Retail uses Alcohol sales -oriented retail P CI Delayed deposit service uses PR Hospitality oriented retail P Outdoor storage and display oriented PR Personal service oriented P Repair oriented P Sales oriented P Tobacco sales oriented PR Surface passenger service uses P Vehicle repair uses S Industrial uses Manufacturing and production uses General manufacturing PR Technical/light manufacturing PR Self-service storage uses S Institutional and civic uses Basic utility uses PR/S Community service uses Community service - shelter S General community service P Daycare uses PR Educational facilities General S Specialized P Parks and open space use PR Religious/private group assembly uses P Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems S Other uses Communication transmission facility uses PR/S *P = Permitted; PR = Provisional (subject to additional use specific standards); S = Special Exception (requires review and approval by the Board of Adjustment) Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The proposed rezoning is reviewed using the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The future land use map of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Mixed Use (MU). The proposed rezoning to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone allows for a mix of both residential and nonresidential uses, which is consistent with the adopted policy direction of the IC2030 plan. The comprehensive plan also includes goals and strategies that align with the proposed rezoning. 9 Land Use Goals & Strategies: • Encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of extending infrastructure and services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of the city. o Identify areas and properties that are appropriate for infill development. o Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. • Plan for commercial development in defined commercial nodes, including small-scale neighborhood commercial centers. o Discourage linear strip commercial development that discourages walking and biking and does not contribute to the development of compact, urban neighborhoods. o Provide for appropriate transitions between high and low -density development and between commercial areas and residential zones. Economic Development Goals & Strategies: • Increase and diversity the property tax base by encouraging the retention and expansion of existing businesses and attracting businesses that have growth potential and are compatible with Iowa City's economy. • Provide an environment that supports quality employment and living wages and that enhances workforce skills and educational levels. o Support Small business start-ups and expansions that expand job opportunities • Encourage a healthy mix of independent, locally owned businesses and national businesses. • Improve the environmental and economic health of the community through efficient use of resources. o Encourage new business development in existing core or neighborhood commercial areas. o Support projects that provide opportunities for workers to live close to their place of employment... The Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan abides by a form -based development plan, which is intended to shape development and redevelopment in certain districts of the City, and promote the creation of economically vital, mixed use, pedestrian friendly districts. One of the goals of the plan is to encourage pedestrian -oriented, mixed -use redevelopment, by encouraging a mix of housing, office, retail, and civic infill development. A portion of the subject property is located within the Gilbert Subdistrict of the Master Plan. Specifically, the properties along Maiden Ln are located within the planning area; however, the properties at 418 E. Benton St and 815 Gilbert Ct. are not located within the planning area. The Master Plan envisions this area being redeveloped into smaller scale housing options and gallery space. The plans notes that this area is "designed to be a defining feature of this creative neighborhood". Although GPAS is not proposing redevelopment, but rather reuse of the existing buildings, their vision will define this neighborhood and create a space where community members can gather and collaborate. Additionally, the Gilbert Subdistrict identifies master plan objectives and a development character. The proposed rezoning aligns with the following direction of the Master Plan: Master Plan Objectives: • Maintain informal, eclectic character of neighborhood • Promote artistic and creative class uses 0 Development Character: • Maintain smaller -scale and lower intensity of use south of the railroad • Promote variety and diversity of form and materials • Creative and adaptive use of existing structures Although the owners are not requesting a rezoning to a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation, the vision proposed by the Great Plains Action Society aligns with master plan objectives and the development character outlined in the plan. It also aligns with the IC2030 land use vision of Mixed Use. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: Across the Gilbert Ct and E. Benton Street right-of-way the area is zoned RS-8. The land abutting the subject property to the north is zoned CC-2, as is the land located west across the Maiden Ln right-of-way. The current CI-1 zoning is not compatible with the existing neighborhood, which is a mixture of single-family homes, retail businesses, and restaurants. The proposed rezoning will remove all existing CI-1 zoning within this block. Changing it to CC-2 is more consistent with the existing zoning pattern. Additionally, due to the existing residential in the area the CC-2 zone is a less intense zoning district, which is more compatible with the existing residential development. NEXT STEPS: Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, a public hearing will be scheduled for consideration by City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0011, a request to rezone approximately 1.04 acres of land affecting the properties at: 804, 810, and 824 Maiden Lane; 410, 416, and 418 E. Benton Street; and 815 Gilbert Court from Intensive Commercial zone (CI-1) and Medium Density Single -Family Residential zone (RS-8) to Community Commercial zone (CC-2). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Applicant Submittal Materials 4. Good Neighbor Meeting Summary Approved by: Da— e1�e Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map ATTACHMENT 3 Applicant Submittal Materials July 8, 2025 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT FOR REZONING Maiden Lane Properties Please accept the following Applicant Statement submitted on behalf of Great Plains Action Society, the Applicant. The affected properties for the rezoning are located along the east side of Maiden Lane and the north side of East Benton Street. The affected properties are 804, 810, and 824 Maiden Lane; 410, 416, and 418 E Benton Street; and 815 Gilbert Court. These properties total 1.04 acres. The subject property is bordered by Maiden Lane on the west (309 LF of frontage), E Benton Street on the south (156 LF of frontage), and Gilbert Court on the east (62 LF of frontage). The properties to the north and west are currently zoned Community Commercial. The properties to the south and east are zoned Medium Density Single -Family. The applicant intends to repurpose the existing buildings on the subject property to the extend practical to support community focused endeavors such as small commercial spaces for entrepreneurs and start-up businesses (sales -oriented retail), a community meeting space (hospitality -oriented retail), a cafe, offices for the Applicant's use, and green space for gardens and outdoor gatherings. The applicant is requesting a zoning change from the current Intensive Commercial (CI-1) and Medium Density Single -Family (RS-8) designation to Community Commercial (CC-2). Each of the proposed uses is permitted within the Community Commercial zone. The site is currently served by city water and sanitary sewer. Any future development will need to comply with applicable city codes, including Site Plan Review and/or Building Permits for renovations. Thank you for your consideration of this rezoning application. Sincerely, .,f11w Michael J. Welch, PE / �Shoemaker �7 Haaland Project No. 25076 Page 1 LD LD 00 LD 0 N W 40J, 4� ' iYw ►�. -� _ 4 Y- - REZONING ZONING`- M� CC2 = - _ EXHIBIT vo _ _ a r_ r 1 ;-1 41 n, - - ZONING k - ZONING it r F hli, - .. - - _ �� _ _ _ �._ IOWA CIT IA ---------- C/I _ -- ., ZONING CI1 q, ' ZONING- / LEGAL DESCRIPTION CC2 ZONIN - _ CC2 : I I , k I tea_ - r.. 1IIYE :I!111111i ^ iwwll _ ZONING - I CI1 - - -H L7 I- __ .? ZONING x. �1 I LAFAYETTE ST -Y - Ll , id I i ZONING CC2 �- I A n__k Y _ -- . ' m ' ' Lu .r M Q E m f. ZONING H ZONING U) , y.; CC2 RS8 LLII W fie rLu k -7+ 4' W f ZONING ZONING IL 0 _� RS8 RS8 �. - L oco coy T PAGE ST cn ZONING � -- " ;. •-, �.-- ---- � � ZONING /I _ - ZONIN -� ZONING RS8 - i . w ZONING- : ZONING , ZONING CC2'' - / CC2 RS8' ; .. <: ZRS8 G / RS8 RS8 k CI1 _ 01: RS8 ZONING ZONING I, ZONING E BENTON ST RS8 PROJECT AREA E BENTON ST - ZONING . ZONING :. ZONING_ I wNG — I T-` - RS8 RS8 RS8 RS8 . 1- "�" ZONING ;ZONING ZONING _ NINGI. - C11 CC2 _ ; CI1 - — I RFC-CX - ,cam s ZONING ZONING , I RSA ..._ i ZONING RS8 - ZONING <: y --- --- -- -- -- ZONING ZONING � ZONIu �`� � ZONING ! _ C11 U C11 -= RS8 W J - --- U) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - a. -. _ Q .,a cn Lu ZONING _i ' ' = Q _ - CC2 Vu -' - A - lk d , — — a Oil7 7!___ NO. REVISION DATE OWNER Shoemaker GREAT PLAINS Haaland ACTION SOCIETY PROJECT MAIDEN LANE PROPERTIES SHEET TITLE REZONING EXHIBIT ALL THAT REAL ESTATE PRECISELY DESCRIBED IN QCDEED RECORDED JAN. 4, 2010, IN BK. 4544, PGS. 831 - 834, BEING LOCATED WITHIN LYON'S FIRST ADDITION, BLOCK 4, LOTS 6 THRU 10 INCLUSIVE, AS RECORDED IN DBK. 12 - PG. 188, AND PBK. 2 - PG. 31, AND REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED IN WARRANTY DEED RECORDED OCT. 4, 1996, IN BK. 2166 - PG, 16, ALL IN THE JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA RECORDER'S OFFICE, COLLECTIVELY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 418 EAST BENTON ST.: THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2, OF SAID LOTS 9 AND 10; AND 416 EAST BENTON ST.: THE EAST 112 OF THE WEST 1/2, OF SAID LOTS 9 AND 10; AND 410 EAST BENTON ST.: THE WEST 1l2 OF THE WEST 112, OF SAID LOTS 9 AND 10; AND 810 + 804 MAIDEN LANE: SAID LOTS 6, 7, EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FT. + THE WEST 1l2 OF SAID LOT 8; AND 815 GILBERT COURT: THE EAST 112 OF SAID LOT 8. SAID COLLECTIVE PARCELS CONTAIN 1.04 ACRE, ACCORDING TO THE ORIGINAL PLAT THEREOF, SUBJECT TO SEVERAL RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN SAID QCDEED AND WARRANTY DEED. APPLICANT INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNER CIVIL ENGINEER SHERIDAN FAMILY, LLC MICHAEL J. WELCH, PE 800 MAIDEN LANE SHOEMAKER AND IOWA CITY, IA 52240 HAALAND 160 HOLIDAY ROAD FRANK SIMON CORALVILLE, IA 52241 418 E BENTON ST. 319-351-7150 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 APPLICANT / DEVELOPER SIKOWIS NOBISS GREAT PLAINS ACTION SOCIETY 412 KIMBALL ROAD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ZONING INFORMATION CURRENT ZONING 804, 810, & 824 MAIDEN LANE CI-1 410 E BENTON STREET CI-1 416 & 418 E BENTON STREET RS-8 815 GILBERT COURT RS-8 PROPOSED ZONING CC-2 N A 0 40 80 120 160 FEET PROJECT NUMBER: 25076 ISSUED DATE: 07-08-25 DRAWN BY: KJB CHECK BY: MJW APPROVED BY: MJW SHEET NUMBER EX-1 ATTACHMENT 4 Good Neighbor Meeting Summary Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting Project Name: Maiden Lane Rezoning Project Location: Meeting Date and Time: Thursday July 17, 2025 - 5:00pm - 6:30pm � r 'I CITY OF 10"'A CITY Meeting Location: Great Plains Action Society, 810 Maiden Lane, Iowa City Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Michael welch, Annie Palas - Shoemaker and Haaland Sikowis Nobiss - Great Plains Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Anne Russett Number of Neighbors Attending: 6 Sign -In Attached? Yes No X General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - An overview of the proposed rezoning request was presented to attendees and then opened the meeting to questions. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - The general use plan was the primary concern for most residents. Some neighbors asked if the property being rezoned was in a TIF district. Other topics discussed included hours of operation, would any of the space be leased or would they be occupying all their space, if there were any future plans for new or reconstruction, and parking requirements and needs. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: No changes based on results of meeting. Staff Representative Comments From: Erin Weitzell To: Anne Russett Cc: Amos Subject: Re: Maiden Lane rezoning Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2025 3:55:54 PM I xx This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. xx This message is from an external sender. Thanks for sending me the link to that document. Upon reading it, I still don't have a clear picture of what the plan for the area is. Honestly, reading that the plan is to re use the existing structures leaves me with more concerns than answers. I was under the assumption that there would be significant improvement to the area to offset the loss of residential property. Based on the application, it doesn't seem that this organization has a clear picture of how they will use the area or what businesses specifically will be included in the development plan. Are there specific plans or commitments from businesses that were not included in the document available online? Thanks, Erin On Tue, Aug 5, 2025, 3:35 PM Anne Russett <ARussettaiowa-ci .or9> wrote: Hi, Erin — Thanks for your emails. I will pass them along to the Planning & Zoning Commission. If you haven't, yet, I'd recommend taking a look at the staff report for the rezoning, which is included in the August 6 agenda packet. You can access it here: https://www.icgov.org/aovernment/boards- commissions-and-committees/planning-and-zoning-commission The staff report will answer many of your questions. Regarding TIF — that has not been requested for this project. Thanks, Anne From: Erin Weitzell <erinaweitzell(@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 5, 2025 3:12 PM To: Anne Russett <ARussettl@iowa-city.org> Cc: Amos <SubepsiIon (@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Maiden Lane rezoning ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** This message is from an external sender. Hello, I was also wondering if you could provide a better description of what the proposed development would be. After looking a bit more closely, I found that Commercial 2 zoning is for large commercial areas, usually off of main roads or highways that can support high traffic. I would not say that that the infrastructure of this area would support that type of property use. Why is it that the current Commercial 1 designation is not sufficient? What improvements to roads and infrastructure will be completed facilitate this zoning? How will it be paid for? Will tax money or TIFF be used? Especially in consideration of the issues with the Moen group going bankrupt downtown, a clear plan to profitability needs to be in place before any project should be approved. Thanks, Erin On Tue, Aug 5, 2025, 1:12 PM Erin Weitzell <erinaweitzell(c4gmail.com> wrote: Hello, I am writing regarding the proposed rezoning of the residential properties on Maiden Lane and E Benton St. My family and I own and reside at 926 S Van Buren St, Iowa City_ IA 52240. We have owned this property for over 13 years. My perspective on the matter is that the properties along Maiden Lane, including the property at the corner, 410 E Benton would be good candidates for rezoning. However the other two bungalow style homes at 416 and 418 should remain zoned residential. Some of my thinking on this matter relates to the other residential properties surrounding the proposed area. The property at 420 E Benton was purchased in 2022 at market value and is listed as owner occupied. The property across the street at 421 was recently resided and looks very nicely kept up. Another property, 417, put a new porch on a few years ago. These are examples of the owners of these properties valuing the area as a residential neighborhood. The city often points out how affordable housing is a huge issue in Iowa City. I would go a step further to say that affordable, centrally located small homes are even more rare. Either as owner occupied or as rentals, these homes allow affordable housing in town. To rezone them as commercial doesn't seem in the best interest of the neighborhood or representative of the overall values that have been expressed by the city at large. I would also hope that the city gets a clear plan and commitment from the individuals proposing this project before rezoning. I think that area is a good opportunity for renewal but there will also be big challenges. As a long time member of the neighborhood, I would love to see positive and well executed improvement. Sincerely, Erin Weitzell Petersen Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Prepared by: Olivia Ziegler, Planning Intem 410 E. Washington StresL lows City. IA 52240; (REZ25-0011) Ordinance No. Ordinance rezoning approximately 1.04 acres of land at 804, 810, and 824 Maiden Lane; 410, 416, and 418 E. Benton Street, and 815 Gilbert Court from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone and Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. (REZ25-0011) Whereas, the Owners, Sheridan Family LLC, and Frank Simon, have requested the rezoning of approximately 1.04 acres of land at 804, 810, 824 Maiden Lane; 410, 416, and 418 E. Benton Street; and 815 Gilbert Court from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone, and Medium Density Single - Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan future land use map indicates that the subject area is appropriate for Mixed Use; and Whereas, a portion of the subject property is located within the Gilbert Subdistrict of the Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan which envisions this area "designed to be a defining feature of this creative neighborhood", and includes objectives to maintain the informal and eclectic character of the neighborhood, and in terms of development character notes maintaining smaller -scale and lower intensity of use, promoting a variety of forms and materials, and the creative and adaptive use of existing structures; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed rezoning and has recommended approval. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Property described below is hereby reclassified Community Commercial (CC-2) zone, as indicated; All that real estate precisely described in QCDeed recorded Jan. 4, 2010, in Sk. 4544, Pgs. 831 — 834, being located within Lyon's First Addition, Block 4, Lots 6 thru 10 inclusive, as recorded in Dbk. 12 — Pg. 188, and Pbk. 2 — Pg. 31, and real estate described in Warranty Deed recorded Oct. 4, 1996, in Bk. 2166 — Pg. 16 all in the Johnson County, Iowa Recorder's Office, collectively described as follows: 418 East Benton St.: The west/2 of the East %, of said lots 9 and 10; and 416 East Benton St.: The East Y: of the West %, of said Lots 9 and 10; and 410 East Benton St.: The West Y. of the West %, of said lots 9 and 10: and 810 + 804 Maiden Lane: Said lots 6,7, except the East 100 ft. + the West % of said Lot 8; and 815 Gilbert Court: The East % of said Lot 8. Said collective Parcels contain 1.04 Acre, according to the original plat thereof, subject to several right of way easements described in said QCDeed and Warranty Deed. Section II. Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Ordinance No. Page 2 Section III. Certification And Recording Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section IV. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section V. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VI. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this _ day of , 2025 Mayor Attest: City Clerk Approved by City Aftomry s Office (Alexandra Bright — 08/28/2025) Ordinance No. Page No. 3 First Consideration: September 2, 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Barmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS: n,,,.,a ABSENT: None Second Consideration: Vole for passage: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Pass and Adopt: It was moved by , and seconded by , that the ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Alter Bergus Harmsen Moe Salih Teague Weilein Date published: VNI % �•-.' City Council Supplemental Meeting Packet may._ CITY OF IOWA CITY September 2, 2025 Information submitted between distribution of the meeting packet on Thursday and 4:00 pm on Friday. Late 8.a. Rezoning - Maiden Ln. / E. Benton St.: See correspondence from Michael 8.b - Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 611 Greenwood Drive & Rezoning - 611 S.c. Greenwood Drive: See correspondence to the Planning and Zoning Commission from Mark Signs and Paula Swygard. September 2, 2025 City of Iowa City r Kellie Grace From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Anne Russett Friday, August 29, 2025 8:36 AM Late Handouts Distributed Kellie Grace Danielle Sitzman; Michael Welch FW: Additional Information - Maiden Lane Rezoning REZ25-0011 Cafe Side.jpg; SW Birdseye B.jpg (Date) 8-A9-;�5 Hi, Kellie — I'm passing along Mike Welch's request for next week's City Council meeting. This is related to the Maiden Ln rezoning. Thanks,Anne From: Michael Welch <mwelch@shoemaker-haaland.com> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2025 8:42 PM To: Anne Russett <ARussett@iowa-dty.org>; Madison Conley <MConley@iowa-city.org> Cc: Annie Palas <apalas@shoemaker-haaland.com> Subject: Additional Information - Maiden Lane Rezoning REZ25-0011 A ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. -- This message is from an external sender. Anne & Madison Annie put together a couple of images to help explain the intended use / vision of the Maiden Lane property. Can these be added to the council packet for next week's meeting? Thanks Michael Welch, PE Civil Department Lead Shoemaker & Haaland Engineering 13D Scanning I Land Surveying D: 319 383 7813 1 0: 319 351.7150 www,shoemoker--haa Ond_com I. lb .1k Item Number: 8.c. a CITY OF IOWA CITY "QF T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 9.9 acres of land located at 611 Greenwood Drive from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Medium Density Multi - Family Residential Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-20) (REZ25-0010). Staff Recommendation: Approval Attachments: Planning & Zoning Staff Report Correspondence Rezoning Ordinance Conditional Zoning Agreement STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ25-0010 611 Greenwood Drive GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner/Applicant: Contact Person: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Location Map: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Date: August 27, 2025 TWG Iowa City, LP 1301 East Washington Street Indianapolis, IN 46202 (317) 264-1833 Jon Marner MMS Consultants 1917 South Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52240 i.marnerommsconsultants. net (319) 351-8282 Rezone approximately 9.90 acres of property at 611 Greenwood Drive from Neighborhood Public (P1) zone to Medium Density Multi - Family Residential Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM20). To allow for the development of a 187-unit affordable housing project. 611 Greenwood Drive 9.90 acres Former Roosevelt Elementary School; Neighborhood Public (P1) North: Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS8) South: Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS8) with a Historic District Overlay (OHD), K Comprehensive Plan: Southwest District Plan: Neighborhood Open Space District: Public Meeting Notification: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Neighborhood Public (P1) East: Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS8) West: High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM44) Residential 16-24 DU/A, pending Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA25- 0002) Public Service/Institutional, pending Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA25- 0002) SW3 Property owners and residents within 500' of the property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. A rezoning sign was posted on August 19, 2025. August 18, 2025 October 2, 2025 The owner, TWG Iowa City, LP, is working with MMS Consultants on two applications to allow for the redevelopment of 9.90 acres of property at 611 Greenwood Drive, the former Roosevelt Elementary School. The goal is to develop a 187-unit affordable housing project. Attachment 3 includes the applicant submittal which illustrates the proposed changes to the zoning map, the Preliminary Planned Development Overlay and Sensitive Areas Development Plan, rendering of the proposed multi -family buildings, and an applicant statement describing the rationale behind the request. The first application to be considered is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA25-0002). The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designates this area is appropriate for Public/Semi- Public. This area is covered by the Southwest District Plan. The proposed amendment would change the future land use designation for the subject property in the Comprehensive Plan to Residential 16-24 DU/Acre. The second application to be considered is a request to rezone approximately 9.90 acres of the subject property, 611 Greenwood Drive, from Neighborhood Public (P1) zone to Medium Density Multi -Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM20) zone. The Comprehensive Plan amendment must be approved prior to changes to the zoning map. Good Neighbor Policy: The applicant has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on Thursday, May 29t", 2025. Twenty-five neighbors attended. A summary of the good neighbor meeting is provided in Attachment 4. ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The 9.90-acre lot is currently zoned as Neighborhood Public (P1) zone. The purpose of public use zones is to provide reference to public ownership and use of land, or use of 3 the land for infrastructure services that need to be located in or near the area where the service is provided. Neighborhood Public (P1) zone allows uses such as schools, parks, police and fire stations, necessary infrastructure and other civic buildings owned or otherwise controlled by the County, the City, or the Iowa City Community School District. Proposed Zoning: The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to Medium Density Multi -Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM20) zone. The purpose of the Medium Density Multi -Family Residential (RM-20) zone is to provide for the development of medium density multi -family housing, which allows a mix of detached and attached single-family housing, duplexes, and multi -family housing. Per the Preliminary OPD Plan (Attachment 3), the request is to allow the development of a 187-unit multi -family building. Due to impacts to the sensitive areas, an OPD is required. The OPD also allows the applicant to request waivers for certain zoning standards. The applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum building height from 35' to 42', which is discussed in more detail below. General Planned Development Approval Criteria: Applications for Planned Development rezonings are reviewed for compliance with the following standards according to Article 14-3A of the Iowa City Zoning Code. 1. The density and design of the Planned Development will be compatible with and/or complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation, and general layout. Density: The applicant is requesting to rezone to OPD/RM-20, which allows for a density of 24 dwelling units per net acre of land area (total land minus streets right-of-way). The proposed development has 187 units on 9.9 net acres for a density of 18.8 dwelling units per acre. The development is clustered on the portion of the site that is already disturbed, protecting the existing ravine and woodlands. Overall, the proposed plan complies with the planned development density requirements for an RM-20 base zone. Land Uses Proposed: The applicant is proposing to demolish the former Roosevelt Elementary School with a 187-unit multi -family residential apartment building. The applicant is working to secure Low Income Housing Tax Credits for the proposed development; therefore, the proposed development is intended to be an affordable housing project. The existing land uses that surround the subject property range from single-family, multi- family, as well as some non-residential uses. Abutting the subject property to the east include a single-family home at 612 W. Benton Street, a long-term care facility, and an early childhood education center. To the north of the subject property are single-family homes with access onto Greenwood Drive. These homes are separated from the proposed development by the existing ravine and woodlands on the subject property and the Greenwood Dr public right-of-way. Brookland Park is located north of the subject property, as well. To the west, also separated by the ravine and the public right-of-way are existing multi -family residential buildings. To the south of the subject property across the W. Benton Street right-of-way are single-family homes and Benton Hill Park. Mass, Scale and General Layout: The proposed development consists of one, 187-unit building with a courtyard in the center. The building is setback 40' from W. Benton Street and approximately 140' from the eastern property line. Parking is provided behind the building and to the east of the building. The existing ravine will largely remain untouched. To improvement pedestrian connectivity in the neighborhood and through the site, the plans show a publicly accessible pedestrian path that runs north/south through the site from W. Benton Street to Greenwood Drive. This walkway was incorporated since it was determined CI that providing a sidewalk along Greenwood Drive would be very challenging due to existing topography and the ravine. The proposed pedestrian path will include a public access easement. It will include both a non -accessible route due to the steepness of the site that requires incorporating stairs, as well as an ADA accessible route through the site. As a condition of the rezoning staff recommends installation of a 10' wide pedestrian connection and dedication of an associated public access easement along the eastern portion of the property to extend from W. Benton Street to Greenwood Drive. Pedestrian path shall also include pedestrian scale lighting to be reviewed and approved by the City during the site plan review process. Renderings and building elevations are provided in Attachment 3. On the southern and eastern facades, the proposed building incorporates design aspects that mimic townhomes with separate entrances. The building also incorporates a setback between the 2nd and 3rd stories at the southeast corner. These design features are incorporate in areas closest to existing single-family homes. Lastly, the building is broken up by various levels of articulation, different materials, and changes in rooflines to help break up the mass and scale of the building. The applicant has requested an increase in the maximum allowable height from 35' to 42'. Open Space: The proposed development will need to comply with the private open space standards, outlined in section 14-2A-4E of the City Code. The proposed development requires 3,150 feet of private usable open space (10 SF per bedroom). The proposed development shows adequate private open space provided in the proposed courtyard, which features a playground, open field area, and seating. The Preliminary OPD Plan also shows a proposed dog park for the residents. The natural areas, including the ravine and woodland, on the northern end of the site will largely remain. Traffic Circulation: The subject property is currently accessed from Greenwood Drive, a two-way local street, and W. Benton Street, a two-way collector street. The proposed development will maintain those existing access points, but staff is recommending a condition that access to and from W. Benton Street is limited only to emergency vehicles. Access to the site by residents, visitors, deliveries, etc. must come off Greenwood Drive. 2. The development will not overburn existing streets and utilities. Staff requested a traffic study as part of this rezoning, which is provided in Attachment 5. The study noted that the proposed development is estimated to generate 86 peak hour trips during the AM peak, and 82 trips during the PM peak hour. Despite the increase in traffic the study states that the surrounding streets will operate with an acceptable capacity and level of service. The City's transportation planner and the City Engineer reviewed the traffic study and generally agree with its findings. Based on the traffic study staff is recommending two conditions: 1. Installation of a raised crosswalk across Greenwood Drive near the entrance to the site subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. Ensure that the design of the access drive from Greenwood Drive to the subject property is at or near a 90-degree angle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. As for public utilities the site has access to City sanitary sewer and water and City staff has no concerns with existing capacity. Stormwater management plans will be reviewed during the site plan review process. 9 3. The development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values, and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development. The nearest neighbors to the northwest of the proposed multi -family building are separated by a woodland preservation area. The property to the east (612 W. Benton Street) is separated from the proposed development by existing mature trees on their property and a side setback of approximately 30'. Additionally, the proposed building is approximately 160' away from the existing single-family home. The change in grade is also significant. The home is at an elevation of approximately 712' while the proposed building is at 750'. As such, the proposed development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values, and neighboring properties' privacy any more than a conventional development would. 4. The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirement or from city street standards will be in the public interest, in harmony with the purposes of this title, and with other building regulations of the city. The Preliminary OPD Plan for the subject property incorporates multi -family uses. The land use adds to the diversity of housing options within the surrounding area and helps to satisfy an ongoing need for affordable housing. Staff finds that the requested increase in height to 42' is reasonable given the location of the building on the site which is set back significantly from neighboring properties and public rights -of -ways. In summary, the proposed project balances the need for environmental protection with the need for an increased housing supply and diversity of housing types. Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The proposed rezoning is reviewed using the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan. Concurrent with this rezoning, the owner has requested an amendment to the land use policy direction of the comprehensive plan to show this area as appropriate for multi -family residential development. The comprehensive plan also includes goals and strategies that align with the proposed rezoning. Land Use Goals & Strategies: • Encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of extending infrastructure and services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of the city. o Identify areas and properties that are appropriate for infill development. o Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. Housing Goals & Strategies: • Encourage a diversity of housing options in all neighborhoods o Ensure of a mix of housing types within each neighborhood, to provide options for households of all types (singles, families, retirees, etc.) and people of all incomes. o Identify and support infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas where services and infrastructure are already in place. • Improve and maintain housing stock in established neighborhoods C01 o Identify areas within established neighborhoods where infill development would be appropriate Environmental Goals & Strategies: • Recognize the essential role our land use policies play in preserving natural resources and reducing energy consumption o Encourage compact, efficient development that reduces the cost of extending and maintaining infrastructure and services o Discourage sprawl by promoting small -lot and infill development o Raise awareness of the environmental benefits of urban development that makes efficient use of land and infrastructure that reduces reliance on cars for transportation Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The subject property is the former Roosevelt Elementary School (rebranded as the Theodore Roosevelt Education Center in 2012), which concluded its services in 2019. The subject property is bordered by Medium Density Single - Family Residential (RS-8) zone to the north and east, also to the east is Medium Density Multi - Family Residential (RM20) zone. To the west is High Density Multi -Family Residential (RM44) zone, and to the south is Neighborhood Public (P1) zone, and Medium Density Multi -Family Residential with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/RM20) zone. The area contains a mix of land uses, including single-family homes, multi -family apartment complexes, as well as non-residential uses such as a long-term care facility and an early childhood education center. Due to the existing mix of land uses staff finds that the proposed development is consistent with the existing neighborhood character. Furthermore, the site's topography and existing natural features provide separation between the proposed development and the existing built environment. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The subject property contains regulated sensitive features including critical, protected, and altered protected slopes and woodlands. There is also a wetland on the property that may be a jurisdictional wetland. Regulated Slopes: The subject property contains critical, protected, and altered protected slopes. The impacts to these slopes are outlined in Table 1. The Planned Development Overlay rezoning is required due to proposed impacts to altered protected slopes. These impacts require review and approval by the City Council after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission through the OPD rezoning process. Table 1 — Summary of Reaulated Sloaes Slopes Disturbed Preserved Total Square Feet Percent Square Feet Percent Square Feet Percent Critical 15,042 15.8% 79,929 84.2% 94,971 100% Altered Protected 2,702 17.8% 12,454 82.2% 15,156 100% Altered Slope Buffers 32,946 53.8% 28,252 46.2% 61,198 100% Protected 0 0% 3,788 100% 3,788 100% Protected Slope Buffers 0 0% 20,556 100% 20,556 100% Woodlands: The site contains 152,769 square feet of woodlands. Impacts beyond 80% (less than 20% retention) cannot be approved by staff. The plans show that 61.5% of the woodlands will be retained. Wetlands: The applicant's environmental consultant identified two wetlands on the subject property within the ravine. Staff asked the applicant to reach out to the Army Corp of Engineers VA to determine if the wetlands are jurisdictional. If the Army Corp determines that they are not jurisdictional wetlands it is not a regulated wetland per the City's zoning ordinance. One of the wetlands is located at the eastern end of the ravine near the existing driveway off Greenwood Drive. Due to the location of the existing development on the site, particularly the driveway and existing pavement east and south of the ravine, the wetland cannot meet the buffer requirements. Additionally, as part of the proposed development, the driveway must be reconstructed which requires some additional impacts along the western portion of the driveway. Altering the location of the driveway along Greenwood Drive would only increase the impacts to the ravine and wetland. Staff considers this a nonconforming situation since the wetland buffer requirements cannot be met given the existing development on the subject property. For the remainder of the wetlands, the applicant is requesting a 50% reduction in the 100' buffer requirement. Based on the information provided by the wetland specialist the wetlands qualify for this reduction. CORRESPONDENCE: As of the writing of this report, staff received one piece of correspondence which is provided in Attachment 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0010, a request to rezone approximately 9.90 acres of land located at 611 Greenwood Drive to Medium Density Multi -Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM20) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, installation of a 10' wide pedestrian connection and dedication of an associated public access easement along the eastern portion of the property to extend from W. Benton Street to Greenwood Drive. Pedestrian path shall also include pedestrian scale lighting to be reviewed and approved by the City during the site plan review process. Lighting shall be installed and maintained by the Owner. 2. Vehicular access to the site from W. Benton Street is restricted to emergency vehicles only. 3. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, installation of a raised crosswalk across Greenwood Drive near the entrance to the site subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 4. As part of the site plan approval, ensure that the design of the access drive from Greenwood Drive to the subject property is at or near a 90-degree angle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. NEXT STEPS: After a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the following will occur: • City Council will need to set a public hearing for both the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning applications. • City Council will consider approval of the comprehensive plan amendment (CPA25-0002) and must hold three readings including the public hearing for the rezoning (REZ25-0010). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Applicant Submittal 4. Good Neighbor Meeting Summary 5. Traffic Study 6. Correspondence Approved by: l . Dance a Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map ATTACHMENT 3 Applicant Submittal M M M V Gi Q C a, E C 2 w 9 r U a LO C J a as v C .t]A G W 3 U MMS consultants, Inc. Experts in Planning and Development Since 1975 June 27, 2025 City of Iowa City Neighborhood and Development Services 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: Roosevelt Ridge 1917 5. Gilbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319.351.8282 mmsconsultants.net mms@mmsconsultants.net On behalf of the applicant, MMS Consultants requests a rezoning of the property located at 611 Greenwood Drive, from the current zoning of P1(Neighborhood Public) to OPD/RM20(Medium Density Multi -family Residential). The described land consists of 9.90 acres in total. The site has access to public streets and infrastructure via Greenwood Drive and W. Benton Street. This site is the former location of Roosevelt Elementary, which has since been closed by the ICCSD, and sold to the applicant. The proposed zoning will allow development of a planned 187 unit affordable housing project. The site is located in an area already consisting of RM44 and RM20 properties, as well as some RSB. The site has access to the transit system nearby, as well as City park areas in the neighborhood. If you have questions or require any additional information, please contact us accordingly. Respectfully submitted, Jon D. Marner MMS Consultants, Inc. 11603-OO1L1.docx REZONING PARCEL IOWA CITY, IOWA 1 113 308 755 1 321 31D 5., �'.. n 6x2 614 1. 326 520 51 SOB 4.� rs :I3 331 326 516 2 3_ a 82 86 t '• f., 1 2�3 233 BrOpj[ 8 el'k Dr 402 625 811 603 403 404517. WS — a0g 112• 40S 410. R58 3:3 �nQ 421 422 .99 412 .tic 4x3 4x4 5a8 2ii 402 ar 316 30E \ [0 412 Oa 7a8 832 614 - 61ookl"ns! 501 ' Pyrk 505 112 3171= 30B t r2 B312 1� 825 B07 718 T13 804 ' 8 815 fins 550 840 } 700 61�9 0021001 820 816 80B &M 712 710 112 % r 6151i2 W2 waodside ❑r � 90° BOB s19 _ 1003 910 y 815 81 81 �7 B01 711 7V fi14 $10 t� 03 835 m 912 RM44 91$ ' 613Now 9m 915 701 700 704 716 70g ._740" 70D0 932 703 7a2 72a 777 736 702. . Toe u 5 701 _ 815 7[3S ' 1001 915 710 7'' 732. 705 0 'a945 7i77 e* 710 709 711 as 712 — — 1 700 _ 739 713 C 714 711 11 71fi 704 729 723 _ 717 718 i13 718 701 710 727 719 T172D 721 722 910 Sao Elio Sao x - 715 725 721 760 4512 WS 520 506 446 31 W Benton 51 gp2 7•i7 733 725 la', BOB 4Q5 33; 325 912. .339 755 u,N Poi BIB 9a5 soe Raffia 820 BOS _ •810,ST3. 1B4 W 812: 7 ��" 434 418 407 .154 8143y .. 910 9a4 42125 9x2 441 28' RIW" 91 73 { 924 435 416 5929 m 430 sas \ 1010 ,� 81i 914 �r 816 ` ,612 9S1 1013 1012 423 417 40 910 922 710 1019 84TJ ea6 967 474 438 426 LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT PART OF LOT 7, IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., LYING AND BEING NORTH OF THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY RUNNING EAST AND WEST (BENTON STREET) THROUGH SAID LOT 7, SAID LOT 7 BEING SO DESIGNATED ON A PLAT OF SAID SECTION 16 RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ON MAY 18, 1848. THIS CONVEYANCE IS MADE SUBJECT TO A LEASE COVERING THE PREMISES ABOVE DESCRIBED TO JAMES A. HENNESSEY AND REGINA HENNESSEY, EXPIRING MARCH 1, 1928, WHICH LEASE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE GRANTEE HEREIN. BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., WHICH SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS 1927 FEET WEST AND 670 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, RUNNING THENCE WEST 693 FEET, THENCE NORTH 64 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE CENTER LINE OF MYRTLE AVENUE (NOW KNOWN AS GREENWOOD DRIVE) IN IOWA CITY, IOWA, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID MYRTLE AVENUE (GREENWOOD DRIVE) TO A POINT DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, THENCE SOUTH TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. AS A FURTHER CONSIDERATION FOR SAID CONVEYANCE AND AS A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND, THE GRANTEE HEREIN HEREBY AGREES AND COVENANTS THAT THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PREMISES SHALL BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY OPENED AND DEDICATED AS A PUBLIC HIGHWAY OR STREET AND THE SAID GRANTEE SHALL NOT BE PERMIT THE SAME TO BE OBSTRUCTED OR INTERFERED WITH IN ANY WAY AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE SAID HIGHWAY SHALL BE KEPT OPEN FOR THE USE OF THE PUBLIC AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME HAD BEEN PLATTED AND DEDICATED AND THE SAME ACCEPTED BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE ACCEPTANCE THEREOF BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AS A PUBLIC STREET, AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SHALL COMPLETE THE SAID DEDICATION AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME WERE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AT THIS TIME. GRANTEE SHALL CONSTRUCT SUCH FENCES AS SAID GRANTEE MAY DESIRE ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET HEREIN DEDICATED BUT SHALL BE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO CONTRUST (CONSTRUCT) AND FENCES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET SO DEDICATED. 4� 0 10 25 50 75 100 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 "=100' REZONING EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF LOT 3 AND LOT 7 IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA PLAT PREPARED BY: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. 1917 S. GILBERT STREET IOWA CITY. IA 52240 APPLICANT/OWNER: TWG DEVELOPMENT 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46202 LEGEND AND NOTES A — CONGRESSIONAL CORNER, FOUND — PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES — CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES — — — — — — — — RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES — CENTER LINES — EXISTING COOPERATIVE LIMITS _ LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED -------------- — —— EXISTING EASEMENT LINES, PURPOSE NOTED UNLESS NOTED OTHERMSE, ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND HUNDREDTHS \ LOT 19 LOT 15 LOT 17 i OLOT 5 LOT 16 PART TWO, TERRACE HILL �p6� AUDITOR'5 PARCEL 2-003-017 ADDITION, IOWA CITY, IOWA 3 r PLAT p)oOK 45, PAGE 239 \PLAT pOGYC 2, PA&E 159. — /�6 I JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER"e �� I OFFICE 1- `_ Zpg.23 lM1lR / ' w I I LOT 11 \ / N�2 �9p6�E / , , , I W / — I rn Lor 0 , �. / — I m 9 TRACT 2 LOT PLAT POWERS & ASSO IATES ' �/ 0 r 6Y G PLAT p5OOK 7, PAOE 33 IN THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE 1 I N42°1914"E I I I I I I I I / I / I � I I / I I I , / I TRACT I / / /o W I , w I I ? I � / LLI I / / i z I 6/7 NE A PEEP `G RECORDED IN I 1500tC 174, / Q / PAOE5 299-294 I ' / / 1 rrnn LOT 8 ' tx � I rn A PORTION OF LOT 3, IN a SGHOGL GOMM15510NER5' 61J�)DIV1510N � OF SE6.1!—T79N—R6W OF THE 5TH P.M. I i IOWA CITY, JOHNSON GGUNTY, IOWA REZONING PARCEL ( P1 TO OPD/RM-20) 9.90 ACRES ryti� 0 P� A PORTION OF LOT 7, IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS' SU6DIVISION OF 5EC.1/o—T79N—R(oW OF THE 5T11 P.M. IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA 660.30'(M) 659.30'(R) S89°57'26"W W. �ENTON STREET 4�- TRACT OF LAND DES6R16ED p IN A WARRANTY DEED RECORDED m IN �OOiC 4655 AT PACCES 519-520 JOHNSON COUNTY RE6ORDER"5 OFFICE A I I S89°0851 "W I 30.55'(M)(R) 9.90 AC M M s CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 351-8282 www.mmsconsultants.net Date Revision REZONING EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF LOT 3 AND LOT 7 IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 6/27/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: JDM 1345 Drawn by Scale: LSS 1 "=100' Checked by Sheet No: RRN Project No: 11603-001 of: 1 PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OPD o \� ' S / / Y / <O /p t ,/ �p ' ul t`l� G� / c� �0Q ROOSEVELT RIDGE L� u IOWA PREPARED BY: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. 1917 S. GILBERT STREET ITY, IOWAI�< APPLICANT: ' TWG DEVELOPMENT 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100 6� RETAINING WALL v J J ZZZ Z/ Lo w t_ DZ in W 00 D W i� W (n p R cz J CS O I� ! ^Cz 00 W W Z Q 0z Z W S89°08'51 "W 30.56' EASEMENT Z �L 0 YZ NORTH 0 4 10 20 30 40 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=40' PAVING LEGEND ° — PCC PAVEMENT a a PCC PAVEMENT PCC SIDEWALK LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT PART OF LOT 7, IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., LYING AND BEING NORTH OF THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY RUNNING EAST AND WEST (BENTON STREET) THROUGH SAID LOT 7, SAID LOT 7 BEING SO DESIGNATED ON A PLAT OF SAID SECTION 16 RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ON MAY 18, 1848. THIS CONVEYANCE IS MADE SUBJECT TO A LEASE COVERING THE PREMISES ABOVE DESCRIBED TO JAMES A. HENNESSEY AND REGINA HENNESSEY, EXPIRING MARCH 1, 1928, WHICH LEASE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE GRANTEE HEREIN. AND BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., WHICH SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS 1927 FEET WEST AND 670 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, RUNNING THENCE WEST 693 FEET, THENCE NORTH 64 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE CENTER LINE OF MYRTLE AVENUE (NOW KNOWN AS GREENWOOD DRIVE) IN IOWA CITY, IOWA, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID MYRTLE AVENUE (GREENWOOD DRIVE) TO A POINT DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, THENCE SOUTH TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. AS A FURTHER CONSIDERATION FOR SAID CONVEYANCE AND AS A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND, THE GRANTEE HEREIN HEREBY AGREES AND COVENANTS THAT THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PREMISES SHALL BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY OPENED AND DEDICATED AS A PUBLIC HIGHWAY OR STREET AND THE SAID GRANTEE SHALL NOT BE PERMIT THE SAME TO BE OBSTRUCTED OR INTERFERED WITH IN ANY WAY AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE SAID HIGHWAY SHALL BE KEPT OPEN FOR THE USE OF THE PUBLIC AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME HAD BEEN PLATTED AND DEDICATED AND THE SAME ACCEPTED BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE ACCEPTANCE THEREOF BY THE CITY OF IORTA CITY, IOWA, AS A PUBLIC STREET, AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SHALL COMPLETE THE SAID DEDICATION AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME WERE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AT THIS TIME. GRANTEE SHALL CONSTRUCT SUCH FENCES AS SAID GRANTEE MAY DESIRE ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET HEREIN DEDICATED BUT SHALL BE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO CONTRUST (CONSTRUCT) AND FENCES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET SO DEDICATED ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY, IOWA .r ""Iq a �ta rl �; T. q �• ,I. V-� _ �T l�rt-i ��.7 • _ STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES ------------- — RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES EXISTING RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES CENTER LINES EXISTING CENTER LINES LOT LINES, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — — PROPOSED EASEMENT LINES EXISTING EASEMENT LINES — BENCHMARK (R) — RECORDED DIMENSIONS 22-1 — CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER —EXIST— —PROP— — POWER POLE — POWER POLE W/DROP =6: — POWER POLE W/TRANS — POWER POLE W/LIGHT c $c — GUY POLE x — LIGHT POLE O ® — SANITARY MANHOLE Y — FIRE HYDRANT e — WATER VALVE OO ® — DRAINAGE MANHOLE 10111 ❑ — CURB INLET —X—X— — FENCE LINE ( — EXISTING SANITARY SEWER (( — PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER (W) — EXISTING WATER LINES W — PROPOSED WATER LINES E — ELECTRICAL LINES T — TELEPHONE LINES G — GAS LINES - — — — — — — — — — — — - — CONTOUR LINES (1' INTERVAL) — PROPOSED GROUND — EXISTING TREE LINE — EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE & SHRUB — EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES & SHRUBS THE ACTUAL SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT. PROPOSAL APPLICANT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI —FAMILY BUILDING CONTAINING 187 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ON A 8.95 ACRE SITE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE APPLICANT PLANS TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION IN SPRING 2026, LASTING THRU SPRING 2027. DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS PROPOSED ZONING IS OPD/RM-20(MULTI—FAMILY) SETBACK REQUIREMENTS BUILDING SETBACKS: REQUIRED PROVIDED FRONT (GREENWOOD DR) 20 FEET 217 FEET FRONT (BENTON ST) 40 FEET 40 FEET SIDE (EAST) 15 FEET 133 FEET SIDE (WEST) 10 FEET 83 FEET REAR 20 FEET N/A MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE 5,000 SF 3,489,149 SF LOT FRONTAGE 40 FEET 660 FEET LOT WIDTH 60 FEET 660 FEET MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT 35 FEET 42 FEET* LOT CHARACTERISTICS LOT AREA 389,849 SF (100%)(8.95AC) PROPOSED BUILDING AREA 61,761 SF (15.8%) PROPOSED PAVING AREA 87,011 SF (22.3%) GREEN SPACE AREA 241,077 SF (61.8%) PARKING REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED PARKING: PER CITY OF IOWA CITY ORDINANCE, NO PARKING IS REQUIRED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS. PROVIDED PARKING: STANDARD SPACES PROVIDED 130 COMPACT SPACES PROVIDED 26 ADA SPACES PROVIDED 6 TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED 162 163 (ONE AND TWO BEDROOM UNITS) X 0.50 PER UNIT 82 SPACES 24 (THREE BEDROOM UNITS) X 1.0 PER UNIT 24 SPACES SUBTOTAL 106 SPACES FIRST 50 + 28 (56/2) = 78 SPACES REQUIRED TOTAL BIKE PARKING PROVIDED 78 SPACES OUTSIDE SPACES 60 SPACES INSIDE SPACES 18 SPACES UNIT DENSITY REQUIREMENTS MAXIMUM DENSITY (OPD/RM-20) 24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE 8.95 AC X 24 = 214 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS 214 UNITS DWELLING UNITS PROVIDED 187 UNITS TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE LOT AREA 389,849 SF BUILDING FOOTPRINT 61,761 SF BUILDING COVERAGE PERCENTAGE(MAX 50%) 15.8% TOTAL BEDROOMS/UNIT 83 ONE BEDROOM/UNIT 83 BEDROOMS 80 TWO BEDROOMS/UNIT 160 BEDROOMS 24 THREE BEDROOMS/UNIT 72 BEDROOMS TOTAL BEDROOM UNITS 315 BEDROOMS OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED: 315 BEDROOMS X 10SF/BEDROOM = 3,150 SF OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 16,417 SF OPEN SPACE (SEE LANDSCAPE AND FINAL STABILIZATION PLAN, SHEET 6 FOR OPEN SPACE AMENITIES) AREA FIFE 10 750.00 O2 750.00 O3 750.00 O4 740.00 O5 750.00 t�6 750.00 AVG GRADE ROOF LINE BLDG HT 746.63 788.00 41.37 *WAIVER REQUEST TO ALLOW MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 42 FEET IOW UTILITIES A THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY IOWA ONE CALLSIVI ONE CALL AT 811 OR 800/292-8989 NO LESS THAN 48 HRS.IN ADVANCE OF ANY DIGGING OR EXCAVATION. WHERE PUBLIC UTILITY FIXTURES ARE SHOWN AS EXISTING ON THE PLANS OR ENCOUNTERED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA, IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE OWNERS OF THOSE UTILITIES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AFFORD ACCESS TO THESE FACILITIES FOR NECESSARY MODIFICATION OF SERVICES. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES, STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND RECORDS, AND THEREFORE THEIR LOCATIONS MUST BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY. IT IS POSSIBLE THERE MAY BE OTHERS, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN OR SHOWN. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THEIR EXISTENCE AND EXACT LOCATION AND TO AVOID DAMAGE THERETO. NO CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ANY INTERFERENCE OR DELAY CAUSED BY SUCH WORK. 8.95 AC RA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www. mmsconsultants. net Date Revision 08/18/2025 PER CITY COMMENTS SITE LAYOUT AND DIMENSION PLAN ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 06/26/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: CAT Drawn by Scale: HEH 1 "=40' Checked by Sheet No: CAT Project No: 11603-001 of: 6 PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OPD ROOSEVELT RIDGE 11 `��'//1� /' / ' I OWA CITY I OWA -- _a �1z �/,_�' /�= / / ' \ PREPARED BY: APPLICANT: �,' /' o MMS CONSULTANTS INC. TWG DEVELOPMENT - & �� v 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100 \ \ 1 701 "�`'J'r 0_ INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46202 / �� IOWA CITY, IA 52240 , � / �� ,�>I- / /, / � / /' //- - v - v 1 I ��701.93WT // - / , �/ ) / 1 ;7 , O \\ , / / / / " \ J .. / / , v V ' //, / / v / �� _ - - _ - ��vvv ' , // __ / v�'I� / /' vv / i/ /' �� o / -vi / ,- � 705 v�\r o/ �,� / / / / v I / �* 1. - - vv v ' v/'� I / v /��// / _ , r ) o�E / / //, I I � \� \ jj {j {j _ / / � � I i / / i //,. - i I v L07 IJ IJ o "'r � / , / l v I / L-� / / / / / /� y I 1, � � / I A / � / / / / / // � / / 11 I ;;-��-\13__. -60\� 11 � \ 0i \\ ) // / � \ I - / _ � vE / / , / - / / � ., / // / / , / / \ \\ \I O� 'u. _ 1 / / � v 0 -E _ / / / / i;'/ '/ �/ / �/ VA11AVA �/� % 1 '.- - - / r" ' �� .'. /, / �� / / /, \v_710.16WB 710.50WT �� _ - _ - `.- - ' / '/ / z ` wv / / ' � - - _ - - i - - _ i � / / ___ / ' ' V AAA .� ; � // ' / %� - _ - / �-- / / z v vvvv vvv l / I i - - - - - - - - it / l/ v ,vvv v v -_ - - - \\\ v i �� - -- _'-' _,�'/�/ --._--- - - - / vvvvvvvvvvw y715.96WT \ L07 9 - - - - .... - - / � /v/ / / // -- / ' / � - _' - - - - - - - ' - / / 1 / // 1 9 - / /� 1 i mot/ �� - / �� / i /'-. / / - - - - - - ) / I _G� / /' �� , // //i/ , - -- - r\ C\ ' �� /, ' ' / ' - / - r / I \ 707. 1 I / / A� �' < / i,'/ ' / '/ ' F / J /' / / / L / l / / l / /l// /l� } i/ / //'// , / .� / , ,// 1 / / �' // / l' \ Iv / �' v , / " '" '/ / ��' �� '> 1 / / 710.30W6 4 / 719.04WT \` I Z / ) /// /�.�' / i '' ' * / / � i / - /_ � _ _ - _ - - - \ --- - - - 'I r 'I-719.25WT_ v / 6 _ /i / /. ' /, / / / / / v-� / - - v- , z � , 11 \ \ ) / �� / / ) / � ///// /../ // / / / / 1 _ - t \ \'% - /// i - --_- // /i \ \�I / ) /. 1 /E-/ ////''..�''//// -I •/ ' ''' - - - - -- -- -�_- - - vv '' �'// �20'718.00W6 �) / V / / - / / / / ' / / / / // / - - - - _ - - - - - -- �� / - _ A A A \ V A / - V / / / / / / / / - - _ - / ` ,�... / / � - - - - - - \\\ / \ / % ,� - - - �i/ / /// ' �/ - --' --- - - - _ / -' ' / / �� ' / // /� /'/ / / - - _ _ vvv v is / // �/ - ; I / / / / / / / / / 1 . ! / / l "I/ / \ / / / / ' i / / / / / / / / / / 7 �/ � / i /, i / / / - - - - _ - - - - - \ = \ \ \ a ado-ao. / / / / / / , 1720.73WB ` _ �0� � , Z-/ // - � i ' - - - ; ' -_ - - - - v - - - O // / , , ' A A A 11\ 1 a / / ,v/ / ' / / �/ /' '// '-/ -./ / /, G 9 / / / / - - / - v v J I V A V / I / / / 719.89W6 1 \ / / - / / / - - , - - - - \ \- 1 / // // ' r - - '--- - / , A ' 1 /�/ / � / / / / /i ' ' / / A IV ®A7� ( � O F-kcw � � w ,- ' , - - ' - - V A V A 0 m1 I 1 1 1 j / A 1 / / / / / / / / / / / / �/ / / �/� � �{� �i' / v v 1A I I �I i t \1A I v-- ' /- - 724.11WT - II i V /< / , v I / T / / i (i / / f 1 / / / /< - l �� 9�"I1VY C1"""8191��II E919- '/ / - - v V A 1 I / / / , -11 / / E v //// / / / - - v 1 I / ' / p I A� /i /oo, /, / , OO, ,/ I- / /- /, , - / --, - -- V A l 1 l I / / / / /' / f 725 T ///J1 ��/ �� / / ��///''i, 1�////��' /'/'/,/ �v / - -/ I I I , 6�- , '�/- '� - v\v VII` 1OII1I1If1 V- �v �','' �'i�I �!�;'/l / / . r / / / , ' / / / / - - / / 723.85W6 724.00WT , v v / //�% / I / -� - - '/ / / ' , ,� / / / / 1 / / , v A V 1 III I 1 I \ 1 - ' / 'i / / , - . / / / ' / / / / / / - 6 1 N / / j '� -i / - L 1 / / '' I / l / / ,� i / / / / i / / 1 L / �, ' c �o �� `� �_ � - /� 1 1 I 1 \ I - - - / / / / / /� / / , / / / / , A f� I 1 / / - t"� 1 //// /c I ',�/�,/ ,,,/////, i/�', / I / '� " "-///��K�Md' _ A A A 1111! (1 /I I/1 _ //,, jj/i/ i v 10 \ / L I 1/,-///--//'/-,///// / ) //-"'/-//'///, �° - V%A1lAA111111 )� - ---_ I-%,/j/// - _`c / /;�/ / 735/is // // / /i / //- i� / ,/ // ''//' - - - `v' v3 ---v�%i//- J_ " -". 1, - / / ram/ //�i/, /..i// -, /�// / / Q��/,/- / / // //-, /,-_- - - - - V A V '- - - //ii--,, _ "i� _ / /�/�l // / ' o`''c / / i / //, / i..i, // /, �/' i' /' - v '��/ /�"/� '-- ' / / / '/ /'// - - - - v V AA 1� �V', yvr_-�-�'%�� i3 -� �v1 V A //:�/ // v / i i �/ /'i /.%/ -'r/�/ -/ / / - - �/i �"//ice- - - �' ///,� //, -' 737.79WB v v v vA -\_- - -_ �y - _ _ A / � / / // / // ` �� ' �'' / / / /. / / / � / , / / � /' � - , � �,),5--, _ 734.98WB� / /, / -- - - _ 735 _ �� v v v ' ce ////f/-/ / .1''/ // /� // / , '--- //// // /-/-,'- - ---'/� 740.79WT� - 7- %- - ti / // I / � / /' / / ' / � / / / / ' /, , I / - / ///� - - , /G"743.o0WT \ _ / �• _�: A ' / / ) //�/11 '/ ' / / /� /' -'// ';"/ 'h?-736.71W6; 743.00WT - _ 738 _ \ \ \ _ I / I i / / I I I ) I ) / \ I I l Il l / ) , - / /i - / / / / /, / j � �j - - , - _ '- I - � , •. \ \ • e .,. .�- I I, �� vv v, v 1 -vv 1 v v v / ) //I \I / // - / //// 7g5 / 739.11WB y• / 1 - < - V A / \ \ ) V ( / I 1 ) -, ' / / i /, �_ - - - - ,/ / // / / , / .�I L •. ice \ \ \ \\ \ / 1 \\ \ \. \ \ \ 1 ` /I/I / '/ _ / / / / /40.36WB 742.80WT11 i _ 9 J J \ V A VA VA A l v A V 1 I 1 1 I I I ) / / / - / / /, / / , /, , _ - /I / / / // - / - - .J, I ,A� __ ') - .� W \ V \ V ,-/ v A .V \ V 1 I f / / / / - /// /'/ / - - - -- // / ' - � (A I I O \v\VvA-/ \ )A.'1vA111))I ///////// / '////////'// ' - 742.22W6/- �v I / 1 / / // /� // / / / / , 738.79WB - / - - n M - - v I I I11 �/I // Il I / �i l /// //// / /r I / ' /� /' - - -' ' - M o vF - // //qh )) �'/� / / / / / lull //l // / / ' // / //, / - I _ 745.20WT�� - _ >L v v // // 4 / * ' / / / / ' / / /i // / ` - '/ / / / / / // // / ////-747.66WT- ''l - y v v 'I v / I I ✓l / i - / / / l / / /// // / / / / / / / / / - , v , 1 / ! / / / / / /, , - / / // // / / /- / 1 / 111/ll)/ l // .r ,�//////////// l/I// ,////-,/////////'//I//// / - Q v v� I v v A v I//,/////, - //- --/////, /////„ /, //// /////' // s y. A A IV_II /� / I I v 111 , 11/� '// /// //�/ / I/// / // / ' / '/ / '/// /' // 11 / - i I V A� 1 / ' 1 �l�// I ��''/,I / /; / / / /// l 0 o) / / / / ' / / / / / / / / 740.82WB / - / 747.50W� - - v g0 -� I� ...L . v I I /I A / '// - - - '�, / '''f // ''// - / / / / / / '/ ' ' '// '/ / 'i / // / CSC - I' / / I/ / A ,� / / / / , - I S _ - tt-- / // -/-,I/ //11 / ////' // / / ' / '/,//'/// / /� 749.38WT'�' v W� ll�ll 1 //l///-/ - � �"/ / -/i//'//�' '/i '/////'i/ - - - - v l JJf l .i / / i / / _ '/ / - / '/ ' / ' ' '// //�- ' '/ / - .e I AV V \ //// // / / (� / / / / / �- , // _ A A.A A v V / I I / A //// / / , / / / / _ - 11 //I �// I I / I. , I I / / I I / I / ' '- / // / // //, /, // -/ / -/ / /-' c' A \ \- 1 - / / / / / 1 lul //// 1 1 ) I I I I � 1 / // i/ / i i',�� ,/� �" i- ice/ i i� I11 V A)v v v A v\ / /PI I /! \ 1 / I I/� III I I . / I / / ' / / - 'i / /- ' / / , // / / i , '/ / l 11�11 A Q .01 1 1 1p 1 / / / / / / / /�/ - / - / / / / , I _ ji 9 / ��4 O v / I )/1 L / / / / / - I1 ) / v v ' v 1 v 41II 1 1 1 I �j�// / / v, - '/ / ' - / - - I /l I l /111 vfl 1 � ,/ / , i'Mo \ I //I "l/ // -/ /,/ ' %�-� -/ , / � v V 1 1 I \ 1 / I /1 A \/l/, I11 1 111 I./// //1 / ' -','/ / -//// // /- / / / / -/' 4# - I - � V A �'J I/ I J I. 1 S / / / - - , - - - / 1 I/ / 111 / A 1 ) f I 1 I �I �l I l / ' - ,Se�o/I (B 77 gNJ ,Rg�l OF' I,m - v - - - - - - - - / � \ 1 � f I /)//)IIl////lIl/1:�1)1// �'/ /-/// / //i// '/ //,-, - / �\- - I / v \ 1-p11AIII v / v - - / / / / / // /'/57' A W - - , �V - / p Q 1 737.43WT / I / l l l) I l /t, I l ) - '- ' - / - / / - - -14 __WT i v750 - _ - �1 s 1 )'/ l // I I I - -- / /i - -, //- - // / - - - - - - ��// / i I 1 ) I I / /) i 1 / Z - / - � , , ' % % ; _ - - 746.70W6 - J h /-- -- --- - --- _ - v `I v v -- - - V / I / /J l 1 _- / //'/ ///'''i' _ A _ Illl / //I l/ // /// , ---- - _ -- - - --. - _)11�(i v v II: 11 / ll/ / l 1 \ - //i/ // ' ' i//-- .� 1 / 1 lil / / // ) / I :1 - - /'/ // // / / /,, / / - - \ III / l -/ l// l /' 4 1 I ''///i/ �''�// / _ / v�� 1 ! / V 1f� / / �v V -, / / -/// /-/- l I / r I / ll�lf// /// / I- I: _-��ii'i ", ice/" /./ •�� Y _ V I� / I 1 v -/ v i- / - - - / / / / I� \ /// I 11 ) / I v / / i ,,/-- --i , / __ - _� 1 It I J J � � i ll ) 1 , '/ //I ,\ �' ii/ -� ✓ i II f / / v /, ^j / / ,/ / v O / I /// I \ �, \ / .// / /� /,/ / / �.. /} f./ _ 7 - \ 1 I I I ) / / O / / 1/////1f I "-� / \ Zv i.////�//,///// 1. i// / v / I \ 1 1 1 I / II � Ml -Q- - //// //// //'/i r' i}�df v- -- V I/ /// /- 1 - - ,/,%///,//4 ,' /' � I / I - 1 I I 1 / ) 11 I / / / - / . 'I-,' I / )� I �/ I t� - ;sue v , vv v \\ , v 700.11 WB v �\ \ � 1 \` \ - ` / / \ \ - v �0O v v v \ \ /- vv v v \ V - v \ `/ - O -7p5 ' - v _ _ - ' J J - - �-z� z Z 709.01 WB- - - W � � � , - - >1 (2 � Q �L W 0 �1' of l w m� z J --_L�, �� W QQ 9 -� J� t /11 v �� 0- W- ' Z �'� v I- 'Q Q - � # � I`/ �CZ z z 1 \ II r\ 1 I 1 \ 11/O I I �I J v Nv �1 ) k / V \ \ \ V � 1 \ \ \ \�\ v �, vvvvvv v vv v� - v v v .A V A \ A V A I / v - I \ \\ \ v v - v v v v \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ v \ \ \ A � \ \ \ \ V ) - v \ \\ V A v �O A\ v v v v v v vv`v \\.\ V A A V A , v v vv ` v`/ �, \ ,�y \ v vvv v - v v \ _ , :A (� v o v �,v� v v v Jv v v_ I 1 - ' / I I I ' / / I vI 1 1 I I I / I 1 1 I ` I I I I I / I / / I I TI I / I V I \ I v I 1 I ) I I / I I I I I \ ) .�,_ / ) I I IT I -_� � I 3 _OWIB � / I Z -_�O \ _v m // // / / �/ // / / 1 Ql� 4� / (L/ / i / / ) � Q/ Q / b, / � -/ I � /r_ ' , / JJ / 'T � �_ / 1. 1 / � i� / � ) - / Zi / / I 1 1 1111 I I I v - - i �i "/�' / ' •�t ) 1 / ( )�) I 1 I l ' / / / -' , O / l,�,ll v� - - -_- ' � .//// f I V I I I ) / / / / / - 1 // / ) I - / -/// / ( / / / 1 ,./ / - \ / ) I ) I / / ' / I : / / / ' If 11111 1 � g'- A - //// / �� ' , , l v � �, J L/ L-----( �I ) / ' / / / I / �� -� �' / _ I/1 1/(�/�/ / ///!/ r`/ v l I l I 1 ) / / / / . / / - -- - - - - - I , III 1 �. I / _ �/ // / � / -. - - I -. I / ) I ) ) / / I 'l - - -- - - 111I/\I -� -/ / / i. / / / I l ) / l l 1 / j ' -�--- - - -- /- - / / / / / I� ,� ��j // ASS r� _ �I I l ln�//// „00 'I ' , ' Q - _ - �kll / - �� - -- ��. i //) _ - / �742.50WT //: �� / o / _D - - - - - / / --�� \- ---- Lr -'L\} \ ---- -- -- --- ', 746.79WT 742.77WT) / /,'/^�h/ 26O WWB� -- -- -- _ - -- -- -- -- 7 -- / / �% / / / I / / / , _ - 1• . �S �y 1 _ _ - _ /. 'CSC 50 750 58WT - - --I --- - - / /I U) - 4JI II_ �� - - /T/ -I - / / / ' / ' o ll>J I� - - - - 752.00WB 1. / 74'"7 ,V , I I I■ / v -- - -- _ /// / / , cV /// _ / - �� ) ) / / / / "I / - _ _ - - - ; - 746.00W6 / / 726.00WB�► /' / l� � � � / / � - //I// -I - '/'// ''// ' / \'' - - - / / ,r - 4 - - - y--, / / // / >. / - j \- , Z C CN CN CN N CN C CN C CN L"N P� N ¢N N / , CN C C N TV � __ v ' �/ '/ / / - - 7[ - t �F,T ....I ............................... \ - -- - / - _ - - V \ [ �1 \ ) l / l -1 Y[•J - - '_/ - -_ - - - - - / - ' ' / ' ' 1 / I / ) / 9O� Q 1 ' / /I / / v 1. v 748.50WT ��■ / ) / 7q0 7AO _ - - _ - -' - - - / , / / / I Q ' I / / 11 v v - 749.29 WT / v�---- -_ - a-• 753.24WB �A --_ - --- // r ///ll -'1 vv -- -- - ,-- %-;- - �- _ - - �- -=y_� _ - ;- / '// /// I - - �I - -- - -�- - �-- - - - �-- ---- -- --- _-'/;' / - //// / //v--- 1755.72WT �, 50.50WT % - '- - ' ' ; /lull I 35 735- - - - - '- -_ - - -- -_- - - ' '/ / // / /\- " - 1 - - - 7 - _ - - - _ - - - - - - - / / - - - o - - - - - - - - - / - 748.62WB - - _ - - - - - --------- -- - - - 5 -- - -- = = _ _ - =-----�- - - --- = -- - 7� - - = 572 --=� - =may --;r7- = --=- = - - -_� �;' - - 761.72WB. -- -- - - ---- - - 72 - =-' - --- ____ - - ------ - -_- -;- ' - - . V FSi _ i / - - I - I 1 / / T-' � � -/ -- - - - ' V / FO 1°-- ` ° I-c c c c c c c c I Tom- ��° / A I v I 1 1 1 '1' CN CN CN CNy N / CN / RCN ,CND C�I C/N / / C/N / / / / / FO F/ f0 �FO�-0 �/ / FO ��FO /FO FO FO FO/ F0�7F0 / _ - / 7 \ � 1 1 (^ 1 1 � \ 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 ---A II � \ � \ \ \ \ \ \ CIEAry Ou \ / - - - J _ J I v 0v -) ) ) ��) ) cs-) I )_r) cry) P ) �> �> )-cw -�)- ) -N- p c,rN _ -1 _ o O \ 1 0 cry O cr cs -)�) �) �)� � �� \�> cS� o t \ O p -- - - I- rt \- - / /- -) A I ) I , / �- 1 \ / 1 I )911 ) 1 / l / ! l l l / l 1 �c, A A / l 1 ) ) / 1 / / / / 1 ) I I I l I ) ) 1 / / ) I v I l l WE-xE WE wE xE��1E wE viE�xE wE wE--xE�,-xE�-fwEfWf xE, ( I "E "E�xE WE wE-/ x� E WE wE�wE� xE�` WE twE wE�WE��xE� / ( \ / /_ _ I_- - _ -, _ - _ I __ _ -__ - � -_v _� v A v Jf��'!��_- - - - A _ v / 1 l , V v v A V A v A v A v v v A _ / __ � _ Kf' _ - - ORE �\ OHE -OHE- OHE OHE - -OH - It -- -- - ,= vv / �'� -, v V ) / / I / / -1 / / ) i / / / r I / / / / ) \ 111 / / A 1 -- - -- --- - t �-- - - -- - -- � �--1 -- 1--v- --� - -- - T- / NORTH INHUH 0 4 10 20 30 40 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=40' STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES - - CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES ------------- - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES - CENTER LINES EXISTING CENTER LINES - LOT LINES, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED - - - - - - - - - PROPOSED EASEMENT LINES EXISTING EASEMENT LINES Iii -BENCHMARK (R) - RECORDED DIMENSIONS 22-1 - CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER -EXIST- -PROP- � $ - POWER POLE =* =* - POWER POLE W/DROP =11i =11i - POWER POLE W/TRANS - POWER POLE W/LIGHT =9�: =@= - GUY POLE 0 * - LIGHT POLE OO ® - SANITARY MANHOLE 114 Y -FIRE HYDRANT * e - WATER VALVE OO ® - DRAINAGE MANHOLE 0111 ❑ - CURB INLET X X - FENCE LINE ( - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER - EXISTING STORM SEWER << -PROPOSED STORM SEWER (W) - EXISTING WATER LINES W - PROPOSED WATER LINES E - ELECTRICAL LINES T - TELEPHONE LINES G -GAS LINES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CONTOUR LINES (1' INTERVAL) - PROPOSED GROUND EXISTING TREE LINE 0 0 - EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE & SHRUB - EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES & SHRUBS THE ACTUAL SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT. 11 EROSION CONTROL LEGEND 11 ■ENEEMEMEN. FINAL FILTER SOCK BE!! • • • BEE N � • � PERIMETER SILT FENCE ■mmmmmmmm-- SILT FENCE TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SA TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILE AREA TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE DIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOW a] DUMPSTER FOR CONSTRUCTION WASTE CW CONCRETE TRUCK/EQUIPMENT WASHOUT PR PORTABLE RESTROOM RIP RAP OUTLET PROTECTION DL DOCUMENT LOCATION (PERMITS, SWPPP, INSPECTION FORMS, ETC.) 0 FILTER SOCK INLET PROTECTION (a FILTER SOCK BEHIND CURB AT CURB RAMP THE ABOVE LISTED ITEMS ARE SHOWN IN THEIR RECOMMENDED LOCATIONS. IF A CONTROL MEASURE IS ADDED OR MOVED TO A MORE SUITABLE LOCATION, INDICATE THE REVISION ON THIS SHEET. THE BLANKS LEFT FOR OTHER MEASURES SHOULD BE USED IF AN ITEM NOT SHOWN ABOVE IS IMPLEMENTED ON SITE, ADDITIONAL PRACTICES FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL CAN BE FOUND IN APPENDIX D OF THE SWPPP. AREA FIFE 0 750.00 9 750.00 9 750.00 44 740.00 (�) 750.00 I6 750.00 IOW UTILITIES A THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY IOWA ONE CALLSIVI ONE CALL AT 811 OR 800/292-8989 NO LESS THAN 48 HRS.IN ADVANCE OF ANY DIGGING OR EXCAVATION. WHERE PUBLIC UTILITY FIXTURES ARE SHOWN AS EXISTING ON THE PLANS OR ENCOUNTERED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA, IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE OWNERS OF THOSE UTILITIES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AFFORD ACCESS TO THESE FACILITIES FOR NECESSARY MODIFICATION OF SERVICES. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES, STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND RECORDS, AND THEREFORE THEIR LOCATIONS MUST BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY. IT IS POSSIBLE THERE MAY BE OTHERS, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN OR SHOWN. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THEIR EXISTENCE AND EXACT LOCATION AND TO AVOID DAMAGE THERETO. NO CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ANY INTERFERENCE OR DELAY CAUSED BY SUCH WORK. 8.95 AC RA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www. mmsconsultants. net Date I Revision 08/18/2025 PER CITY COMMENTS SITE GRADING EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND SWPPP ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY I OWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 06/26/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: CAT Drawn by Scale: HEH 1 "=40' Checked by Sheet No: CAT Project No: 2 11603-001 of: 6 PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OPD ROOSEVELT RIDGE \IOWACITY 10 = PREPARED BY: APPLICANT: o �j MMS CONSULTANTS INC. TWG DEVELOPMENT 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100- �% IOWA CITY, IA 52240 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46202 '� o UI % 0O � 0 I CO i i�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�s®♦♦O®<�v,9'�♦s♦♦O i♦!e♦A♦♦♦♦ !♦♦'►♦♦e♦b♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A®♦♦♦'►♦A♦A♦A♦♦♦A♦'►♦♦ ♦o♦i�<� -. � es♦A♦s♦A♦A♦A♦A♦A♦A♦<, ♦♦�,�®♦®♦♦♦♦®♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦ ♦As♦Ass!!♦ ,�♦;►♦♦♦♦♦®A♦♦s♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦®♦♦A♦♦®♦♦s♦♦ ♦♦A♦♦s��.A LOOT• '♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦s %♦oe♦A ♦♦♦♦♦ s♦♦♦ ♦•s♦♦♦♦♦♦♦seA♦♦e♦ o♦�►<♦b A♦♦♦♦s♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦s♦ ♦s♦♦A !♦a♦ ♦�A♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦!O e♦i A.•s. • ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ice """" a - , 00A♦Oose� ♦♦es♦s®♦♦i♦♦ ♦®A®i0®i ♦'ss!♦♦o.♦-+ ♦��♦ � �� 1►♦♦i♦0000♦Ai.►♦♦s♦s♦♦O♦s0♦o®ssAO®A®e♦ a =ooe" ''.A' ®�!iii��s �®ii♦ei� ♦:♦i®o♦i♦i®s®��e♦��♦�®i♦i♦e♦�♦♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦e♦�♦®♦A♦►s♦A�Ao1►�J�►®♦�♦�♦®♦�♦�♦�♦�►s♦�sis�®��wA�♦�s�esiss♦vs�s'=►A®iPi♦i±_ ��!%i!� ♦bi. � i I isi♦i�i0♦ s®O♦®♦�®®s�A�♦e♦�♦o♦!♦-�sl;♦�♦�i�♦�®�♦i♦i♦o♦A�o♦♦♦�♦e�o��®�•i♦®♦i♦i♦i♦i♦®♦i♦s♦i♦®eise°i♦�iioi♦♦i♦i♦o♦�;i�'s`��oi♦:e♦:�♦di♦i +: o♦_ wig► �� ®®♦o®is%ie♦ilesssse ENN09i1:4Nrl �o� A♦ii®iiiiiii�oiiii%oi®ss®ii�s.i®�iiiis®♦Ae� .'isi oiii o� iii iiiii 'I �I ♦o♦♦♦�A♦� - • ��♦♦*PA♦ee♦♦♦♦♦ o♦ i!♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦®♦♦♦��♦�♦♦e A�►��aw�♦♦♦♦♦♦A♦is�A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦®♦♦♦♦♦♦ A I♦��I/�♦♦♦♦♦f o♦f ;♦ii �i • • ��.`♦�♦�♦�♦��♦. ♦♦♦♦ N►ifl�:Adi►A l,�1i'i n' A®iD1�►♦,►♦i�r- ♦b♦O♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O♦♦♦0♦♦♦♦�►♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦®♦A♦♦!®♦♦♦♦s♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ® 11'v`O►f INNER A♦i►♦♦��♦♦��♦Sit �1♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦jp ♦♦ A�♦- O'♦•1�A4-♦O♦ E o'►♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ b♦A • ♦bo ♦♦♦♦♦ 1♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦eeA .Oi♦i♦i♦i♦b♦i♦i♦io'�♦i♦ _ r��A�'�'��o'�'ii��r'♦io �`��Qi♦i♦!♦♦s♦i♦isi♦��; ®iessa♦�e�♦�®®i♦i♦i♦isi♦i♦o♦i♦i♦i♦i♦®♦i♦i®e♦♦s♦i® ♦ !i��i!o♦!i♦isi♦!isi�e' ® a00000Ap♦♦♦pp A♦p♦♦a 6 ♦�.,►► ®e♦�i i�<� F T !-I E ♦pp♦Ao♦♦♦® ♦s♦bA♦e♦AbA♦s� i<�As♦pss♦AoOp♦♦®ppsA♦ASA♦Aop 0R �2A�I�o°sue®°A�Aoe�A°ems .�i♦i♦isi♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦ ♦♦♦i♦i0i ♦i♦i�ivi� ®•epss♦♦ps®p♦O®�i�►OssAsO♦♦♦ss♦sOps♦♦♦s♦s♦A♦♦♦♦♦ As®i♦i i♦i♦<♦i!i�ll►.♦i►.s��ssis.� ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦®♦A♦♦♦♦�♦A♦♦♦♦ , t _ ♦ �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A��♦®♦♦♦b♦♦♦�Pbi♦♦♦.♦♦♦AiA♦♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ems♦o ♦ � ♦�♦♦♦®♦►��♦�/1►♦♦!P�♦♦<,�♦♦ems♦♦d �App��+�♦�:®`O®��v�'>:♦:®�.®►.�IPA :�:�.�.�e�.��',►® ♦♦e ♦♦♦�A�♦�♦s♦♦S♦♦♦ sP♦i�♦A♦♦♦� G♦rA=�rAiiiA�<�♦��=♦� ,�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦o♦♦s♦♦s<�>a®♦♦ie♦s ►♦•♦♦♦♦♦i ►♦ • ♦♦♦ •♦ps�►0♦♦e��►♦i�'D!♦►♦e�►♦s�'i� ®♦s♦♦♦A♦A♦s♦♦♦♦♦♦♦o♦s♦esl�s♦♦♦o♦♦♦♦♦®♦�i6�'1♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦®♦♦♦ I I �` �♦♦♦�♦♦®♦♦♦♦♦♦�►� i♦♦♦♦ O'►♦♦O♦!i►A♦v/f�•♦�il=_•i �<r♦®r ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�.. oe♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦o ♦♦b s♦ � ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ .!. Ili, !. �.. ►♦♦♦♦♦♦♦iG�♦ ♦!♦♦A♦♦♦A♦A I ►♦♦♦♦♦♦oA ♦♦♦ ar��Ni<�♦1►'♦A'♦1►'♦♦'♦�►'♦y♦y!� ♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦♦!•�♦♦e♦♦♦♦®♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦!♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦ �-♦0"♦♦vim♦'!tee<O - �� ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦11�®�'•♦e��e��♦♦1�♦,)//A,>//♦,�'►��li►�♦!►�♦ �, '.♦j®Qj♦♦�j♦♦Q♦®A®♦♦ • ♦j♦.♦♦♦QO♦®♦®♦j♦♦♦e �►•��j♦A�j®♦�j♦®�'j•Q'j m �!♦♦♦♦�♦�i�i�►♦��'�•♦�'�•♦b�•♦b�♦♦O�♦♦♦�®♦A!•i � = ♦ ♦♦♦A♦♦®♦♦♦®♦♦♦♦®®♦♦♦�®♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O•♦♦�'►O♦♦±♦� `•�•�♦9•�'�A��!`•��A -..��•!♦�♦♦♦�♦��♦<><♦s♦��♦♦♦♦♦i,♦♦ye�'>e�♦A�A��♦��*�.y�s iv♦♦♦®♦♦♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦♦O♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦!!♦OeA♦®♦®♦®♦s C�®6:♦•�:�•��•��♦��!►, _..®♦♦A♦.�.?.♦♦i♦♦.♦�' �O°♦♦�:♦♦�►<♦i�♦♦�0♦��♦s��♦ol•®�I��p 1s♦♦e♦O♦♦♦ A♦�A♦♦♦♦♦O♦A♦♦®e♦♦®A♦♦ ♦!♦e♦!♦♦!Oe♦O♦♦♦♦e O♦�♦♦♦�♦♦!�♦♦ems♦♦<'♦♦A�i''►� m0♦�♦�=�♦ �♦�s��<O♦�♦O♦�♦♦♦�♦OAS♦♦er'♦♦b�♦iA`♦♦A'♦eA�♦'�► �e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦s��♦♦♦♦♦♦!A♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦♦ !♦♦A♦♦!♦♦♦♦!♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦ I ��►♦♦�►e♦��♦♦��♦♦�i♦'.+li>O♦i��l'=•i►�♦i►O♦►O♦�♦�♦b®�♦C♦�♦C♦�♦��COOi�♦Oib♦Oi�♦A��♦��♦��♦'�s. �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�e♦♦♦®♦®♦♦♦♦♦♦!♦♦♦♦A♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦!♦♦♦♦♦♦ • ♦!♦seA♦♦i♦♦♦O!♦O♦ ��♦♦!�♦♦1,�♦'!�♦♦b�♦b��iA�♦A•!♦AAO♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O., ♦♦e!♦A♦e♦eAA♦A♦I' ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�O!♦♦!♦A®♦®♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦♦♦�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦® ♦e♦♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A!♦♦♦♦♦� 1►.♦�►®♦<�.♦��.0?,®ii�.��i�►�i�►�i�►�♦�is�►�i��:��:� �.�•��►��0,•��o��0��s `) ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦A♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦ ♦o0A♦®♦•♦0♦6♦®♦o♦A♦®Ao♦o♦A♦ ♦♦♦♦♦o♦seA♦♦♦A♦s♦'►♦A♦A♦A� � �♦♦!♦♦♦!®A♦1�6♦� i� L � O';: �,:� 7� ►� i� i. i�♦a. •-;iT•. �riw•l.i�•A�s ' - �1 Oi♦o%®♦s®♦♦i♦i® ®!♦i!♦♦i®s♦i♦i®s♦i®♦®®♦♦ ♦♦s♦®A ♦♦A♦♦♦♦♦s♦♦♦♦♦♦ �,�@►�l��A�s��ow�►��•��,��•!/0�?i��!�oi!��i�,.si�w♦i�.�!.♦- ♦��i♦♦♦O♦♦♦A♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦!♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦A♦!♦♦♦♦®♦♦♦♦! si♦.♦.AroA.♦.♦.A.A.♦.♦.A.e....®..r..•.♦. A.� es♦♦osA ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ e♦os♦♦♦ S►♦♦f'OA°Di!•_®♦Ao_�oA♦?_♦AO♦A.O�►s♦i!s♦<�_��_��_��♦s,�_��♦��•��A./-�' I • � ♦♦O®�♦�®S♦O♦�♦♦O♦�♦�♦�♦O♦®♦®♦A♦®♦r♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦♦®♦♦�®�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦♦ i� , ��♦O•�a�•�♦i►•AAA•�♦►•�♦A�A�►•��•��•�`�•�♦�•�♦�•�'►i•4•�•�� ®s�♦�®:♦�♦O♦®♦� A♦i♦:OOi♦iA�ls♦der♦�♦A♦♦�®S®®♦�®®♦�♦®♦♦��`•�♦1��- �♦�i,�!♦A♦��A��A�®A♦,►��,►��s��4��♦��♦'��®li�� ' �♦'♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦eA♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦.e�♦�♦�♦�.®o♦:�®®♦�♦ ilia ♦��♦4♦�♦t•♦��►♦Or``►♦9�►♦i�'� -� --- ♦i♦♦♦i♦♦♦i♦♦♦iss�i�a♦A♦i♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦A♦A♦os♦ �� CII �I j s♦se♦i'A♦i♦i�D�s�!s��o�D�r��+�®�ss�s��s♦_ �.�,� �I--- ---- o � ♦s oA♦♦ aa<�`♦�►i< N'i�s♦♦♦ '- `fit ♦ o Z — Z — �--- �- , ooA ♦♦♦ ♦ = .s. ♦♦ a' 1�<►`e�s♦♦� ♦`.'�. ♦b'♦®i•�i♦�iC!` I Oo®i♦i O®A®♦ sA♦si♦si♦�i♦4♦♦si �►!♦ss♦�♦�♦ ♦♦�i♦<,#♦�♦" ♦♦b♦♦ ♦♦♦s♦♦♦®o®♦A♦♦o♦♦♦os�i•0o♦A®!�c♦r��i�'sA♦$??s�e � s♦♦o®o♦s®♦♦s .y i s♦�'eps Apes • ♦p®s®o♦o♦A♦♦sew ��®Iv�al ,�iAIA,Ii►A s;' �♦®ps®e®ss • ,, � ♦♦e♦s♦s!r ®i♦e♦♦i♦♦s♦♦♦�►s�o♦♦.♦<Aii�i�i�i*�i�e♦s�i��♦ ♦p♦♦♦♦2A♦i�►' ,� E �; _ AAA♦®s♦;3►s<Sys♦®�A�♦`®�A�®�e�04s♦00♦♦a�. ♦�A?�► I�♦1�?�'♦♦sl,,:;s.�l �,•4 A♦♦ASA♦: �,o♦♦o♦o o ,� '�A va.A ♦<r, Ii r��•..o♦ � _ v A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� .,♦♦♦ oAOo♦o �s�<�♦b♦♦�'♦�i� � .%s�is�< ♦<s♦oi♦♦♦ ►'.®��.`� � 4 '\ I �- � � sieisi®A®�:�i♦i♦ e•:�i♦op®sus♦i♦0�p♦Oi♦ s��TAsi!►♦sss♦<�.�►��i♦♦♦s♦ ��s�;►�♦ o �T r�♦es�ii♦ o♦♦♦e♦♦s Os ♦ ♦♦o♦♦A�:.♦.�oo ♦ � ��s♦♦oss�A♦A♦A♦s ♦A♦e ♦i♦ia4 .'fasi♦♦♦ioe.•�s�►`♦•s♦ ♦ � � ,► o♦ooi♦i♦AsooA Os e®is •♦s _♦s►♦ �♦ e�'I�♦®�i -`� � Cil Cil � � � w®��.♦s♦♦A ♦ ♦A �As♦sosei Ae ►�A'♦isi♦i♦i♦s♦so i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦® ♦♦�is�is♦ IIIII I e �sOeDOesi♦i%i%♦♦♦♦ s♦?i♦!°-�i�i�♦O o® ♦♦ ♦ ♦ I'' II I j♦�sj0�'►1,h�♦�s�®®,�s♦® � ��♦��♦�� ♦ ♦®i��i•♦1►♦♦A •A IIII', � I i� � � t ♦ _♦ ♦ip ♦♦p♦i ®♦i♦ ♦ OA�o�♦i ►o.►•♦.►®.►�Oo♦i0 � �-JIIIII � N s S � t_�♦�♦�� _ � • , o ♦, " t ♦�♦� ��♦s��♦��A♦<?' � r �_- �r IIIII ♦ �` • 1 r ♦ o ♦ e ♦ ►iiiDii�,��♦e �_� Z . - —s Z � - �L-._ - . a ♦ ♦♦e♦ ♦ o ♦ ♦ A ♦A�As�-♦e♦��si-ss" T � �� - - - � ♦♦e♦ i♦ ♦ Ab♦♦ib♦♦♦A♦A�OA �' • ♦♦♦ - v vAv♦i♦ - � � ♦♦♦o ��i,�_♦o ♦A HO♦�♦A♦♦AAA -, - °A'♦A♦♦♦A�♦♦It♦♦AI �♦7♦a► 'r� f�Y �� --._�� r �' T: _� � ,- - JI'� �-1��--. �� .— � rl �i� hii}i �i'�i � • i � ` ♦ ; '�,�...�►pip.®�i�.�.♦ �� ---f� - - . . • II „t!, ,,, „As,. , ♦♦A�♦AAA♦♦e''♦said♦♦♦� iiiil'iiiii'i'ii'i'i'i'i'i'i' = _ � � � ,ilily ♦o si ♦�♦o♦b♦.. � �♦♦♦♦ss s ♦i ♦� � ® -- - s•♦w ♦♦♦bi♦♦♦i��♦i��,••e♦!•G_♦AA�_�1 _s♦♦_Obi♦♦A�♦®•sA®•�►®•A♦i♦®♦<•;isi, ��1'��Ai" - A < �1�.<♦��l�i:♦'w-,"�w_♦=w_♦/S'.�w5►.♦%►-=ae�li_b�DOWN ARMS ��w_��i.e►�i_��i►♦j♦ � ` ► �__ . - J'— i'd:♦�i:♦��=<%>I'♦� ♦ ♦♦ _♦�► ��Z�eZ�G� - 1`��♦�1��Y.1i:♦�►•♦+�►ie+`�•1°��.�Z��►ZAf:�;••�:♦�iP♦p • IL. J�'', ,��O�O,'�O�t'�♦�A� � ♦ o♦ g♦♦��♦♦/►♦♦♦/1 � n. ��►',� ► P�� aA4F?�a+�A�►•►�a.�Goo6�.•� o<� ��V�bb�o♦s♦e 1 1�♦�♦O!�♦�♦®♦01��`�1�♦♦b�♦♦A Ar♦ �� ♦♦®♦� _ �;Y,� G♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦' Ir O♦♦♦♦s♦♦♦e♦!♦♦♦♦♦i♦o♦�C♦OC♦.♦®♦ ♦�♦A/ ►oOt�♦O��sl�♦♦!G? �Ili�.�� 'r ►♦♦ ♦�♦♦♦G♦4� �♦ �► l�♦♦♦♦e♦ ♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦AA®♦♦♦®♦A♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ �♦� � � ►.♦��♦ei�♦��♦♦ � ►��♦,gip♦��AA/I� � /► ��!♦♦I►♦ ♦e♦♦♦ ♦♦A♦♦♦!♦♦® ■ 1►o4!��l►s♦��:♦,I '°rep?�♦��►.e?I♦l'� � ►� / _cgs®♦� �♦e®®®t♦�♦�♦♦4101111-4 ON;, MINI • . . 9.1 ,•.i ♦ ,� •.. L.A.► _r- NORTH INHUH 0 4 10 20 30 40 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=40' STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES — PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES — — — CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES ------------- — RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES — EXISTING RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES — — CENTER LINES — EXISTING CENTER LINES — LOT LINES, INTERNAL — LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — — PROPOSED EASEMENT LINES ----------------- — EXISTING EASEMENT LINES — BENCHMARK (R) — RECORDED DIMENSIONS 22-1 — CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER —EXIST— —PROP— — POWER POLE — POWER POLE W/DROP — POWER POLE W/TRANS — POWER POLE W/LIGHT $ $ — GUY POLE x — LIGHT POLE OO ® — SANITARY MANHOLE Y — FIRE HYDRANT e — WATER VALVE OO ® — DRAINAGE MANHOLE wi ❑ — CURB INLET X X — FENCE LINE — EXISTING SANITARY SEWER (( — PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER ' — EXISTING STORM SEWER �< — PROPOSED STORM SEWER (W) — EXISTING WATER LINES W — PROPOSED WATER LINES E — ELECTRICAL LINES T — TELEPHONE LINES G — GAS LINES - — — — — — — — — — — — - — CONTOUR LINES (1' INTERVAL) — PROPOSED GROUND — EXISTING TREE LINE — EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE & SHRUB — EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES & SHRUBS THE ACTUAL SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT. SENSITIVE AREAS LEGEND — STEEP SLOPES (18%-25%) (32,692 SF) 17,444 SF IMPACTED (53.4%) — CRITICAL SLOPES (25%-40%) (94,971 SF) 15,042 SF IMPACTED (15.8%) — PROTECTED SLOPES (40%+) (3,788 SF) — ALTERED PROTECTED SLOPES (40%+) (15,156 SF) 2,702 SF IMPACTED (17.8%) — PROTECTED SLOPES BUFFER ALTERED (61,198 SF)(100%) IMPACTED (32,946 SF)(53.8%) UNALTERED (20,556 SF)(100%) IMPACTED (0 SF)(0%) LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL — IMPACTED AREAS LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL — LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE IOW UTILITIES A THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY IOWA ONE CALLSIVI ONE CALL AT 811 OR 800/292-8989 NO LESS THAN 48 HRS.IN ADVANCE OF ANY DIGGING OR EXCAVATION. WHERE PUBLIC UTILITY FIXTURES ARE SHOWN AS EXISTING ON THE PLANS OR ENCOUNTERED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA, IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE OWNERS OF THOSE UTILITIES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AFFORD ACCESS TO THESE FACILITIES FOR NECESSARY MODIFICATION OF SERVICES. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES, STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND RECORDS, AND THEREFORE THEIR LOCATIONS MUST BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY. IT IS POSSIBLE THERE MAY BE OTHERS, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN OR SHOWN. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THEIR EXISTENCE AND EXACT LOCATION AND TO AVOID DAMAGE THERETO. NO CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ANY INTERFERENCE OR DELAY CAUSED BY SUCH WORK. 8.95 AC RA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www. mmsconsultants. net Date I Revision 08/18/2025 PER CITY COMMENTS SENSITIVE AREAS: SLOPES ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY I OWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 06/26/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: CAT Drawn by Scale: HEH 1 "=40' Checked by Sheet No: CAT Project No: 3 11603-001 of: 6 PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OPD ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY, IOWA PREPARED BY: APPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. TWG DEVELOPMENT 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100 L07 13 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46202 / I v v UI i" — /— — ////—///./f �— . "///�/ /—/ /—// J////__— ///\/-6// — �/ ///Lv//�// /, 1fi/� / /�/ / /// /I1 v//"// —i 1 /-IA_/I —/ I /�/ I I 'A/�/ � --I— ' IA Iq/ ,I/I II _ \ I_1I\II ✓_1l I— / /I /i/ _�—�� —/`/��l O//�//i/ / \//- v- / C \ VA AA A/ — Av\ \ AA\IZ Q � bo ,\` WETL /�\\✓.vV � W�v Q V ' Y/(' Vv �/ � O� v F F S v l \_ \ A --/ 1—f AR E I1 iI A o ILIWTS O -DISTU— I_ _i R BANCE. SEE NOTE.IN-L€ // + LLJ +1 1 + + + + Lu CZ 1 1 + + ICI + NI+ + 735 i , ++ < 17 CA ++ f ++0 / ++ 40 AM M M + / + + 110, + / A W 11/ I1 q I + rmEA 4"7// P)l ) I // 750 - � 1 P + V U) 4 / Q OL 15b n/ v 71 IF I1 o III — — _ -- -- -- -- —'� / / h/ //-- _ —//// // 11 / //`/// //////r Yu — — — — — — — — — — — — — — /� /T/ — — —I — — — — — T — — — — — —lI _ / / / / /I �QJ � � - - - "--- _ DOG PARK v cs `vv _ _� �_ , // / Nun v / / )/ I I I 1 / / �� I CN CN CN C CN CN CN N CN CN CN CTy CN CNCN�- N CN�JCN ¢N CN�CiV ! CNTV CN G " CN CN / �N��CN I C «Vil \ \ l I / // / \ \ \ - / / / " " - / / / / IZ - 4 .I.. 1 .. �./... .l. �- - /.../...i.....✓ .......... � -- - -. -- .-...I.. /..... 1-..... 1 c� / ............................. ........ ffff .. .............................................�................... / /.. _ .�. l...`....\.\............ - v v ��Gj. �.... �. .� � �i� � QOzh� j 1� 74 ->6`'0 v / \V "CS - —= - -- _------- - ---- =—�� - �c— / T --�- _ ---7-- oHE aHFai erE�T--nc- - — V / Fp p I—c cc c c c c c I Tip ��p --� / A v I 1 1 1 CN CN CN CN CN CNy N / CN / RCN ,CNDC��C/N / C�N FO F%� f0 �FO�- p �/ / FO FO /FOFO FO FO / F0�7F0 v -LJ6, _ v O O CPS O CP CSC ��—)�) ) �)� �� ) —WE xE wE WE WE xE_ WE WE WE WE WE xE, � ��wE wE�xE xE�wE—/ WE E xE wE�wE-txE�` xE � t wE wE�WE��xE� v A v A A ID " - - OHE �\ OHE '0HE/ OHE OHE - -OHS - _ 0 LE _0RE _ OHE _OHE_ _ HE- GHE HE /�0 F, / - -' © \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ 4 \ \ \ 1 --------�_�---� '-- +--� �I----------I--r -—�,�---/�--/�-fly-- Il---i---I---�--� „I " 1 I v_ram � �---�---- /_ NORTH 0 4 10 20 30 40 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=40' STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES ------------- - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES CENTER LINES EXISTING CENTER LINES LOT LINES, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — - PROPOSED EASEMENT LINES EXISTING EASEMENT LINES BENCHMARK (R) - RECORDED DIMENSIONS 22-1 - CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER -EXIST- -PROP- - POWER POLE - POWER POLE W/DROP - POWER POLE W/TRANS - POWER POLE W/LIGHT $ $ - GUY POLE �x - LIGHT POLE O ® - SANITARY MANHOLE Y - FIRE HYDRANT e - WATER VALVE OO ® - DRAINAGE MANHOLE Wi ❑ - CURB INLET X X - FENCE LINE (( - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER - PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER - EXISTING STORM SEWER << - PROPOSED STORM SEWER (W) - EXISTING WATER LINES W - PROPOSED WATER LINES E - ELECTRICAL LINES T - TELEPHONE LINES G - GAS LINES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CONTOUR LINES (1' INTERVAL) PROPOSED GROUND EXISTING TREE LINE =EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE & SHRUB EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES & SHRUBS THE ACTUAL SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT. SENSITIVE AREAS LEGEND + + + + -WETLAND AREA + + + + (152,769 SF) + + + + 18,151 SF IMPACTED (11.9%) - 50WETLAND BUFFER (VIA BUFFER REDUCTION) (81,734 SF) 3,023 Sr IMPACTED (2.0%) NOTE: THE IMPACTED BUFFER AREA DEPICTED IN PLAN VIEW IS ALREADY IN NONCONFORMANCE WITH THE CODE DUE TO THE EXISTING DRIVE LOCATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PREVIOUS ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY. THE EXISTING DRIVE WILL BE RECONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO CONFORM WITH CURRENT CITY OF IOWA CITY STANDARDS. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE WETLAND BUFFER REDUCTION: THE 100' WETLAND BUFFER HAS BEEN REDUCED TO 50'IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS PER SECTION 14-51-6.3.a: 1. THE WETLAND IS LESS THAN 5 ACRES IN AREA. 2. SPECIES LISTED BY THE FEDERAL OR STATE GOVERNMENT AS ENDANGERED OR THREATENED, OR CRITICAL OR OUTSTANDING NATURAL HABITAT FOR THOSE SPECIES, WERE NOT IDENTIFIED. 3. DOES NOT CONTAIN DIVERSE PLANT ASSOCIATIONS OF INFREQUENT OCCURRENCE OR OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE. 4. IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN A REGULATED STREAM CORRIDOR. IOW UTILITIES A THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY IOWA ONE CALLSM ONE CALL AT 811 OR 800/292-8989 NO LESS THAN 48 HRS.IN ADVANCE OF ANY DIGGING OR EXCAVATION. WHERE PUBLIC UTILITY FIXTURES ARE SHOWN AS EXISTING ON THE PLANS OR ENCOUNTERED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA, IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE OWNERS OF THOSE UTILITIES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AFFORD ACCESS TO THESE FACILITIES FOR NECESSARY MODIFICATION OF SERVICES. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES, STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND RECORDS, AND THEREFORE THEIR LOCATIONS MUST BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY. IT IS POSSIBLE THERE MAY BE OTHERS, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN OR SHOWN. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THEIR EXISTENCE AND EXACT LOCATION AND TO AVOID DAMAGE THERETO. NO CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ANY INTERFERENCE OR DELAY CAUSED BY SUCH WORK. 8.95 AC RA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www. mmsconsultants. net Date I Revision 08/18/2025 PER CITY COMMENTS SENSITIVE AREAS: WETLAND ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 06/26/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: CAT Drawn by Scale: HEH 1 "=40' Checked by Sheet No: CAT Project No: 11603-001 of: 6 n N 0 N 0 0 0 a E - O 0 PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OPD '� � ) - � , �� I i I /v J � \ \ - � 1 I- \1 \ \ \� \ \` - \ \ / \ \ - � \ ' / - V O� \ I� - �v v 1 i:� / A V A /I ` v v -- -_ I \ \ / I_ �� I - v- x I �k�:L s _ _ * - p5 - - ®" I o - " LLJ Z Z Z ��-� fix, r - - - -I -- -tom C\ C -� Lu x x : I - - I �70 � �� --- z > X . j - - - - w "'-I m �- - t l �° -� � w : .I — f— -- �� r — / - / / � sy li \ :; y; t ;;/::✓:/:: 7:JIV .::::: _:',:::__ ,, .. - - ":- --� - �:' `: �x\:: u :::•___•:::?:/: g s x,:= �i- ,cam /i y c r ./. J� , I � '/ / I x ,_ ;�' :rr r...r.,� .i .? .> yy. !✓:...:/:.. !:? r �.T. - - - - - x X_._ -:� ::� \a. :.:...... r•b"i��i��•b^ /• / v �-'Q Q i \ \ � "� � / / % .. :% ? ? ' : ' . :.........: ''I' .. =3 -x . -ox i" k L O \ / /' r / /� �f� y•/. !: j r y . ,�...... y../.:. r. ..,..' _ - - . - r.- - �: : :\:\:1 \: I.:\..\. as ova. r j �� i �i a /I - _ , v p I, (/t / \ / / /i '/.j .i. ,: (✓. ,: �. .? .: 7. .s. �... :...�.xf.: r./. ✓. �.. .. 1I -: - .--_.\ti`. .s a�..\., .\. >Tb �)aa.r ... Q' '�Y',y� _� IIF�II O /i \ i -/ / / / �/ , f �. i y . ,� y. ,.. . �: �: " .. y . . x . :; :� ::' - �, , i (6�. :. . : i .� �y :�} SJ..�i} '' O) \, I// i •i•i;•sh=�y= y'e= =,�=,r=l=.�: ./. ==t"k=�=y'r=='�"'__ =j'=J=^�=s' y•- \_ �•�_=4�==:'1'\=,I =_`�_ _/__ "•I�•'�•• k.>(�,•�>v>p,( I 1 II f� �/ \ % / / / I I,i/ \ n�. .i rt y %. r./.? :.l., . i ?/ v/? r :p .. ? .. ? ✓ . l ✓/. — — _ � k \ \: \ 1 1 ' 1 1. � . �.:.. �i,_a yvr � — — 1\\ 11 / /ia/ / I '.� fs.G! ./ X/x. ...%�%,rr/„ .,.:% ... .../. ,J© 9• .� :y'•!_✓:y. -. "\. :\. d I.?» :?. \'Q v./.6 v �-L 1 ) \I \ i / , / :/s?' ix=: : fy✓j=ip 9 j'•=y'! =j:::_��o� (ft s�4 �m-0'jIl, ''_/ x - y\" \=ItJ.I=I 1 \ r �i / /_ I( 1 �' i / / / , " r ✓{j �. i .. !.. ✓. /. y . n'j . �' ,'.. '/' : " "f • ..:.... i.. . ..-.,..�.y : . s .- : ' : •/• .:...' _ x .... a.. a '\.\. ' ` . ! ] i I..I .I .I ] . � . �• x .. r.: ' • �`�� h0 • ' - _ �_ � \ `� \ \ : \ \ I I I (1 1( - //< / / ` / ( l {ter/•%%��•� r� ryE.�.�,�./.f./�.� ..G. y......z�•� •''•_ �_ _�_��Pl`�'l�Lf,d�li /:,." � ✓..y. }].I.Id]1{�I.I.I;1�1.4 � ... ':/'�y'�� 9''p� /ir- � - I \ \ \ 1 I,I (\ \( // / 1 ( E) ✓•4'i/='�'�f• h 't.t.,' _' '"__ '___'�_�'=�'j=� = T'y:_','_ -a- _' =y= �_' _�_' '\'= i"1== _ (J�'=y='I" "F� "f==/ id/•: ��}/X/."/ _ �'� - \� \0 //) I . �i. %".f r:.: •%":. ... ; -:. '� z 0 O'a•0"a' " ]: iL4 T. . 'A�" � X'4>, O fxX I/ v v . v / //�, /� r�. y. .,� ./y.,. ./',.�.! y. "" ',.s. y.. sy.f .:�r. /:/.. ",N�Q� Q" Q O"�I �11 "�%•%v!/.s % - �� V A \: A A / ". rYri�I� =.'rar'.j. Epp"y ✓.t '_ _••___•: ,.!. O _ J �? ,N =�?I P•�== O ;� _ / / �/// � / ✓'.: i = =3 'xy=�l !_'/`��e-='''i' /__'=T "___"v, i=i=7'�[ aa, '= x �6% �Y6 b=�i `e b=III �_ `� i �l '�i "'> l / - i� 1 V A \ \\ \ \ \ /�,, /// r.- t j'.:y:'.:/�.y. ? ✓./. . .r....... .O'xa�-a'O .�. _ yv O a U• Q• 'a �iyf - I ` [ r v v v v i/�i `/ °�s �s i' x'r': :i.: __=x=l=_::::'" : ::`''''": '%: y :Os��yT '� y -- \4 xI x19 i��?v -x5;> p>0 �O k} - - f \\ \ \ " / i ; / ' 735 /, , :: , . : s : ✓. � �_ = s :..... '. &� b b✓ ? � x '0 \ �k. O �bF (� b <� Z y _ / - I ; I / / ,/ /�/ a�/ . ✓. .�.>./.. J.i !. .:r /'�i.: :,c :.�........'(" ..":,: �, Y'� /"' y si--�eJ• - - - 3 \!-Y,�"•//f'•�•b\ T ( \' \\ \ \ \ r ,, ? y, " '•- } of a .Q a Q a a '©� o a b a. o. •� �. •�, �, .Q \ r �\ //// / , // /" _. .}_.y. _% .1. y. .0 ... O. ./. .. .=f C's"-Q"�.Q.'',q.v•5> ".v - ,. \Q \" Y\ �\ Q' C / 5 l Q _ \ \ / / / / = x\ �' : N 'l " /_ ! _ ^1 ' ' = x 3 Cy3 Z O O 0 O (\ Csj� J .C�3 r \ \ \ . \ \ I / /, 1 / / , //. :C�" -ram•/y•--r.:' y=ter. -� .x: .� ..i ".,. y. !. %t t ... '.1G v. y. %: :i N.j •gel• v •gel• v •�l �v� i• v •�• /•�"''Y - - - - - \ - .�i •bti %• •\ 1 Y(•- _ �G \ \ h \ \ \ \ \\ _ \ \ \ / y �- ._!. �. �•; _....... .r .� 5:,. y.• o� �1�✓ova �' o a'� a a �` a"� -a v / // / A / ✓7/•� ly l'_:'�:' •� �""'_'.'...r....=_ :::: 'r'yI�� y•�:: "9•N�/- ,f �i •" � - -- -A . 'VA�1Y '�>•nyr 4 _\� v� \\ V A A/ / I l Ot / y �q�•/X : f :l.x x /:: / .x . 4 ✓. ✓.: _ . 1. . x . ' r..c ,-.�.. 0 V 0/ 0, S,Ux � �i :�/ _ � � �� _ � �,�2`=�� - . L - iv _ � A V/''� \ /// ///i / / �� / :,,,""„,.,.:X/: y:r.,.r=�.;./_:::,:�:/x.,�.::::: :: ':.{:.""'}: :�. 1`i t�G F��j©� `_ `9'�� O }: _\ I �\ \ \\ _ / v _ / / / / ? �. ./ ✓ � . ? r : :/i /. Ik .,.. ::: G . /. . ? ....... �: : i .: ? 'x.'r. r, . rr .. y 125 J: �0 Q u <} �i �- - ( a �� •x L x d - - - v C v v v v v v / v / / / o�"E S ., �;r/. yy.././../y../.y.G'/. .�. ../. y. ./. ./. ............ �/ x�.-:-' �;/.' .1.:✓., ./.:" �0_ Iv-'� �v-•�� v ..c �� :..�. ... \. 1 ;A A \ x x \-,\ 'q .1 - :� ::1:"`:?�.�;:?%:� ::: �/:/: /r=1. ..:zrr:-'�':", /::�:: -" "__ ��ay"%: :__SFr'oxil�� ,��o�Q a I . �; - - - v- - I LX��;LxLL,LL'�L:h v ` vvvv vvvvI v v v v x�x x�x �' x j I �:': xfx x x XV& - __ � - XX 0, :0 \ \ / � - I I, ::l iy. ] • /: } •I :1.1" '� : I. a ./ : I l '1 1 ] • : r :J :: • (• ::::- x .. ' t r./.:. 1. _:_j : �" x .c, ✓- 6. %k. ;.C5 "-<' li • bx 0 rb• % t / / -- - ', '__L_� \\-XLX - x ,4 _/--Jl/ j __j \� � \ I I\ i - I I \ \ � \ \ \ \ � \ \ � \ \ \\\ \\ / \ ?y/•L : x �: :I �'� =1'p '\=L:/,t /.I']� J' =x=(==" 3F"'=l'.,c:�ly:Xyf•�j-i• /_=J�}'=� +,��^j Q=�^j / - \ L• / - - - - I \ \ \\: \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ .\. w.� .\:\" . k ?.: Y :\. 3 t :\:\: ". ] ;4 .I= ©� :. : �:.::/. ./. ✓.. 3 i? T Oi 3.0:' 3 C�J O 'I _ TREE_ \ \ ;\ \ \ O \ v ,vvvv vv v / -.i . i l : ��:v:? :v.� .v.V.v.. C a aG . :�� r �/• V z•� �� zi/-�• -ot 0 -b. i ' / / I v v �� - ( v E I IV ACTED �R�Q v v v v v v v v •I • r(• 1" © /• / I V • \ V v XIX v II � - a / .v_ :v' :v 'I' p ] 'I =I '(: :/:: �� :. Y x =t y� �✓� }i' yet - E LEGEND � -',v I t v v v v v v v v v v �� / y �� :v. .v:.a . r S S a .I :17 ] . l:I:/:/: ... Gi'✓' r. r . r. / 3� } �? 0- / / 4 ® ® � �� ® I : v v v vv v.yx v vv / v a 1. . ..... � r 1) / ,1==�':I]:I �'I�?r�:s]/''�I:/:/� :::::, ✓% {��'aQ�a�a45_ - w, n n �� vSv vv 1 I I I / ... = 7 = =l. _ = I. � '1 = :I. . ? /= P = I = _ '{ _ .....: ? _ :: a � = V i` 9 ' �i�'vx__v_ ' /�' � m v 'I v v � v M \ v A A A V A v v A I) �.i..l"J.l./. ! ��y./�rl.J ]!.G1.L..... :✓. ..;"�<} 3�y0 3� O fl O I _ v / vv v v ( / l / / 1 NI hi 7 e*`" _ .: x: -t J " � ' f " :/: /. "/'/'/'l'/' t f � ' .({ ✓ y y y .. '�". : " = a !. y. y. ✓.. �� . i , fie%• �v -�b� xi C / - / - - - - - _ v v � v A I I A : A V A A v v l X/1' '/ ' :... ::� i./.? ::Erg?/.� l/:/:/:/:/.:....... s ?: , /:/ r r (j O E}, O - \ \ I / I I ti \ \ ` - \ l l / l,�1.. a,. X •' ..r..i y., y ✓� /.. P { .......:� !• .,: j •/1 • �!'�" �'' � / - � v v v p : !:. . 7 . / j Z 2 ] t . i ✓.. .. <.. i �J •O C> 13 �} 3� / v - v v v v �I v 1O v v v v I/ /I//-.?r: �.c= .i✓! ry%./r r ./.,. ..........>.,...y. .i, 4 bZ4/ b"�•� , v v V A / A ` ` v v ` -, :, ; _ J I // ll/ : �� :� :� :t r./�9 /!r. ::. r < may. r �i x� a � / - v vv v vI v v- v v I �I Q v v v v �l l/ ../;9 -- '? /fir?`%:'.:" ::::. :/:�:: .. '/' >' /w11 V�' / -- ---- ------ v_ A v v _ �_ _ �,v / �/ :; r,.� . y .: :.-..:. %:/:/:, "/:/j r� , V:/:? ... .:/.. x ./ : ' /. ' y:/• P V, /Y V, .,/ � - I - _ _ - - v O, d....I I v v - ` - i 11 GI / /� \ '//�l'✓','' _ _ . ..k r /9 _ :/_ _ _ �_ _ ' _ _ _/• y=/` ; :� :/: X b!. hb• %/ I - - - - A \ I V A A _ �� / t-_ r• r / l l I l l / ,� l '/ / �" • r- "' - s •� "% • ' ? / 7Q " •<y - - - - � _ _ - - �. I, \ \ CSC / f / •/ ✓.s ./. , r.. yam. y. ✓.. �(. /./. ..... ✓. r.,:. . !. x. !. .� i ..� G <7` '" ��_- - - - \ _ r �I rfry'=.f='. .:.x r 1==ter: _ .=:.i�.h: / - _ - _ `\ \\\ \ \ \ \ / l l l l 1, - - -* - /. _ /. �'-� . �: " ::...: • :I:, .,/ ✓- //: •.X©,r�.,�.�i' ... �1�1. . / r. ' / I ` - - vv v V � I I / / )ll'l // / 1 /llJ// �Y.✓'..i..:/•�.f /. G.yr.y."1":::1:/:'/.�.a:,.:'��1:/' "• �j�•'�J � � - - Av r v vv \ \ I\I vI 1 1 ///////v V ///// I=I={'.9==/x•t '(':_/_�',_{'_/==/x'r==/.x�z :- :_:':/.'.,'�,:� �O/, / y v v v Ar I I I / I I �• &i b• a b• b• ] r. ,-/;✓: y r� O a O �� i v v v v -- I I I I /�/l/ll v -� ) III //11..1:..{::I" :].L:::h:�: :::p:.. !::':•�i.is �.,.�. 4 / / / VA V v 1 °/ r /l : ] . .r.. I... ? r :? . ✓.:. r. '. �" C">f �i Ci Q �/ v' : ' I \\ - \ \ I I I �IIIiIi==]:•I'.I �' _ l =/'a=y'a:'':/__>.'_�=ry X((�,:::G• �i, C3 �} i=O �1u11 v `vim - ` I I v I //IIp \ I II I/1/II1.={:.\. .(../. /.�./�.��/.�L.�.../. �Cll•� l' i00'b:�}�.-i'x _ -�' V / Ipll1� i �v v v � �I: I \ / / 41 1 \ 1 •1 • i t" ' • '.fin . . ��. . .." - VI ///' ill/IIIx,:1 /3�/'/'�_�'� /= o _ I I -Iv I I: I I I `v�v / vvvv vv I']]"f��x:� Wxx'xxxx720::<,. , &-:O- _v - o (// I' I/ r ) - `/ va/// IIII �I= /Ir •rx?==..:.' :✓:4 's / _ -v v I1,1/Iv 1 ( I '�:�;)k�� :I:dd./.s:,•,: :::<:'/ 1 � " - vs _ ---- - v - I 1 I I : II I -_� �) v / v750 - _ -vv 11 v ` ivy 1 I Z ., :I./.�:...�:::�Z�:" :�j �:©:®��"O•�y� -- ' � �" ,--- -/ - ---_ �� II III I v Q- I/I //// =(=I: is .�� ; �• %?', - %. � ' _ - - - -- -I / v / I I/I Ir I I I(IIII// l/ / r ?::::: :.;:�rybsJ � JJ x -0.0 -' - --- -` / I / � Q w / / /// / / I I\x''\= x z ="" , �' "�y". - �'•'�' _ r',r• ( I \ I / \ I / . Ci` ) ��yy I \ \ / I I \ I / l I l l lu 1 // / V /// / A.,-x ,a� a C7ia �.LS��.a. } ) v�� Q /// �I Y ry"k=. I I 0�( / ✓ x x !_ ' V I 11 I -1 / / / // l i,l /C' .C>v, . / _ I - I p / ��/ // / // /v `.", blob k>:b• �' f /.� -_ - II / I� �/ /I/ / / O✓�.Or i : ✓ . J v III o I I v / // (l) / )//I/// v v n.0 ' I / / / / 1 1 r v v I b��r � ,1"�s� rfi� �.x x / . " L0 I I I / �' � /N _u k' / ) / �/ r / � E) �� / a �"� > �5 - q / � / I i i i - / / I -� /I� I / v / // I / / ®i I � 4/' "J � 11r"V_ � x .. / 5 I I / / / I / / f v -x � /}� .}V-/% : . - / I (I II II I I I I /p �/ v _ �x-2 x9�'��v'� ' /:/ / / I vI I I / / / / / I / /) � � / ' Z //// // I I - �� /• s / I q o - - I I v 1 I / / / / / I' , - / I I' "' 1 I 1 1/ ( m , /_w✓'V/_�' : I I I I I / / 0 11 rr v� - / / r� : v v I I I / I / , - 1 /I//I(II( I I - -_�_- / I �>' xV /•'� ,( ' V I IIII 1 / / / I r I I I I I / / / / / / -I /' - �- - II�I ' v -- - - _ b. � 5,jX,- . i r. / v I / v / I / / / / / I / / / , - I / �� - _ '' 'O^` �.1 x x I / 1 I I I I / r / / / / / / / / ' I O I - / _ - f III I �/./ / -- �' }< X .I.:':/.I:•!•' / / A I / II A ` v / / I I I I I I / // // // - / / - - - - - - - - -- 1. /, / �� . / /- ) - ` N I I cfI I l / I : ' / r '/ v- I 2 _ - ( \-- //Q----/"/ >x :�-:" Ixx �<0 / / \\ ASS I III/`� v 1 I II II II'In�/'I 'vjam/ //I '. /' I// ��`' ----- \ \- - _ :::. '1 i1/) - 0 �, / // I i l 11j1 v - — — I / I I l I I I I �i/- / / _j / , / / /'/ - _ / / / I / ! / / / . / / aCi/� --� - Q - � - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --� r� /�, // _ -- - - � L: / - / - / / //// // // ' / / / / / /' ///i/1 / / , / / / I ill '(11 - I - - / A ^ \ _ = - - _ - � \ \\ I i DOG PARK I - _- I ROOSEVELT RIDGE 11 /'I � / / IOWA CITY IOWA"'/`�"-/ 1//� '/ PREPARED BY: APPLICANT: MMS CONSULTANTS INC. <11 & �� TWG DEVELOPMENT 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100 L07 13 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46202 'r 0_ '\ - ' - / ' I 1j I-///,/- � \ � //\� v\A\ I' V / // ` / /' v J �v \ n(�� V( /ti //////a// v� / ` CS / / / / - /' / v 11 /11 /11� ' / v / \ � _/ / - I_v ( �// v I 1 �, .11 \ \ V� O \`\ / / \\ i / j / ' \ //' C( \ Vv /'/// ��1,� - I' / v / 1 ,� / / `� -\ I V_ - - d V A ( � /, I' "�� - / s v-�� , / / / v ,vv v ' / v ��, / I . I y�f y / " v - - \ ,�� / / / / sd�� '/: .:: r =� :i bey v v x I 1,jjjj 1 1 / \ / / / \ I r /" . 1. y 1 r / /: r . �. j ! .t � I, q> v / �3':' i / err /: 3�Dp V' <' / Z s�\ \ \ / i ,\. ' I - X �. y:''':'r� %;. C: % Co-' '\ <b / /yam - :' _..." .;:/' ay..., 4y. �y�� ' / / / I v N / "1 " . .� . s r..� ✓. �, I._ " ...�. � .,�..;:. ,�::: . a / �:.. ? . ? :'. � . D iv`• :i b• N / z��xx�./xx/'.':: - ) j .�Ox L07 10 11 '1�' - _ - 3� l z \\ / ' / t / �.-�. •s r: z r: ..x ✓_ .f ... x :. r ;"y.,...../. .� .. .. .(..� x ' r ib' �I . r: _ _ �: — x: r: _ s . - .- _ .:-�� . �.., : : �.. : r ::::: ado a a x x x . . X(x x ,�' s/O r - - _�: , '.' :- - - - .-' .. - - .-X /_-= y : `/:::.....:\: O4 6- - xx\ II .,Il- x-x X. x X_ -x - - �xx/..xxx.xx_xxx. X<�>x __ - �O�.0- ,I.,x_x �'. �x ... 1_x.xx�_.'xx_/x/:' \\\\ 11 I 9 . I\, "I"_� (/ / l �'• �• -"y= _"z '" z-rz xxzzz� � /z :l x =' z='=z '' " z='• ' j="==='___" ' / \ , \ , = J' ��% /= r"'= _ '��' ma's' - �, ,r. _ : �: .' . _ ... % -<::� _:.. r .............:� . •�a� :a :: <�>. 0 X�.. x x X. � x x x.:'.ex.:::�:::':/'x' x — x x X. x x x � XIA�.;i� x6A � � ' C\V ' ; �: ;_�� x �:'� � l � I' I I-r, -:' /4-: z:::::::: x x x �' - 0 �>x 0 x x x ��X'/X'�X::::: ::::::::I:::::::::::::::: x x x x X,;> ' � , � � \ \ , , � >__�' x I x — _��x �/_.. ::::Xxx.xxx. x 4 I I\Z'��' {r _- x x x x 0 _u '<?U:: y• r / 1 } //� ) / ✓=�= =3,=,k� _, �=r===,f,`=/=.. d== t==ry..===.;!==.= i=.. ==_ :•==J.== 4..===_____________________ "� a✓`i'<:" ✓k� \ / \ / t l \Vl/ / y. !✓ ..ice xy. f y.n ..r . .�r�ir t•`: f.:..:..... �...... ....... .,� ../.s........ ................. v_/V/ �_ �/ �i' XI: V 1 / / 1 �� \ / , � i :_ / f �yX.Z, � ::�: r. r....�' ::.. ..:1. ...:I:..-............ :i• :: I• " ......� .- .... :. • •-�/v�i b. \ I I\ \ I / \ / / :� 1 i• L!✓y. ./. . : L • . • y '/: :! : ..�' : : "' •� ": r:_3 "-' . 1 . . . .. . . . . - - •_•:_. �. . _ �. .`:\: . . : : : : : : : :: : :-x . : . j .i. :i}- ft:�} , ,�/ ( / 6 .'. .. �. ,r y . /. •' r ' " y - I' . j - �. . . .\. y . . �. . �. ,> 'j • b" 3u !fie% / V A i y :_/•/ =�r> �.::/=> =/::l`: 1 kr•�=s> ----- -- ->_ ' ' '> ==='t• xa;i lO=a=xiia=-0__0- \ i G ------ - - - 0II \I I III I v - _--- - - / / / / // / /./cry /// _ , v - I, (J1, / / I / / l / (/ Il r - \ \ - - / - ' - - - _ - - '- / i // /' / / l / / I / / . I / l ' ' � / /i - - - ---- - v A / / / / 1/ 11l/l A I / /- -'- /-- - - ---'- / / / / I I / I l I 1 / 0\� /�/ //, --- `-- ,__ - E I TI G TR \ I I / - \ I I N r /� l� / / / / - j - \ - , CN CN CN -' CN CN N CN CN CN C CN CN u"N �-CN CN�JCN ¢N CN�&V - CN N CN C - CN CN / �N- I C �1 - C E AREA \ \ IDI. - - - - / Z ILJ v / �i / / / / v V I v I / / / r l r l //ll r/l / l 4� �` V A V A _ _ -� - - - - - - - - _ - - - / i _ - / i / / / l l / / // l / /Q /� v / l / J) A 1 v -v - 11 L— --_ -- ' /IIlI //l // v v - -- - ;--_--- - ;-- _ �/ I w /�' /, /l / - - - , I%r- `, v _�� -�,-- / /I// / I '-/ vvv �_--;---;-"�35;--- - - -- -- --- =_;-. / -- //'/ /, /lv I— - — L " ->6'0 I, I - —= - -- _------- - ---- = - = - ; 1=-�� = = _ == -- I_ - = =- = �� _- �:�25-' =�1 ,�-_: _=_� =Tom==-- = _-= '' _ � / ; -_ - - - I oHE - - - - - _ - - - / � aR Fai - G E' �_ - - - _ _ _ - _ _ -- - / - - - I / I 1 1 / / / ,' / ' / ' ' - V ' F ° I-c c c c c c c c I T�� ° --� / A I I 1 ( 1 CN CN CN CN CN CNy N / CN / )CN ,CND C�� _' / C�N , / / / / FO F%� f0 �FO�- 0 �/ / FO FO /FO FO FO FO / / F0�7F0 / - - ' v A C I I V I I I � V A � A A A V I \ O o , cry \ I O cP cs —)�) �) �)� �� ) I � \ cSl I O t O \ \ \ \ O \ \ -- ) \ - - I- I rt \- - / /- -) (- I l \ / I I I9s�, 1 1 / l / / / / / / \ / �c, I \ I / ) I I 1 / / l l I l ( I ( I l I I ( I / / / l v I l ! WE WE WE WE NE-� ENE WE WE�NE ' WE WE�-NE��-xE�-(wE�wF xE� I �I "E I I- WE WE wE-/ yrE WE E -WE wE�wE� WE-` xE � � wE wE�WE��WE� / ( \ / II - - - - - - - - - -�_- - - - ( - _ - ,_-_\ _� A I V `--Jf��'!��_- _ - - _ - - - - A - - A I � 1 l V \ i \ V I V A \ A \ A V A V A - -_ - _ - /- - - - ORE �/ OHE '0HE' OH OHE - -OHS - _ 01[E ` -ORE _ OHE � _OHE_ _ HE� _ 0HE ` _ HE �/�\///�"/JOH" '- -' �� \ © \ \ \ \ \ ) \ \ \ \ / I \ \ \ \\ ( \ \ \ \ \ \ I VA / / vV - _ - - - - - - - - - - - _ � -- - AAVAI All ll .Ll/�--�'��'-'- a �J _ ) ) ) ) / ) / A , i I I v v v I I v v I / v v II II - - -� -/ _ ` --- -- ' - -- - --- - vv / �- � `v v v f / / / / ' -I 1 ) / f / V J / I I -� / / I -- - -----/_�--- -� '-- ��-v+ 7--_ -I -�-----��--1- 1-F , "- f,- �' '/ //-/-- —,--F- I--,—l---1 V r I I ,/ / r I �- / -- I---I--fi I / / I -- - - - - - -- °-- - - - - -- -I--1--v---�--- - T- / - I I /_ram � �---�---- /_ � / I 1I NORTH 0 4 10 20 30 40 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=40' STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES - CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES ------------- - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES - CENTER LINES EXISTING CENTER LINES - LOT LINES, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — - PROPOSED EASEMENT LINES EXISTING EASEMENT LINES li�,,, -BENCHMARK (R) - RECORDED DIMENSIONS 22-1 - CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER -EXIST- -PROP- � $ - POWER POLE =* =* - POWER POLE W/DROP =1111111I =11111I - POWER POLE W/TRANS - POWER POLE W/LIGHT =9�: =@= - GUY POLE 0 * - LIGHT POLE O ® - SANITARY MANHOLE 114 Y -FIRE HYDRANT * e - WATER VALVE OO ® - DRAINAGE MANHOLE wi ❑ - CURB INLET X X - FENCE LINE (( - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER - EXISTING STORM SEWER << -PROPOSED STORM SEWER (W) - EXISTING WATER LINES W - PROPOSED WATER LINES E - ELECTRICAL LINES T - TELEPHONE LINES G -GAS LINES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CONTOUR LINES (1' INTERVAL) PROPOSED GROUND EXISTING TREE LINE 0 0 - EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE & SHRUB - EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES & SHRUBS THE ACTUAL SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT. SENSITIVE AREAS LEGEND -WOODLAND AREA XXXXXXXX (152,856SF)(100%) O O O O O O O 00000 O O O O O - 50' WOODLAND BUFFER AREA (43,423 SF) (38.5%) LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL - WOODLAND AREA IMPACTS 15,483 S38.5% ( F )( ) WOODLAND RETENTION AREA (93,950 SF) (61.5%) - — - — - LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE TREE PROTECTION DETAIL N.T.S. D(FEET) = 1.5 X TRUNK 0 (FEET) X 12 TRUNK � MEASURED AT 24" ABOVE GROUND O O 4' HT. CONSTRUCTION FENCE POST EXISTING z oo GROUND 't :2 17 INSTALL TO MEET CITY OF IOWA CITY REQUIREMENTS. DETAILS TO BE PROVIDED WITH CONSTRUCTION PLANS IOWA UTILITIES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY IOWA ONE CALLSIVI ONE CALL AT 811 OR 800/292-8989 NO LESS THAN 48 HRS.IN ADVANCE OF ANY DIGGING OR EXCAVATION. WHERE PUBLIC UTILITY FIXTURES ARE SHOWN AS EXISTING ON THE PLANS OR ENCOUNTERED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA, IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE OWNERS OF THOSE UTILITIES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AFFORD ACCESS TO THESE FACILITIES FOR NECESSARY MODIFICATION OF SERVICES. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES, STRUCTURES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE SURVEYS AND RECORDS, AND THEREFORE THEIR LOCATIONS MUST BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY. IT IS POSSIBLE THERE MAY BE OTHERS, THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN OR SHOWN. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THEIR EXISTENCE AND EXACT LOCATION AND TO AVOID DAMAGE THERETO. NO CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ANY INTERFERENCE OR DELAY CAUSED BY SUCH WORK. 8.95 AC RA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www. mmsconsultants. net Date Revision 08/18/2025 PER CITY COMMENTS SENSITIVE AREAS: WOODLAND ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 06/26/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: CAT Drawn by Scale: HEH 1 "=40' Checked by Sheet No: CAT Project No: 11603-001 of: 6 �D n n N a 0 O 0 a 0 - O O 0 i 0 ID PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OPD ROOSEVELT RIDGE i - PART TWA �� / / �) ' - AF,PITION, I O WA CITY I O WA,,,,,,/. = '/I y ,I� PREPARED BY: APPLICANT: III v ;�j - MMS CONSULTANTS INC. TWG DEVELOPMENT v � - � 1917 S. GILBERT STREET 1301 E WASHINGTON ST, SUITE 100 \ �'\ =ira `_t L07 1 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46202 ,�' - / / /j/ / / ,/ I V e_ T ''' ' ' i `/ %_/ / \ ` \\\ \ / / / `\ �� /� ,w� Y / ` v� 1 / / \\V / l / i� / V I �/ i' _ - - / A 1 , l / - �\t / V/ i -- / I / _ / I v \ , - - i\\ - , / / - -\, _7 J i / / I / 1/ / k O+ l ' v - - , ��/ �� i v� v' / o' 'I' ' ' ' / / ' >. ' v \\ ( Y v v � 6 , 1 aE ,� ,/ / }' I i ' os I \ - / - �_ - I / I -,/ / // �,'. F�07 11 IIO \ v ! /' / I A I l -L-/ / / / / /!ii / I II I 11 �. / / a 7V 1 ")I`1 v v - I -I / �' / /' I ' /'/' / /'�//'/ �v - - - c t�j/ , , / / . / / / / - \ \\ 750 _ I A 7,_/,, -/,/ .-;*,' ll't ___ �� - - / / . I - - - I " I - _�/ �O� �0Z' I / /, I / //' ` - ,- - - ' ' ' ' ' vvv - -- ------ / O - ;-___ - - vI,v V , � / / _ - ' �' / t V � AA Vv � \ \\\\\/ I \\�� - �I I i -� -- ', � / / l / � ��w v 1 I� �iyi °�j T V ' / „ - - - - - ii % , , '/ v AA` \� 1 - - � , -`fir` _ 3� _ _ .� _ _ - _ - - - , , , A AA _ �. �" / - -, -� , '-- - _ . - - - / / / I - - I . ,�_: I - I. / /I i t \ / \ L07 9 � I - I , I II� /, , - ._ , / - - A , 1 / / J // / / / 11 / l I ,� , , _ i \ x \ / , 1 /, // , , , / \ \z �', < I i//i ,,, ,/ , 1./'/ , ' l / / / - G -_ �G / 1 / � l '///l\/�11 /I ��'�� I / I.'\ ��( 1 / / i, I„,,' �i'i', ' / �� / l �i� / / I / / / / '� /// I' _ - -- 11 I I v / Zl / v / , ,/ „/I � i.�� , '(r-, �i — 1 �/ / / _ _ //// I// l v p 1 Q / / _ _ _ Y \ \ i l 1 ,, , I / /� , / / / / / / / / / \ - ,_ , � - - - - - - - - - \ \ ,, ',x, i I / ) A I / I / I , '� ,/ // ,.., / / / / , / J .- - - - - - - - - - , - /// ' _ / / // �, � 1 / �I 1 �l /i / /arc-ii/////�i.v / /, / / - ' ' // , -,-- -- _ '-- I_ - -vvv vy A \ ' '/'/ // i -_ _� 1/ . v- - - /�. / %// / / /, //�/ � / /,/// _ _ - _ - - vvv v v v // / (// - _ _ / �� / ' i / �/ .� / / /.. / % / / — z , , _ , ' � '_ - - - - v v A 1 1 1 1 A A 1 / / / \ �o ,6a ego go gC �gL it / , // i , / -/ / / _ _ -,_ / / / I� '.e o 1 , VJ i / / 1 I / / / / / / / / ,l / / / / _ i , , „ '� _ _ - A A \ I V I I \ 1 1 A V 1 v I / / / / / / / / / - / I-- : V + I \\ \ I V " Z. </ / I // / / / / / /. i* / ' /.r /'I / / / _ _ - _ \ \ \ � _ , / \ / / / / / . � -� + / / / / / V 1 / / A'+ l v v , _ [1 f / �i IA I '/1 / / / " / // /, 9 �� / / 1 j ,, __ -- AA V I III I I11VA A-_ / // i, 1 \ / I I1/ // - I ' a 1 / // / / y / / / pcmz, A I A 1 A/ / / / HE ) , �/ ,/ / / / / / / „ , ur,/ - - , / ' \ V 1 1 1 I I , / / / i / / / �' _ - I .= I 1 I l 1A / , � / // , / /.i / / /�/ / / ) l V / , - _ _ , / �'_ - v I I v 1 , / / / /// / _ - A \ I / II /i / / ✓/, j//.. // / / - / _,„ / -- 1 1 II II\1I � i ��- -� -� - / q / A 1 / / / / / ab '\+ A / / V / / / 1 / �' / /i /'i/.�` '//,�/ � / // , / / v _ / '/ // , 1 , - „// - A V I 1 1 V l I l l l l l l v �_, / "� /, / / / /i i ' / ,� , / i i' / / , / , / 1 / , � � v A \ 1 1 A I I I I I I I \ _ / '' ` / // - - � 11 / / / % % / /� / /,� / / / /, / / / v m 6 W V 1 / / � - / +,+ �+ A 1 //h, l/�/ //�I //, '//'j ///,' ��/// / � "/� �j] �YJIJ-Yi/� VA 11 III \ --� /,// ////,- _ �� ,� 1 / / A / /i / / / �� J"��YY v A 1 l - /// .v= L / / / , , / - _ - I _ - , , - \ /' / Ec / / h I / ��m: -' - _ /, / - - a \ `11 LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS 1 NORTH 0 4 10 20 30 40 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1"=40' zi1zi1:i1 a O a 3ii'OA a000 +. `" 11 11 � c ' I E 10 _. 1 / / , - // / / / , / / , , - A I / , _ ,A A / / /, / / cr.E / i / i / / „ �/ / / / I ' / / , , , � ' / / / / / / / v v. v VA 1 I A III iir, i/ , I d V A /i /a � - - �v r+t'\ ,� ,/ `/ �` , /�/ / , .; / / / / / // / / , , / , - - - - v`` vvv =_ _ %� ,,, ` . - - ' v STREET TREES: \/ I / �,�' / / i / /// / �.,� /, /� % , / / - �/ ,,/ '� _ , / / , //// /// , � v AVAA V A V/,- - %_%gI - / v ;'� �.' V A / , / , / ', / "' ' ' �/ - - - '' '' „ ' ' _ ; ' , , / ' /,, / / - - - - v - - vv'vvv` == - .' - _ v v ' - I TREE FOR EVERY 00 LF OF FRONTAGE ON LOTS LOTS WITH MORE THAN / / / , A _ s --_- / , / / /� / / / , / _ _ - - - - I v vvv1v , %-- a v v I ONE FRONTAGE. :' ' , ' _ - / /iiiiiiiiiiiiii� ,' _ �� • r 1 �� DENTON ST: 000.72 / GO = I I REQUIRED �_ I I PROVIDED �� - , - - _ - / / , i _ _ / / + ' + _ _ , , a illllll / / _ GREENWOOD DR: 81 9.90 / 00 = 14 REQUIRED ' - / r // // III '/./ l I / ' / //'' / -'// ;� /� _ -11 _ I `�� v v 14 PROVIDED (14 EXISTING) \ / I 1 , � I / / I I L' I \ / / I / / ) ' / ' , , , _ i , / / , , j - _ - / - - - A � •, + 'V+r \ V A v vv v , / v 1 v v v , I // r \I ( ; � , ; - - ' ' / /, , , - _ - 3 ++ . v v / / RESIDENTIAL SITE TREES: vv / v �� 1 v v v v v I r v _ - � / / ; ; - _ ' / „ / /1 - - `_ v 'v v vv v v ` v I TREE FOR EVERY 550 SF OF TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE. vvvv v v v , v'v v v /I�I / / / / / / , �1'v / v v ' - v ' ' ' - - "' i ' I - III- _ - / _ _ r;, ��' ' v - 0 1,772 / 550 = 113 TREES REQUIRED v.' / / / v v `% 1// ' ' " - -, V \ ` 113 PROVIDED (8 I EXISTING) \VAAVA �� A \ l J I II /// / ,/ / i/////��/ - -//%' , /� _ V �` S 9 __ V �.�� \\ V A \ / ) I l/ '' 1 I J/I // ,// // M M M M �� v I �'I'1 v - �` I f 1 I V // I / ) ) f I I/ l/ / / /// , / // / / // ' /// i1 __ ,- '/ - / -NV r�� _ ri V I +[' V ` ` - -� f f ♦ .7 / / / l l / / �I / l I / - / / / l f / / / , _ - - `ir�„�" v _ [� ' \ v l/lIgL,J '/ ).' / //1 //''/ / ///// ,, ,' - �,'� v I /�// // / / , / / d/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ' , / , + _ �� ' ' 111 v v v / Imo, //////////;/�/// ,/ //////"//// /,/, "a `.�V A A1� +'A+�+�\V�_\ /// I I//� '/',/,///// ////� IIII/ , /'/ ,// ////// / /, '� _ v ,,, V - III '', - - / / // I // I v l," /�. , // , // /// / / ' / / / 1 / I // /� /- ,'ice l I�/ . ! /I/d /// , / / - //�i / //// / // , / ' / //' //// /' l / ' - ` '+v� I ' �` ` /✓ / ' , ,// , / , / / / / / / _ a v I ��....�.:. L, ., ' _ LANDSCAPE LEGEND II/jl ,i//'/i,' '/� i ///j'""/ / /, / ' ''/ /// ' I// // / / // ' l - - - \ V A I� \ v \ \ /'// _ / '''f / //,/ I // / /',' /' / / / / / // / ILl \ \ a 1 \ // , , , // / / / / / / / ,, ; ;- �'/ / _ / '/ /� ' /,� // - v v v v / r I - SYNTHETIC FIELD TURF I \ ,// / / J ' , / / / / , // / / '/ /, ,/ V / / / / 1 I ) I' I I / / / I � / / , / / / / / / � / , � / / , / / / , / v 1 , - ) I I 11�/ I 1 I 'I I I I l I I I / / / , / / - / 'i / , i / / / ", i j i i j + III A '� 1 I" VA - v A \ v 1 \ / \ I /11,l,111 I I I I: I I ( / / / / / , ,� � -�,'/ ,/ / � / / z -/ / / i / 1�111 �� _ v III I /IIII 1 � I I / / / / , / , •� � , _ _ / IIu / � �� `•": v ��: 1 / [w ..I� / /,� �, 1 � ' � � I / , TURF GRASS SEED I / \ A / / / / / / ' Y POA VJO N/ D ;� yO�i '' �'IJ V'N" / , / / A �, �0 1 A v A+ , I V \ v /II / I �/ �i, / / / / �' / , , , , / / / L� � , // / _ 06000042 ��C��C949 �0 v v v / I V 1� ! / - , , , 1/ 1 v V 1 1 _\ 1 / 1 I 1 \ \ \ \ l� ] 1 1 I \I I 1 ./ if 1 I / / , ,/ , /�! h`J l"IJT' ��' , , / ' - - V / , I ./ / / / / I / / / / / - _ " v v �' I � CRUSHED ROCK GRAVEL v/ �, , I v v I I ' i I / / I 1 / / I , — - /SY ; I g; 0' JRgww DF.%G� ' � � - - ��, I . � a z /I I I //// l I i I Il / , ///�/ ///// / //,��[�� , , , ' / .�� - / - - -_� V ,/,,y� y�y \ \ \I +,I+�l A1j I 1 -- \ \/� 1' 1 Ifi I 1 / 1 1 I � / ( l l ! / / , / I l l 1 l I I 1 , ' �, ' / / / / ' /, � i, ! " i i/ � � - - - - /� /-Ay - I I / I - , - - - I �l �� AQ '� v /I WOOD MULCH BED I //// // / s // 1 /////I///////// (/II\ /,/-////„//,'�i'��-,-3�%" /.I, - - vI +V /' v V l 1 /1. _ v (I rni 611I /ll!l ///l/l I :1 - i, ;/;Z//'ii�/,/', i .` s -ice - - -\ I111inll --- A ' - 4 I �� i � I / / / 1 � �D / / � / +1" �1 FALL PROTECTION SURFACE /,/ I I I / /! A / / A 1 , / / /, / / / / / / // / � „r--.+ : + / Q l ,l, l/ l//////��VI A �'///// /, 'i ii'�'/ / 'i i. t' � �I / , i / /ir ( / - F - / , ,/ �, // / , I / / / I J I v v i '� ,i " i i , � i /'� ' / / t / � / I/ IIII A A / l // //i, ,i/i//�� "� // / / - ' I i ) / 11 � �'7(0- �i` / /i , III//I// I v 1 A ./,-�i 'i — I, ', ' /� � - - ,. l � � N - �I ' ;� 11 '�� /LV � PLAY STRUCTURE ELEVATION // I / / I /'/ ''/ i i i ,i /ii / % / // , / -,_ nr�l/ - I l / 1 .i/" 1 1 '� / , /it) N / v / '// / // //, ' , // /' - ' / - 'l I III 144 �__ I Ala " / /L / // //'// // , / G + / / / // /f + , + + ..ii o \ - - 7X�„ j ,'I + I I 1 I / / / I v I � Z / � / el I l A -_�-/ '/ /// //// , / I - I / ' _ / I v� W Y- �-//%// / / I I 10 / I "I I •I� I / � /'' /� 0 0 0 0 0 0 - RAISED GARDEN PLANTERS _ ' _ - / ', / - / / / I I I I l I / / / / / / ' - - -W) ,T / ' 1, ' / _ 0 I I I II Ills / / / / � ��,'// -- ��k-qQlll , - , @ _ / //l / / // / / _ Q -, _ //I/ / / 11 I -� q -- ) / 11I I/ / //- // / - ' ''�'° Qi _ — — — - - Z F I' '- 1 --_ �' \ �+ \• - t' d �'l: / - , i• i'+/ i+ "ti / i / f - _- - i � --- ' I �/ / / \- , / - - - �'' C CN CN \ +'� CN vN+ Cry CN•v CiC,a ' '•'C +'6N+''+ Cj.V l + +/' +C + N' + ++f�N 'N —' +/'' a CN C+ + C+ IN, '� +I+' I� I I� '^ / , Illa. , ' ' / Lr" �: r 6� r •� �" I T 'I , 1 / +1 /• O - h / i� o _ ,' :f I i _ Y v I - , �, - r ' -1 +' ' - - - - - +1 - ' - - / _ - , / / _ - _ _ - , ' f - - + i _ _ _ 6 ' Y DO . _r � i i _ _ `�k7J` ' . ter: � r 3 •- ' ,/Z IE = �� r �- + `�r� ' ox[' uHE - - - — - - FO + + / + + s + + + ) + 1 + + / + �� , / / / , - - ' - \ / Eo c c /—c cc c c c c c c T/c ��c / \ I \ / / /�— [� /� FC FO 0 / / / FO \ N CN CN CN CN CNy N CN RCN ,CND CN RCN C'N / (%Iv CN CN / / / , , / / / 'FCT 4 / FO ��FO F0� FO FO FC / ' FC �� / - - J ) ) I II I 5 I- \ 1 \ \ \ 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ 1 I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ I— rt / \— — / /— —1 / \ ) I I I I I I I ) -� -4__ f I / / I I I`k� 1 / / / / / l 1 \ / / I I I / l / I I I I I I I I I / / / 1—WE / WE—VIEWE / wE wE��xE WE \ viE�wE I xE�wE�rwE��-x��—AWE f wr��wEI /— �I "I ! I— x� ,' / w€ 1 x��x��wE-1 wE�' x� \ 1 x� IwE�WE�'xIE� / ( y / _ - ' - _ _ - _ - - -_ _ — -_I VA /� _ =I�� N- LT- -© , v v 1 1 \ ` \ V I V A `v , l \ V v A - V AA \ - t - - - ORE '\ OHE ^ 'OHE� OHE - OHE - - -OH€ _ - `OILE ~ _0HE \ 6HE �_ � SHE_ QHE- � - 0HE �HE OH �p ,FRY C�i}-Tr�� \ 1 \ \ I \ \ I I 4 \ \ - VA / / \ _ - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - V AA V11 AIIJJ IIJJ ;� `_1 -L_=�/�� LJ �V�-LJ--V/? u eJ - - ) A I / J I / , � A 1 V A 1 1 I A A / 1 v A\ I I 1 \ 11 �I - ' I - _ - - _ - -A / - , / \ ) / / / / / ' I J 1 1 ) / l / ! ) 1 / / / ( / \ 1 I I / / - - -- ---++4--- � -�----- r--I- -I - I -ram- -r,�- 4--, /--/-'�--fl --+ 11---? --- - --- '----/-�--/- - - ----- - - -t�L LANDSCAPE NOTES STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES PROPERTY &/or BOUNDARY LINES - CONGRESSIONAL SECTION LINES ------------- - RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES - CENTER LINES EXISTING CENTER LINES - LOT LINES, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PLATTED OR BY DEED — — — — — — — — - PROPOSED EASEMENT LINES ------------------ EXISTING EASEMENT LINES AIIIJ,,, -BENCHMARK (R) - RECORDED DIMENSIONS 22-1 - CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER -EXIST- -PROP- � $ - POWER POLE =* =* - POWER POLE W/DROP =1111111[i =*= - POWER POLE W/TRANS - POWER POLE W/LIGHT =9�: =@= - GUY POLE 0 * - LIGHT POLE OO ® - SANITARY MANHOLE Y -FIRE HYDRANT * e - WATER VALVE OO ® - DRAINAGE MANHOLE W11 ❑ - CURB INLET —X—X— - FENCE LINE (( - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER - EXISTING STORM SEWER ,< -PROPOSED STORM SEWER (W) - EXISTING WATER LINES W - PROPOSED WATER LINES E - ELECTRICAL LINES T - TELEPHONE LINES G -GAS LINES - - - - - - - - - - - - - CONTOUR LINES (1' INTERVAL) PROPOSED GROUND EXISTING TREE LINE O0 - EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE & SHRUB - EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES & SHRUBS THE ACTUAL SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE TO BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANTING SCHEDULE SHADE TREE 32 i�7) 2" CAL. flf//f ORNAMENTAL GRASS 139 e71 � 1 8" HT. `lI%)DECIDUOUS SHRUB 167 1 8" HT. EVERGREEN SHRUB 151 0 18" HT. I - THE LAMS. CAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERFI' ALL LOCATIONS OF UNDEREJI UTILITIES ON 517E PRIOR TO LAMS. CAPE INSTALLATION. 2 -PLANT QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATION ONLY; DRAWING SHALL PREVAIL IF 6amiCT OCCURS. 9 - KIM, SIZE AND QUALITY O= PLANT MATERIAL 6HNLL COPPORM TO NvtERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, ANSI Z6O - r", OR MOST RECENT ADDITION. 4 - LAYOUT OF PLANT MATERIAL AT SITE SHALL DE APPROVED DY THE LAP6CAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 5 - ALL PLANTING UP AREAS SHALL HAVE QUALITY TOPSOIL ADDED (IF NEEDED) $Y LAMSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO DRING UP GRADES V' - 4" $ELAN EXI6TNG CONCRETE AREAS AND TOP OF DECORATIVE WALLS. (PRIOR TO $IDPNG, CONTRACTOR 15 RECOMMEMED TO VISIT SITE) 6 - FINISH GRADING Cr PLANT UP AND SIX AREAS SHA1 DE PERFORMPD DY LAMSCAPE CONTRACTOR 7 - ALL Shfl AM PERENNIAL PLANTING AREAS SHALL HAVE A MINIM Id 9 IWA I DEEP BED OF DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD PARK MUCH AND AN APPLICATION OF A PRE -EMERGENT ("PREENOR APPROVED EQUAL) FOR WEED CONTROL. S - LANP66AM EDGING MrWfEN DARK MI-0 AND LAWN AREAS SHALL M A SPATE CUT EDGE EDGE SHALL DE IWrALLEP VERTICAL AND ACCORDING TO DETAILS 5 - 6TACNG S1A_L 6E REQUIRED ON ALL TREES (EXCEPT MLLTI- T VARIETIES) 6TACE USNG (2) OR (9) 6' STEEL "T" POST PLACED OUTSIDE OF ROOT6ALL AND ADHERED TO TRUNK OF TREE WITH 1.6 el GABLE AD WOVEN NALON TREE STRAPS. 10 - ALL TREES FREE-�5TAMIN6 IN LAWN AREAS AND IN PLANTING DE95 SHALL DE WRAPPED WITH A 6TADARD ~Al TREE WRAP AM FASTEND WITH TWIN OR APPROVED METHOD. 11 - ALL TREES FREE-ITAMING WITHIN LAWN AREAS SHALL HAVE A MINIMLM 4 FT. PIA RING OF POUDLP SHREDDED HARDWOOD BARK MACH AT A 9 INCH DEPTH. 12 - ALL LANDISCAPE PLANTING AND SOD AREAS SHALL M THOROUGHLY WATERED UPON INSTALLATION AND A TOTAL OF (9) WATERINff6 BEFORE INITIAL ACCEPTANCE. AFTER ACCEPTANCE, SOD SHALL DE MAINTAINED FOR (30 DAYS OR LINTL ROOTED IN. 0 - LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR M15T FOLLOW AL DETAILS PROVIDED ON SHEETS PE66RI15W LAMSCAPE CONSTI l TION TEChNIQI.ES. 14 - ALL LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS SHALL DE GUARANTEED FOR A PERUA OF ON YEAR fRCM DATE OF INITIAL ACCEPTANCE. 15 - SEED ALL REMAINNG AREAS WITH POT URBAN MIX TYPICAL TREE PLANTING DETAIL N.T.S. PRUNE BROKEN BRANCHES AS NECESSARY, MAX. 1/3 NARROW BRANCH UNION ANGLE WITH EVIDENCE OF INCLUDED BARK AND/OR BRANCH/TRUNK DIAMETER RATIO GREATER THAN SHALL BE REJECTED. WOVEN NYLON TREE STRAPS, SIZE TO ALLOW 1.5"O OF TRUNK GROWTH, — PLACE AT 213 HEIGHT OF FIRST BRANCHING GALVANIZED AIRCRAFT -GRADE - 16 GAUGE CABLES, ONLY TIGHT ENOUGH TO PREVENT SLIPPING; ALLOW SOME TREE MOVEMENT 2' - 6" STEEL "T" POST, --,, STAKE PER STAKING ORIENTATION PLAN, REMOVE AFTER TWO GROWING SEASONS EDGE OF MULCH AREA MIN. 3' RADIUS I 5" DEEP VERTICAL SPADE CUT EDGE -_ STRIP SOD FROM UNDER MULCHED AREA FERTILIZER TABLETS 3 PER TREE SPACED EVENLY - AROUND ROOTBALL NORTH TREE �STRAP CABLE STAKING ORIENTATION PLAN PLANT WITH BASE OF TREE A MIN. 1" ABOVE ADJACENT GRADE ENSURE ROOT FLARE IS VIABLE REMOVE ALL TWINE AND STRAPS OR CUT AND FOLD WIRE BASKET AND CUT BURLAP FROM TOP 1/2 OF ROOTBALL 3" MINIMUM DEPTH SHREDDED HARDWOOD BARK MULCH, ENSURE ROOT FLARE IS VIABLE SIDEWALK/PAVING �t��7 3" WATER RETENTION SOIL RING EXISTING UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE PLANTING MIX/NATIVE SOIL BACKFILL TREE PIT TO BE MINIMUM OF 2.5 X ROOT BALL DIAMETER SLANT AND ROUGHEN SIDES; INCREASE PIT DIAMETER IN HEAVY CLAY SOILS SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL (DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN) N.T.S. ROOTBALL (CONTAINER 1)¢ X MATURE ON -CENTER SPACING ON -CENTER SPACING ROOT BALL (BALL AND GROWN) REMOVE ENTIRE DIAMETER OF SHRUB (SEE PLAN OR PLANT BURLAPED). CUT TWINE AND CONTAINER BEFORE LIST FOR SPACING)1 7 BURLAP FROM TOP 1/2 OF INSTALLATION ROOTBALL AND REMOVE BEFORE INSTALLATION EDGE OF SIDEWALK OR CURB PLANTING TOPSOIL FOR BACKFILLING TURF III —I III— —III—III—I I III III— - 5" DEEP VERTICAL • == • — • • 4" MINIMUM DEPTH —III III —I I I —III I � I— III=III III SPADE CUT EDGE =III=III- SHREDDED HARDWOOD _ —_ —_ III III— III III —I 1 II I—— III—_ - FERTILIZER TABLETS BARK MULCH BED —1— — III —III—= = —III III —I —_—_ III —III —III —_—_---Ili_ —� (3) PER SHRUB SPACED I I I, -III -III, III III III III III, III —III III III III -III= EVENLY AROUND ROOTBALL , ,III ,III PLANTING HOLE SHALL BE 2X DIAMETER OF ROOTBALL EXISTING UNDISTURBED AND 6" MINIMUM DEEPER SUBGRADE 8.95 AC RA M S CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS 1917 S. GILBERT ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)351-8282 www. mmsconsultants. net Date I Revision 08/18/2025 PER CITY COMMENTS LANDSCAPE AND FINAL STABILIZATION PLAN ROOSEVELT RIDGE IOWA CITY JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA MMS CONSULTANTS, INC. Date: 06/26/2025 Designed by. Field Book No: CAT Drawn by Scale: HEH 1 "=40' Checked by Sheet No: CAT Project No: 11603-001 of: 6 W Z) I- U W 2 U Q O 0 Z) U) OWNERPROJECT TEAM Washington1301 E. 00 TWGIndianapolis, IN 46202 1 DEVELOPMENT, Development • .2703 csmith@twgdev.com GENERAL CONTRACTOR qTWG • Development,1301 E. Washington Street,- 100 • Indianapolis, IN 46202 DEVELOPMENT, 40 ARCHITECT . _Washington00 • 1 TWG Indianapolis, IN 46202 0) 'IT DEVELOPMENT, ARCHITECT 0-5 ..- LLj 3: • CIVIL/LANDSCAPE • / . • �!+ `JE - bets kl+M1'annrng and iltta!foprnLVM $SrIQ� 917 S. Gilbert CO •wa IA ,, i w r • - • • f 7 y✓'a'G'� ' • • • . • v f - 'asLU Uj :-CIE! - xt G• -- �.3" \ IFA ISSUE aL i ( �r F 411 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AA- « ,.Tf IIIyr r s � .:,�- ..: -..S�i 1�'r.'�. _' -t-_: `,, ,+ �� '-.: of C.1 ® - � -y �"'- o,: - �;a=_,A',3.c� - �• �;_ _ a � - .. .. -- .._._ .. xr.:.- _.Y. -� -. ! ;."�,JY-.. -x .. A.n...:. I I III ♦ j .a _r _ 3"'+ca 'tY�' - - -- - Mi.: $F �'..� � sue• � � - '- • • • >_ ` s - APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES A 7= : r"\ . . __ , ..' ..era. a _ ... .�• _ _ �. , _.«.. «. _ L / h.: m: I _.. ... _, —. 4 , A;11-Ift 16, q e U a •?+!r {n �. T t- I r I : a I kk - - ,�. ate` •a, �. ., ._ _ > l a _ -.•_ - .. - - -_. --gam- - ---:. �,__s ..._- ... - t'i'¢_ -. ... . �. --_• -..._ - y...-. ,�--�„ ,. �. .. - k.. ... .- .. ter-'=. -. -.%. -S I , F 6r� dye t �R, e '.,f ^ � -.♦ - . - ! _ 1�\ ��`� �l :e`}�,°`., , +- ' +.,:: "-'•' !.. aa" '" c _a^ - L:. 'Z..r,�r"r='C� A'- _"v �,sw. - ;' - m t L!* NOTE: ALL DWELLING UNITS ARE TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS • - I M • �_ I F I I ni. 4#1 PROPERTY �d 13 I UNIT SUMMARY UNIT TYPE LEVEL 1A 1 C 1 D 1 D.1 1 D.2 1 E-HC 2A 2A-HC 2B 2C 2D 3A 3A-HC 3B #/FLR 1 6 6 1 6 3 1 13 2 - 1 2 4 1 1 47 2 7 6 1 6 3 1 16 1 - 1 3 4 1 3 53 3 7 6 10 - - 1 16 1 2 1 3 4 1 - 52 4 6 4 1 - - 1 12 2 1 - 3 4 1 - 35 TOTAL BY UNIT TYPE 26 22 13 12 6 4 57 6 3 3 11 16 4 4 187 TOTAL BY BEDROOM 83 80 24 % BY UNIT TYPE 26% 26% 15% 14% 7% 4% 71 % 7% 4% 4% 14% 66% 17% 17% % BY BEDROOM # 45% 42% 13% OF THE FAIR HOUSING ACT DESIGN O Q MANUAL. UNITS MARKED AS 11HC11 TO C:) MEET UFAS REQUIREMENTS CU 3: Z W L o �' W o� 00 (D 7C) L � O Cc Cfl Q BUILDING AREA DEFINITIONS REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION "NET"AREA - ALL AREA MEASURED FROM EXTERIOR FACE OF FRAMING. THIS IS WHAT IS USED FOR BUILDING CODE AREAS. "GROSS"AREA - ALL AREA MEASURED FROM EXTERIOR FACE OF FINISH "LEASABLE" AREA - SUM OF THE "MARKET NET AREA" FOR ALL UNITS ON T+ "% BUILDING AREA - LEASABLE BUILDING AREA - NET EACH FLOOR Y• u` ! - , � I, „ ° ". NAME AREA LEVEL AREA .• COMMUNAL„ AREA - ALL NON -LEASABLE SPACE WITHIN THE BUILDING r '' !'\!'%-rMr %1A IT A R ArA lIT\/ r%M n irre+ A r% K l/-% !'\rrl!'%r rl r!%-rr-% -% A I 01 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN • 02 LEVEL 1 - FLOOR PLAN • 03 LEVEL 2 - FLOOR PLAN • 04 LEVEL 3 - FLOOR PLAN • 05 LEVEL 4 - FLOOR PLAN • 06 ROOF PLAN • 07A ELEVATIONS • 07B 3D RENDERINGS • 08 UNIT TYPE - 1A • 09 UNIT TYPE - 1 C • 10 UNIT TYPE - 1 D • 11 UNIT TYPE - 1 E-HC • 12 UNIT TYPE - 2A • 13 UNIT TYPE - 2A-HC • 14 UNIT TYPE - 2B • 15 UNIT TYPE - 2C • 16 UNIT TYPE - 2D • 17 UNIT TYPE - 3A • 18 UNIT TYPE - 3A • 19 UNIT TYPE - 3A-HC • 20 UNIT TYPE - 3A-HC • 21 UNIT TYPE - 3B • 22 UNIT TYPE - 3B • UNIT AREAS & DETAILS 1A 1 C 1 D 1 D.1 1 D.2 1 E-HC 2A 2A-HC 2B 2C 2D 3A 3A-HC 3B MARKET NET AREA 704 829 784 868 851 887 930 930 1131 1257 1028 1204 1207 1411 MARKET GROSS AREA 723 836 795 889 869 895 939 955 1138 1299 1039 1229 1231 1450 # OF BEDROOMS 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 # OF BATHROOMS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 " . i— �LEVEL 1 WL %W�• ,� - COMMUNA 116,398 SF ;r _P LEASABLE 144,334 SF 60,732 SF LEVEL 1 61,393 SF rvv 1 rr,\11V 1 kk_.vr-,r-,1uvr-,0, rXIVICIVI I T 0r-/-1l�CO3 LC/-iJIIVV Vrrll°iC, CLCI� I f�ll�/iL ROOMS, MECHANICAL ROOMS, MAINTENANCE ROOMS, ETC.) LEVEL 2 61,393 SF LEVEL 3 59,853 SF LEVEL 4 42,406 SF Ln lw�iffr Ir LEVEL 2 TOTAL 225,045 SF IN ' I. COMMUNAL 110,486 SF " t JF _ LEASABLE 150,236 SF UNIT AREA DEFINITIONS 60,722 SF LEVEL 3 HUD NETAREA= DEFINED AS "PAINT TO PAINT". IT IS THE LIVING AREA OF THE COMMUNAL 10,SF LEASABLE 47,505 SF BUILDING AREA - GROSS UNIT MEASURED TO THE INSIDE FACE OF THE UNIT PERIMETER DRYWALL. I 505 , 57,947 SF NAME AREA HUD GROSS AREA= MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF DEMISING WALLS IF r - �I I A LEVEL 4 "TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND FAR SIDE OF CORRIDOR 1COMMUNAL J8,:2:22:81 SF LEVEL 1 WALLS. PROJ. N0. DATE LEASABLE 33,313 SF COURTYARD 117,664 SF 22012_00 2023/05/23 TOTAL �220,942 SF GROSS AREA 62,510 SF MARKET NET AREA - (BOMA/IREM, ANSI Z65.4) MEASURED FROM THE LEVEL 2 CENTERLINE OF DEMISING WALLS TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF EXTERIOR WALLS SHEET NAME -e 1 Y Y j - • ...v .Yz It_ ; GROSS AREA 62,196SF AND FAR SIDE OF CORRIDOR WALLS. COVER SHEET LEVEL 3 �,�[ I� .,� _ ' �* ' r 14 GROSS AREA 59,186 SF LEVEL 4 MARKET GROSS AREA - MARKET NET AREA + ATTACHED BALCONIES + GROSS AREA 142,859 SF EXTERIOR STORAGE AREAS DESIGNATED TO THE UNIT. TRUE ROOF DECK 111,071 SF NORTH 255,484 SF BALCONYAREA - MEASURED FROM THE EXTERIOR FACE OF EXTERIOR WALL, � SHEET NO. VICINITY MAP TO EDGE OF BALCONY/PATIO. 00 w ry w 2 U ry O r) (n N 0 �N1 V ry n O U CONCEPT - AMENITY LEVEL PLAN 1 /16" = 1'-0" I I CONCEPT - LEVEL 1 PLAN 1 1 /16" = 1'-0" A 4 07A 5 6 2 7 8 --7- — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - L 0 9 10 11 12 2 02 FLOOR PLAN SYMBOLS - - A B D I E GRAPHIC SCALE 16 32 �a D 48 64 LEGEND 4 07A ACCESSIBLE UNIT HEARING IMPAIRED UNIT 0 0 N (n N N 4-0 c N 0 �Z � - N � �M V cu•� QO-) = W c ti V (u o 76 � Q co � co as J ■ H Z W 2 06 J W W 0 IFA ISSUE N Lo C) Q C) : >� U ca Z o W L W o� 00 C' N (D -0 cu 70 L r 0 Q REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION PROJ. NO. DATE 22012 00 2023/05/23 SHEET NAME LEVEL 1 - FLOOR PLAN SHEET NO. 02 w ry w 2 U ry O r) (n N 0 �N1 V 2 CD ry n O U (4) 07A 2 7 8 12 I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 CONCEPT - LEVEL 2 PLAN 1 /16" = 1'-0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0 16 32 FLOOR PLAN SYMBOLS �a D TB A D E LEGEND 4 07A ACCESSIBLE UNIT HEARING IMPAIRED UNIT 0 0 Ir- (n a) L 4-0 c: N 0 0)� c:Z !E — N c/) -M V Cu•Lm =w cuco f` V Ir- (u o -3 � Q co — - co as J J ■ H Z W 2 06 a J W W 0 IFA ISSUE N Lo O Q O > U ca Z o W L o �' W o� 00 N (D -0 cu 70 L ,- 0 REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION PROJ. NO. DATE 22012_00 2023/05/23 SHEET NAME LEVEL 2 - FLOOR PLAN %A?" 48 64 SHEET NO. 03 w ry w 2 U ry O r) (n N 0 N V CD ry n O U J 07A 5 6 � 2 7 8 9 10 C 1 12 I I � 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 I I CONCEPT - LEVEL 3 PLAN 1 /16" = 1--0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0 16 32 FLOOR PLAN SYMBOLS �a D A B D E LEGEND 4 07A ACCESSIBLE UNIT HEARING IMPAIRED UNIT 0 0 Ir- (n W 4-0 o c: N 0 0)� c:Z ! — N c/) -M U ca.Lrn =w cuco f` U Ir- (u o -3 � Q co — - co as J J ■ H Z W 2 06 a J W W 0 IFA ISSUE co N C:) Q C:) U ca Z o W L o �' W o� 00 (D cu 7C) L r 0 REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION PROJ. NO. DATE 22012_00 2023/05/23 SHEET NAME LEVEL 3 - FLOOR PLAN 48 64 SHEET NO. 04 w ry w 2 U ry O r) (n N O �N1 V 2 (D ry n 0 4 07A 5 6 E 8 9 10 11 2 / / I / I A I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 CONCEPT -LEVEL 4 PLAN 1 /16" = 1'-0" 12 12 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 16 32 FLOOR PLAN SYMBOLS �a D 48 64 LEGEND 4 07A ACCESSIBLE UNIT HEARING IMPAIRED UNIT O O (n a) L 4-0 c N O Z � — N c �M U�`�rn I- � CD = w cu I` U (u O 76 � Q co — - co as J J ■ H Z W 06 a J W W 0 IFA ISSUE N O Q O U ca Z o W L o0) W 0 00 cn " (D -0 L r 0 Q REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION PROJ. NO. DATE 22012_00 2023/05/23 SHEET NAME LEVEL 4 - FLOOR PLAN SHEET NO. 05 w ry D U w 2 U ry Q O r) D U) N O �N1 V 2 ry n O U w ry U w 2 U ry Q O r) U) N O �N1 V 2 ry n O U t -I ol_� ❑■❑■ ©viUU �a ©�© UU �0 uu ❑❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ III' ❑■❑■ uu ❑■an ❑■ WE Now ©�© �� No -in m 7=1L11L11r- T FM FM was F IIII IN �© low ❑©❑© an �❑©❑© IN �© ❑©❑© Him ME -•--------------------•------•----------- li:'s's's'sir=====_Foam ====mim______________===mlr=====_==__________====_=�I:=_====_=====_====_==O-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-':�� ..........-----------■--------------------------•■--------------------------------------■---------•--. 71 ELEVATION 7 '1 1 /16" = 1'-0" ELEVATION 3 1 /16" = 1'-0" I GRAPHIC SCALE 16 32 48 _ LEVEE 120' - 4 5/8" LJ E ❑rN NH _ LEVEL�2 110' L-IM IN ---- ELEVATION 5 ELEVATION 5 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 16 32 48 64 an FO-01 I mu-1 am mu I M SM a In 1 I FFE-71 111011 MEN 11101� FE-71 0101IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII10101M] FFM- mus- 1 01011 ELEVATION 2 1 /16" 0 16 ROOF LEVEL 138' - 0 3/44"" 1J LEVEL 130' - 0 1 /2" LEVEL 3� 120' - 4 5/88" LJ LEVEL 110' - 8 3/4" LEVEL 100' - 0" 64 ELEVATION 6 1 /16" = 1'-0" 0 GRAPHIC SCALE 16 32 ROOF LEVEL 138' - 0 3/44"" 1J LEVEL 130' - 0 1 /2" LEVEL 3� 120' - 4 5/88"" LJ LEVEL 110' - 8 3/4" LEVEL 100' - 0" 48 64 ROOF LEVEL 138' - LEVEL 130' - 0 1 /2" LEVEL 3� 120' - LEVEL 2� 110' - 8 3/44" L LEVEL 100' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL 90' -- O O N U) N L 4-0 VJ 0 r` N 0 �Z � — N H c/) CM U ca.Lrn =w teco r` U � cu . O 76 � Q CM In!: ■ Z W 2 IL a J W W 0 IFA ISSUE GRAPHIC SCALE 4 ELEVATION 4 1 /16" = 1'-0" 0 16 32 48 64 N LO O Q O > U ca ROOF LEVEL P[TT ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑138'- 0 3/� O o a❑❑ o0 0o a❑❑ oo W L 0) _ LEV�EL 4 0 c: ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ EB Em Fffl EB ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ 130'- 0 1/ 1J =]o ❑o ❑o ❑o 0 0 00 0❑❑ o0 0❑❑ oo ❑o ❑o ❑o ❑tm❑o . o0 00 00 _ oc 120'-45/� N ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ FM ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ r r r ❑r r r r ®r r r ❑r �❑r r r r r ❑r �❑r r r ❑r �❑r r r r r r �❑r r r r �❑r r r r r r �❑r CD -6 _ LEVEL 2 L 110'-83/4" O r r❑ r❑ r❑ r r❑ r❑ r❑ IEI 19— RT r ❑r �❑r r r r r ❑r 0❑rEl FEITEI El El F r r r r ❑r �❑r r r r❑ r❑ r❑ r r❑ r❑ r❑ r r❑ r❑ r❑ ❑r FM Il ❑❑ Q o00 000ymmftm o00 o00 o0o LEVEL1� 100' - 0" LJ _ ROOF LEVEL 138' - _ LEVEL 130'-014 LEVEL 3 LJ 120' - 4 5/8" LEVEL 2 1J 110' - 8 3/4" f LEVEL L 100' - 0" _ AMENITY LEVEL LJ 90' -- 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 32 48 64 1 I ELEVATION 1 '1 1 /16" = 1'-0" 1 ■ 0 16 ■ 0 16 GRAPHIC SCALE 32 48 64 _ ROOF LEVE� 138' - _ LEVEL 4 130' - 0 1 /2" LJ LEVEL 3 120' - 4 5/8" LJ _ LEVEL 110' - 8 3/4" _ LEVEL 100' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL _ 90' GRAPHIC SCALE 32 48 64 REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION PROJ. NO. DATE 22012_00 2023/05/23 SHEET NAME ELEVATIONS SHEET NO. 07A �� . : ,ram/ jy 4 \ II _ v b • � yy Ce� 1 d; r� � a `a•O �. � r - a . s Ilr 4yl r I III !.E�yr I � r U III EEN I I .l I ,'1 r } • I _sit i ,two .:"4i'C- m - ., 1/1 : _ .-___ ��. : --.' � - A �,, •``� _- - $Al �' ° �- -y� .. _ .. '- .. - ..- -. Ib `�'�3°1i"t-Vf7i• .,: � .�ar- '. a •_ :; s,. � c Ill, ��: z_: ark . 1 —all ,� I r — u , F y I� a.~;i , i. T -'' _--`._ - ` I,. � _ -� :.- yo _.j,f ,a�i•"'�t'Ly - I Jc� �:-' �-. ,P'e. r pr"s-,_ \'�, -w �•_ . 4 .-. i � - <+ - - - IjI 1 � er�lF<'• - - � 'z:s :: : �kyFt k - - ' - .n, _Lr- _ I •. ` :.:-:.,,f 19 i�_-�`'#' {,, 1.' .. ,'i, za _ _. ,:r, x I'3 ,per ��7{, _ __ �'s-6 �' ..; `F''T .�, .Y M1bi ' §r • 1't- L _ I i _ I J" v "'� 7 y { r rf _ �,;. >�: t•. - .. <d. A�- ' 6 - - - "- .. `. __._ •mow :;�� '°�F .i }i ;- irrr.�--. � .rTl .•' d :4s'._. ._ � A ,a --a .,. _ x... iF �':. h , , � ` -.. .: *h %_, — I �. .. _ - - - �1.a _ _ ,C - - .�s "`_ • i`_ _ _ w> t!F rr '+�:. _ � -w �S lr to BtF _-'q �. ,• #,' �X _._a _ ,l _ - - _T�....,I,r - -a:-' T s< �' ., -�, i, - ,- - „•,tr' - - aTtl: * :F .. - s. i + - - < - `:1t%.• '..� �� '►"-3-,;. _ �, � ., � ;, � � .x .. ,- ._ � ., � ,- - • 1. �r.�- a.,•:- _ _ �" r PVP / \\ I r _. ,. _ _ _ i.- .,tr J! :�, � _ .r`.. ;Z _ r`. t_ _ � — Oil z 3 ,j _' r. - .. 1. „ a ; , • • � : - � � c_ .. - - {, P - - _ zit%Y _ y .. - $ k a k7z . _, ;, 9► �. swrc _ - 1, F / I F = \ r ti ✓ _ l ••e�w., �'. ,'77'•yam �y„1,=�-TES^?i P''. ,•r 'r�`sr _^'-�s��I,filffl■■�rK��w _-. - - _'�C t at if _ 71 Liu vim pop — Li Rio tvQ! y - . �?�1 -<' � � ♦:, .¢.. ,. • - , . ' .�. - :: xt,r. '+ aF Tb, ,,',$r� a+. =ate g.g I,r , s. J e a� 4.F} .t fir! , -.•.lw f<.r ,.. - :'; -�;E` ,"r. .s 'n ,:;3•,1 +.., ,�.v ,.. �,,,.,,. ":-^ *x la� ^, .'1 F a>.�:>; 1� �-. d � � __: -- - - ✓''t.. - a_._i r .�_ xi ' .F_.. _.. '.ht'Z":.. , _.rr "R x"Iae.:.. ..,. ..:,.:, ,.. .�' - w - i - !:�.` , u a � t N. } s a , a r, }. _ ..._ :: <__ •- - �. .Y.4. ...! __�, 'fir- • - M ... . ,r. - - - _ '�r�;' ,_ ..•._ . _.. .e� ... h :.a. s.. is .. . ,,. r6;. h 1 i .. q.: r _. _y _: - .. �.1 - e. I • I� a f9 I r � t' 1 t 2 _ f < �. _ .. - � I� ,_fix_- k , � _ r=_ x � ., _... � •. - .F• # - _ : e _ .,, I( j ., a _, . _ - 1. ::.--_ .. u:. �. :- :�: ..,., .e.. : - , ..r4 1. <INK a c' ttt l g f , , r. .a . : ... _ r.. 1, • ,.., I iS 1 - I 1 > l y6 „-.._ __ ,•r . ,_ �. ,._ IF € ... 'fit . °� ,� .' S lr • � A ? 1 ,(.. + a. ..r. : g y _ • j _. __.p .. _ •.- _ ,_.. r _ ,_.. to •e�-, .. ' •F :_. _ - ,,. — — i p r r, ,.r..- Y'. � QS .�' a•E_... .#' M-•:-- ', ,... e. - - ....,r .,. - _ C::>ro z - :i t ..., � "8.: �,'-w�+V'., f,. 1 K 1 - 99 • m pw bw 1■ ATTACHMENT 4 Good Neighbor Meeting Summary Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting � r CITY ❑F IOV A CITY Project Name: Roosevelt Ridge Project Location: 611 Greenwood Drive Meeting Date and Time: May 29, 6:30 -7:30 Meeting Location: Horn Elementary cafeteria, 600 Koser Avenue Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Jon Marner & Scott Pottorff(MMS Consultants) Jackson Tayler & Brian Hiltunen(TWG), Aldo Sebben(Studio Arch) Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Anne RUSsett Number of Neighbors Attending: 25 Sign -In Attached? Yes X No General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - General concerns about existing traffic, traffic enforcement in the area. Concern about maintenance of property. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - Interest in type of affordable housing. Concern from most attendees regarding existing traffic issues in the area and the additional traffic impact from this project. Pedestrian safety for the area particularly at the proposed Greenwood Drive entrance location. Parking for tenants and the potential impact to parking on streets. Some interest in capacity of existing sewer and water infrastructure. Questions about possible amenities for the tenants and interest in a community garden. Grading and design of the site. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: A traffic study is being completed for the project to provide with the application. Staff Representative Comments Name and contact information (optional): Comments: �1e � ye ri o Yt ,,V� v G '� Name and contact information (optional): Comments: n XIli \ S 4 Y 475 5 v-- 5� w toe 1v2 G� S f�- f vi,a- �l�we c �' 1p J So tr�t� ram ' `" `„— id se Name and contact information (optional): 4eC,-)0.Cx.L Ito W(3;1G1111w-(X r L91y4� Comments: 7 Nance and contact information (optional): Comments: j�, tkrovt k qP prop �JAZ, pot red- h6d Name and contact information (optional): Comments- 14 Zoe& —�:ia.}�75fm«�lPdP/v'at�(Ayu,�,wa�a.ii�.e G'�ceaA ya Fnhb,P i`1L Le�G'�ic+�r/.�,E yaAa�sYwr� /964-/976. per, �, sR9 a-J�j ATTACHMENT 5 Traffic Study 0 1 WNW A I(lAl BOGERT 4050 River Center Court NE Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Office: (319) 377-4629 Fax: (319) 377-8498 Greenwood Affordable Housing Traffic Impact Study Impact Study Complete Draft 611 Greenwood Drive Iowa City, IA 52246 Prepared by: Anderson -Bogert Engineers and Surveyors, Inc. Date: 6.27.25 Cedar Rapids I hereby certify that this Engineering document was prepared by me or under my direct personal supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Engineer under the laws of the State of Iowa. Jacob M. Sprengeler Exp. Date: 12/31/2025 Iowa Registration No. 27485 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study was conducted on behalf of MMS Consultants, Inc. in order to identify potential traffic impacts relating to a proposed affordable housing development located at 611 Greenwood Drive, Iowa City, Iowa. The development is anticipated to contain 187 dwelling units within a single 4-story building. The study area described within this report includes the following intersections: • Benton Street at Greenwood Drive • Greenwood Drive at the Proposed Development Entrance • Riverside Drive at Myrtle Avenue The study reviewed existing/no-build, opening day full -build (2026), and future no-build/full-build (2046) scenarios. The current property contains an old school building which has been vacant for over 10 years. The proposed development will completely demolish the site and completely rebuild. Of the study intersections, the two located Benton Street and Riverside Drive both exhibit a high potential for crash reduction. This matches several overrepresented collision patterns observed at these locations since 2020. Several factors including sight distance, sight triangles, and non-standard intersection geometry may be contributing to the collisions at Benton Street, while general signal visibility at Myrtle Avenue along with a temporary adjacent construction project could have contributed to patterns at the Myrtle Avenue signal. Existing counts were collected by the CLIENT at Benton Street and proposed site entrance. 2021 MPOJC data was referenced at the Myrtle Avenue signal. Counts were adjusted/inflated since the observations were completed outside of the University of Iowa academic semesters. The peak hours were determined to fall between 7:15-8:15am, and 4:30-5:30pm. Based on current ITE generation rates, the site is estimated to generate about 85 peak hour tips during the AM peak, and about 82 trips during the PM peak hour. All existing/opening day scenarios operated will likely operate with acceptable capacity and LOS whether the development is constructed or not. In the future, background traffic growth (particularly on Benton Street) will reduce the functional capacity of the Greenwood Drive southbound approach. The intersection should continue to be monitored in the future as background traffic increases. Generally, the southbound approach to the Myrtle Avenue signal on Riverside Drive plots within the warranted area for the southbound right movement for a 40-mph approach. Criteria for speeds less than 40-mph are not currently established, but this location (particularly in the PM peak) plots well within the established 40-mph warrant. The eastbound left movement on Benton Street at Greenwood Drive also plots well within the warranted left auxiliary lane warrant for urban streets. The intersection on Benton Street at Greenwood Drive likely does not fully satisfy volume warrant criteria provided in the MUTCD for Warrants 1 or 2 on opening day. At some point in the future as background traffic grows, these warrants could be fully -satisfied with or without the proposed development traffic. Several methods to improve alternate modes of transportation to/from the site were discussed. Particularly, improving visibility of the pedestrian crosswalk on Benton Street at Greenwood Drive, along with the existing midblock crossing at the proposed development entrance. Several improvements could be considered in order to improve pedestrian access and overall visibility along Greenwood Drive. INTRODUCTION This study is being completed on behalf of MMS Consultants, Inc (the CLIENT), who is contracted on civil design services for TWC Development (the DEVELOPER), to study potential impacts resulting in redevelopment of 611 Greenwood Drive. The property is midway along Greenwood Drive between Myrtle Avenue and Benton Street. The developer intends to demolish the existing buildings and replace it with a multi -family low-rise affordable housing development consisting of approximately 187 dwelling units across 4 stories. STUDY AREA After consulting with MPOJC and the CLIENT, the study area limits were determined and are shown in Figure 1 below. The three study intersections include: - Greenwood Drive and West Benton Street - Greenwood Drive and Proposed Site Access - Riverside Drive and Myrtle Ave Figure 1 - Study Area EXISTING NO -BUILD CONDITIONS (2026) EXISTING LAND USE The existing site was previously developed as a school but has been in a state of disuse and vacancy for several years. Therefore, at the time of the study and traffic counts, the development site was not generating traffic. ZONING The existing site is currently zoned within the 1131-1132 public categories, which aligns with its former use as a school. ADJACENT ROADWAY NETWORK The adjacent roadway network is summarized below in Table 1. Table 1 - Existing Roadway Network Summary ADJACENT LAND USE The areas adjacent to the proposed site are generally residential housing to the west and north. The primary commercial/services land uses are to the south and east of the site. Downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa are located to the north and east. Figure 2 - Adjacent Land Uses CRASH HISTORY AND POTENTIAL FOR CRASH REDUCTION (PCR) The Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) maintains online crash databases known as the Iowa Crash Analysis Tool (ICAT) and Potential for Crash Reduction (PCR). The PCR is a statistical value that compares similarly categorized intersections and roadway stretches throughout the state. A positive PCR value represents an intersection that is performing more poorly than similarly categorized intersections throughout the state. PCR values greater than 0.2 are generally considered "statistically significant' for all crash severities. This significance category includes the worst 2.22% of all paved intersections in the state. A PCR greater than 1.0 is considered "High" and includes only the worst 0.65% of paved intersections in the state for all crash severities. The safety analysis for the study intersections is summarized in Table 2. Table 2 - Existing Crash Experience Summary Greenwood Drive at W Benton Street This intersection exhibits a statistically significant PCR value. Of the 15 crashes experienced since 2020, over 1 /3 involved collisions between southbound and eastbound traffic. About the same amount involved rear -end crashes for westbound traffic. The exact method for recording vehicle directions and origins cannot be determined directly from the ICAT turning movement map. One potential cause for this overrepresented pattern may be due to the close intersection spacing between Carriage Hill and Greenwood, creating a potential for overlapping left turns onto Benton Street as shown in Figure 3. Based on the arrows in the figure, it seems reasonable that these intersecting paths could be reported as shown in the ICAT diagram attached in the Appendix between a southbound vehicle and "eastbound" vehicle. Figure 3 - Benton Intersection Overlapping Lefts The unusual geometry is typically not considered best practice by current design standards. One countermeasure that may be considered to alleviate potential issues could be reducing the Carriage Hill driveway width and configuring this private roadway to be an entrance only. The existing parking arrangement on Carriage Hill appears to lend itself well to a potential one-way reconfiguration as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4 - Carriage Hill Parking A `i x Another potential cause for this type of crash could be the existing sight lines between eastbound vehicles and southbound vehicles, particularly on Greenwood Drive. There is a significant number of obstructions between these two approaches. A few of the notable obstructions include 2 utility poles, a bus stop shelter, stop sign and other sign assemblies, gas marker, and guy wires. Figure 5 shows the firsthand views for these movements. The additional visual stimuli combined with the existing pedestrian crossing requires a longer time for drivers to perceive and react to potential collisions. With many inputs, decision making becomes much more difficult and time consuming. Despite having the right- of-way, eastbound traffic may not be able to effectively perceive an errant southbound vehicle in time to take corrective action. Removal of obstructions within intersection sight lines is always recommended. In this instance, the bus stop could potentially be relocated away from the intersection to the north, and the city could work with the utility company to either shift or relocate existing utility poles out of the sight lines (several of the utility poles appear to also be within the current preferred setback distance provided in SODAS and AASHTO Roadside Design standards as well). The existing crash data also show that nearly 1 /3 of the crashes occurred during nighttime hours. The intersection has two luminaires in the general vicinity. Improving street lighting and uniformity within an intersection has been shown to generally reduce crashes per several studies published on USDOT's Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse website'. Some studies have found that installing new or improving existing lighting reduces crashes between 15%-25%. Figure 5 — Benton Intersection Sight Lines An additional pattern evident at this intersection is unidirectional rear -end collisions, particularly on the westbound approach. One potential reason why this manner of collision may be overrepresented may be a combination of sight distance, pedestrian presence, and inadequate advanced warning of the hidden intersection and pedestrian crossing at Greenwood Drive. 1 https://cmfclearinghouse.fhwa.dot.gov/ Westbound Benton Street traffic must traverse a vertical curve on approach to the intersection with Greenwood Drive. The existing Greenwood/Carriage Hill intersection and uncontrolled pedestrian midblock crossing are completely obscured from view until about 200' in advance of the intersection based on available streetview and site visit observations. For a posted speed of 25mph, the 85t" percentile speed is typically measured and estimated between 30mph-35mph. Given these speeds, the stopping sight distance for Benton Street should be between 200'-250' in advance of the Greenwood Drive intersection. This limited sight distance may create situations where westbound vehicles may need to rapidly break for traffic entering from Greenwood/Carriage Hill, or a quick deceleration to yield near the intersection for pedestrians in the crosswalk. In the figure above, the crosswalk is beyond the line of sight for westbound traffic. Figure 6 - Benton Intersection WB Vertical Curve Figure 6 shows a view several feet above a typical driver's eye. From about 220 feet away, the crosswalk cannot be seen, nor any pedestrians in the street. In fact, an oncoming vehicle which is at Greenwood Drive is only just becoming visible to westbound traffic. Traffic counts outside of the academic year by the CLIENT showed over 10-20 pedestrians using crosswalks within the Greenwood/Carriage Hill intersection each hour. During school, its reasonable to assume this number would be even larger. The prevalent pedestrian presence here increases exposure to potential speed differentials and collisions at this location. Due to the vertical curve, additional advanced warning could help prevent instances of hard breaking, speed differentials, and rear -end crashes. Several entities have found success installing active crossing devices such as a Rectangular -Rapid -Flashing -Beacon (RRFB) and interconnected speed/queue detection systems. Pictured in Figure 7 is a typical interconnected advanced flasher (Cedar Rapids), and a slow vehicle detection system (US 151 in Fairfax, IA). These types of advanced warning systems could be beneficial for westbound traffic in warning of either slow vehicles or interconnected with pedestrian crossing devices such as an RRFB. Figure 7 - Advanced Warning Flasher Systems Greenwood Drive @ Site Development Entrance Near the proposed site entrance, there has been one crash since 2020. It involved a pedestrian and suspected minor injury. The incident occurred during apparently normal daylight conditions. Therefore, it does not appear that there is a correctable incident pattern at this location. Riverside Drive @ Myrtle Avenue This intersection contains the highest overall PCR value of the study intersections. The primary cause of crashes at this location since 2020 have been rear -end crashes caused by "following too close". Of the 16 collisions, 11 have been this type. Out of the 11 rear -end collisions, 8 have occurred in the southbound direction. 9 crashes listed speed as one of the primary causes of the collision. It was noted that there is not currently a dedicated southbound right auxiliary lane at this signal. Southbound right turns must therefore queue and wait within the Riverside Drive through lane as they yield for pedestrians. Since Riverside Drive is a primary arterial with high -volume, each instance of yielding in the through lane potentially exposes motorists to speed differentials on the road. Increased exposure to speed differentials comes with increased risk of collision. MPO counts showed that the pedestrian volume on the Myrtle Avenue crosswalk were minimal during the peak hours. No counts were available during the midday hours where rear -end collisions have been most prominent. Another observation for the overrepresented southbound rear -ends is related to time -of -day and environmental factors. The ICAT dashboard shown in Figure 8 shows the time -of -day distribution for rear end collisions at this intersection. 6 of the 8 southbound rear -end collisions generally occurred between the hours of 11 am and 2pm. This collision window coincides with the time of day that the sun is typically aligned directly behind the southbound signal assembly. Figure 8 - ICAT Rear -End Collision Time -of -Day Time of Day 111111 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 N.. AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM r... As shown in the figure, it would appear that during midday, the sun can tend to backlight the Myrtle signal. Since the signal creates the potential for speed differentials (as the signal changes from green to yellow and red especially), increasing signal visibility can be one of the most effective safety countermeasures. In this instance, providing reflective tape for the backplates may improve night visibility. For daytime, potentially adding additional supplemental indications on the vertical pole and potentially the near -side could improve visibility. These supplemental indications would provide additional sight angle perhaps out of the sun's path and potentially limit instances where indications may be obscured by a vehicle in front (particularly larger vehicles like trucks and buses). The majority of speed -related crashes occurred in 2024 (5 of 9) which is around the same time that the new development was being constructed at this intersection. The remainder of the years saw 1 speed -related crash each. Therefore, the intersection should be monitored for speed -related collisions moving forward to determine if temporary conditions from the development possibly contributed to the 2024 spike, or if something has permanently changed to create a new pattern of speed -related collisions. Wi EXISTING TRAFFIC PARAMETERS AND DATA Counts were observed by MPOJC at the following location in 2021 while University of Iowa was in session: • Riverside Drive @ Myrtle Avenue Counts were observed by MPOJC at the following location in 2019 while University of Iowa was in session: • Benton Street @ Greenwood Drive/Carriage Hill Counts were observed by the CLIENT in May 2025 at the following locations: Benton Street @ Greenwood Drive/Carriage Hill Greenwood Drive @ Proposed Development Entrance (Briarwood Heath Center) Counts were observed by third -party Shive Hattery in September 2020 at the following location: • S Riverside Drive @ Myrtle Avenue The most recent CLIENT counts were completed after the conclusion of the University of Iowa academic calendar which ends in the first week of May. Therefore, traffic conditions (particularly in areas on or adjacent to campus) when counts were observed may differ from the typical peak hour conditions when the University of Iowa is in session. MPOJC also provided a traffic impact study for an off -site development located in the southwest corner of Myrtle Avenue and Riverside Drive. The counts for this study were completed during the COVID Pandemic where many public studies have shown a significant reduction in overall traffic nationwide. Iowa DOT AADT and turning movement data along Riverside from Benton Street to Highway 6 was also available in 2014 and 2018. The various sources of input data and associated parameters are summarized in the table below: Table 3 - Input Data Summary Source of Input Data CL • .. .. • Date May 2025 Jan 2025 July 2021 November 2020 October 2019 2014, 2018 Counts - Riverside @ Benton x x 2023 Counts - Riverside @ Highway 6 x x 2023 Counts - Riverside @ Myrtle x x 2023 Counts - Benton @ Greenwood x x 2022 Counts - Greenwood @ x 2022 Development AM Peak Hour 7:15-8:15a 7:30-8:30a 7:15-8:15a 7:00-8:00a, 7:30- 8:30 estimated AM PHF: 0.86 0.87 0.83-0.86 PM Peak Hour 4:30-5:30p 4:15-5:15p 4:30-5:30p 4:15-5:15p After 5:30pm 5:00-6:00p, 4:00-5:00 PM PHF: 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.89-0.95 Background Myrtle 0.76% Annual Growth Background Riverside 1 % 0.94% AnnualGrowth From these sources, the following existing traffic parameters were determined for the study area: AM Peak: 7:15a-8:15a PHF: 0.86 % Trucks: 1 % (No 2025 Data —Assumed from Shive Hattery and MPOJC Counts at Myrtle Signal Approach) PM Peak: 4:30p-5:30p PHF: 0.95 % Trucks: 1 % (No 2025 Data —Assumed from Shive Hattery and MPOJC Counts @ Myrtle Signal Approach) Background Growth Rate: 1% 12 The previous data source table demonstrates that none of the three study intersections have true comparable data for counts during and outside of school. Therefore, adjusting the most recent CLIENT provided counts at the Benton Street and development entrance intersections must be assumed. A previous study by Anderson Bogert located at the intersection of Highway 6, Riverside Drive, and Highway 1 in January 2025 considered similar issues. However, better direct counts were available for times during the academic year, as well as during breaks. The following is a direct excerpt from this study: "The mainline traffic [volumes collected in January 2025 during academic break were] compared at the two ends of Sturgis Corner Drive with the volumes collected during `normal" traffic operations by MPOJC in October [of 2024]. These results are shown in the table below. At both locations, one direction of travel was higher during the Anderson -Bogert counts. This is contrary to what might be expected when a majorgenerator[such as the University of Iowa] is notfullyoperational while counting. Table 4 - Previous Study Count Comparison Anderson -Bogert Count Comparison Approach @ Anderson -Bogert Approach MPOJC Approach Roadway Sturgis Corner Total Total Difference Ratio Drive Riverside Drive Northbound 765 880 -115 0.87 Riverside Drive Southbound 1173 1087 86 1.08 Highway 6 Eastbound 1392 1175 217 1.18 Highway 6 Westbound 1297 1368 -71 0.95 Since the signalized intersection counts were collected during an ideal time, they will be kept constant while the Sturgis Corner Drive counts are adjusted. At the south end of Sturgis Corner Drive, the eastbound movements were reduced and westbound increased in order to balance. At the north end, the northbound movements increased and the southbound decreased. Since the largest discrepancy was 87% between the MPOJC and Anderson -Bogert counts, all movements to/from Sturgis Corner Drive were increased by a minimum of 15% during the balancing... IDOT has counted this intersection [at Riverside Drive and Highway 6] about every 4 years since 2010, including 2010, 2014, and 2018. In 2014, the DOT counted outside of the University of Iowa academic calendar. Therefore, from 2010 — 2018 the intersection saw about 1 % annualized growth during this period. Therefore, it's estimated that the background growth rate for the study location is about 1 %. Assuming this growth rate, the 2010 DOT counts were brought forward to 2014, estimating about 45,300 as the total daily entering AADT for the signalized intersection of Highway 6 and Highway 1. The DOT annualized counts in 2014 were completed in July (outside of the university's standard academic semester) and was only about 41,500. This is about 8.5% less than predicted utilizing an average growth rate between 2010 to 2018. Therefore, the assumption to balance movements to the signalized intersection counts of MPOJC and ensure all movements to/from Sturgis Corner Drive are inflated by 15% seems adequate for analysis purposes." The comparative study found that counts along Riverside Drive (a primary arterial through the heart of the University of Iowa Campus) during a school break were as much as 15% lower in one direction, but 8% higher in the opposite direction. This suggests that while the University of Iowa is a major generator, the majority of traffic along Riverside Drive comes from vehicles unaffiliated by the University, or generally unaffected by the academic school term. The impact of counting outside the academic calendar likely provides a more substantial impact on Greenwood Drive compared with Benton Street. This is primarily due to Benton Street's collector geometry, serving significant pass -through traffic. This is in comparison to Greenwood Drive which is primarily an unconnected local street. As 13 a conservative assumption, the 2025 counts observed by the CLIENT along Greenwood Drive were inflated by 15%. As a collector road, a similar pattern on Benton Street can be reasonably assumed compared to the results seen along Riverside Drive in January of 2025. Since one direction of counts was lower outside of school, while the other was higher, inflating all Benton Street counts arbitrarily by 15% may result in an excessively conservative analysis. Therefore, a lower inflation rate on the order of 6-7% seems more appropriate. Of the two sources of count data available on Myrtle Avenue at Riverside Drive, the Shive Hattery data was taken during the COVID pandemic and may be unreliable. Therefore, the 2021 MPOJC counts for this intersection were utilized and brought forward by the assumed growth rate to 2025. Additional trips generated by the Shive-Hattery study were then added to the intersection. The other two intersections along Greenwood Drive utilized the CLIENT's recent counts from May 2025, with Greenwood Drive counts inflated by 15% and Benton Street counts inflated by 6.5%. The resulting existing/opening day no -build analysis volumes are shown in Figure 9. 14 I DRAWN BY: JMS I FIGURE 9 I APPROVED BY: ADJUSTED EXISTING/OPENING DAY gNDERSON+�BOGERT I DATE: JUNE 2025 ANALYSIS VOLUMES AM(PM) 15 OPENING DAY CONDITIONS (2025) DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT The proposed development (DEVELOPMENT) is located at 611 Green Drive, Iowa City, IA 52246. The CLIENT generally described the facility as an affordable multi -family residential facility. It will consist of 187 total units spread across 4 floors. The architect's rendering of the proposed facility is shown below in Figure 10. Figure 10 - Development Rendering The current engineer's site plan is attached below in Figure 11. The CLIENT indicated the primary site access is to Greenwood Drive. The access to Benton Street may or may not be eliminated from the design. If it is to remain, the access will be gated and used for emergency vehicles only (gate shown in PINK). BUILD -OUT SCHEDULE The entire development is scheduled to be operational upon opening day (assumed as 2026 for purposes of this study). W Figure 11 - Site Plan PROPOSED LAND USE AND ZONING The proposed zoning for this site is OPD-RM-20(MULTI-FAMILY). This is different than the zoning shown on the Johnson County Property Information Viewer at the time of this report (Institutional Public (P2)). According to the Iowa City Zoning Code at the time of this report, the development complies with permitted uses of RM-20 zoning. Based on the information provided by the CLIENT, the proposed ITE Land Use Code with is the most applicable is 223 — Affordable Housing. This land use code has a relatively "small sample size" within the ITE data. However, when compared to the next closest land use (Multifamily Mid -Rise), the estimated trips were within about 3%, which is a negligible difference for purposes of this study DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION The development characteristics were used to enter the ITE 11tb Edition generation chart for land use 221. The estimated site trip distribution is summarized below: Table 5 - Site Trip Distribution Estimated Site Trip Generation, ITE Greenwood Drive Affordable 11th Edition Housing AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour IN I OUT IN I OUT Land Use Description Code Unit of Measure Quantity Peak of Adjacent Streets, 7 - 9 Peak of Adjacent Streets, 4 - 6 Affordable Housing 223 Dwelling Units 187 25 61 48 34 Full -Build 25 61 48 34 Peak Hour Trips 86 82 Total Weekday Trips 837 17 ADJACENT OFF -SITE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENTS At the time of this report, a new development was being constructed off -site at 525 S Riverside Drive. Not yet fully operational at the time of counting, vehicles from this local generator require adjustment of the counts acquired by the CLIENT. The off -site property is located in the SW corner of the signalized intersection on Riverside Drive at Myrtle Avenue. MPOJC provided the traffic impact study for this site. According to the report, the off -site development was anticipated to generate 133 trips during the AM peak, and 179 trips during the PM peak after internal capture reductions. Only about 3% of the off -site development traffic was estimated to utilize Greenwood Drive (less than 5 vehicles total in each peak hour). Therefore, for the study intersections on Greenwood Drive, the impact of the off -site development were assumed to be negligible. The off -site development is likely to impact the Myrtle signal which is analyzed in this report. The off -site development's impact on this intersection was discussed in the existing conditions section and is accordingly accounted for in the "existing background traffic". DEVELOPMENT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The CLIENT provided that this affordable housing complex was not necessarily targeting college students as primary tenants. These types of tenants are generally more likely to utilize alternative modes of transportation to/from activities on campus than a personal car. Students would be largely attracted to the university campus which is located northeast of the site. The typical tenants for this site are likely distributed in accordance with the general commercial density distribution surrounding this site. Tenants most likely travel to and from jobs at commercial entities or are traveling to/from commercial retail/service sites. According to currently published Iowa City Laborshed Data2, about 53% of Iowa City's workforce lives within the city, and about 79% of the workforce lives within 24 miles. The average employee in the Iowa City laborshed travels about 17 minutes or less to work. Therefore, the majority of site users will likely be destined to stay within the Iowa City municipal area. From the site, the closest commercial services (grocery stores, eating establishments, etc) are located to the south and east of the site. The primary areas of commercial and professional employment (including University of Iowa, and general downtown area) are located northeasterly of the site. Therefore, its expected that the majority of site users will likely be attracted to Riverside Drive as the primary means of accessing the site. The assumed trip distribution, assignment, and opening day full -build analysis volumes are shown in the following figures. 2 https:Hiwd-Imi.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.htmI?appid=96b4ef5da19045578ce80eadfbf5827f W I DRAWN BY: I I FIGURE 12 BY: I APPROVED BY: TRIP DISTRIBUTION gNDERSON�%BOGERT DATE: JUNE 2025 TRIPS IN (TRIPS OUT) 19 DRAWN BY: JMS FIGURE 13 APPROVED BY: ANDERSONO%BOGERT TRIP ASSIGNMENT DATE: JUNE 2025 AM (PM) 20 DRAWN BY: JMS FIGURE 14 APPROVED BY: ANDERSON%BOGERT OPENING DAY FULL -BUILD VOLUMES DATE: JUNE 2025 AM(PM) 21 FUTURE CONDITIONS (2045) BUILD -OUT SCHEDULE The entire site will be constructed by opening day. Therefore, the development has the same generation potential on opening day compared with the future scenario. ADJACENT OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT At the time of this study, no pending off -site developments in the immediate vicinity of the study area were brought to the attention of Anderson -Bogert. Since the majority of adjacent properties are already developed, it is assumed that the adjacent network will continue to operate comparably with opening day. For purposes of this analysis, no other external future development or roadway network factors were assumed to impact the study area. To obtain future analysis volumes, the existing no -build volumes were inflated by the assumed background growth rate over 20 years. The development's estimated trips were then added to the network in order to obtain the future no-build/full-build analysis volumes shown in Figure 15 and Figure 16, respectively. CAPACITY ANALYSIS The current general method to analyze intersections for capacity is to utilize methods of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The two intersections with partial stop control can be analyzed using this method. The signal located on Riverside Drive at Myrtle Avenue contains a ped hold phase (phase 4) and therefore cannot be analyzed with the HCM methodology. Therefore, Synchro methodology was used instead assuming uncoordinated operation (as of the previous MPOJC project the signal had not yet been connect to the coordination corridor and does not appear to be running signal timings generated with the previous project based on data provided by MPOJC for this study). The general definitions for Level -of -Service are summarized in the table to the right. LOS A generally represents "free -flow" conditions whereas LOS represents a complete breakdown in flow. At the time of this report, Iowa SUDAS generally suggests LOS "C" as preferred for intersections overall, with LOS D preferred for individual movements. LOS D for the intersection and LOS E for individual movements are considered "acceptable" in the design year. The capacity analysis for all scenarios and study intersections are summarized in the tables below. Table 6 - LOS Definitions Highway Capacity Manual AWSC Control Delay s/veh 7th Level -of LOS by v/c <=1.0 Editioned TWSC and -Service Criteria Volume -to -Capacity Ratio v/c > 1.0 0-10 A F >10-15 B F >15-25 C F >25-35 D F >35-50 E F >50 F F Highway Capacity Level Control Delay s/veh Manual -of -Service LOS by v/c <=1.0 7th EditionSignalized Criteria Volume -to -Capacity Ratio v/c > 1.0 0-10 A F >10-20 B F >20-35 C F >35-55 D F >55-80 E F >80 F F 22 IDRAWN BY: JMS I gNDERSON %BOGERT I FIGURE I APPROVED BY: FUTURE NO -BUILD DATE: JUNE 2025 ANALYSIS VOLUMES AM(PM) 23 IDRAWN BY: JMS I gNDERSON%BOGERT I FIGURE 16 I APPROVED BY: FUTURE FULL -BUILD DATE: JUNE 2025 ANALYSIS VOLUMES AM(PM) 24 BENTON STREET AT GREENWOOD DRIVE Table 7 - Benton Street At Greenwood Drive Capacity Analysis No -Build Under opening day conditions, the intersection currently operates with acceptable LOS. All movements operate at LOS C or better. The southbound movement is the most critical, at LOS C. According to the HCM methodology, the expected southbound queue is usually less than one vehicle. The future no -build scenario sees the LOS for the southbound approach degrade to LOS E. This is primarily due to the background traffic growth assumption along Benton Street. With nearly 1,000 combined EB/WB vehicles during the PM peak, southbound traffic may have difficulty entering Benton Street due to the heavy EB/WB traffic. The longest expected queue may exceed 5 vehicles. 25 Full -Build The intersection generally continues to operate comparably with the no -build scenario. The intersection's performance will be primarily driven by the background traffic already using the intersection. GREENWOOD DRIVE AT DEVELOPMENT ENTRANCE Table 8 - Greenwood Drive At Development Entrance Capacity Analysis No -Build and Full -Build Assuming the two individual site driveways act "as one", the intersection will operate with good LOS during both all scenarios. Neither the background growth nor the proposed development appear to have noticeable impact on the capacity and performance of this intersection. 26 RIVERSIDE DRIVE AT MYRTLE AVENUE Table 9 - Riverside Drive At Myrtle Avenue Capacity Analysis No -Build This intersection operates with good LOS B or better for both no -build scenarios. For all no -build scenarios, the intersection operates with LOS B or better. The most critical movements are eastbound and southbound. Both operate with good LOS C or better for both time horizons. Full -Build The proposed development will likely not have a noticeable impact on individual movement delay for the opening day scenario. The analysis suggests that all movement delays change by less than around 2 seconds per vehicle. In the PM future full -build scenario, delay appears to increase by nearly 10 seconds per vehicle but still operates with acceptable LOS D. This increase is likely due to the overall coordination corridor parameters of the Synchro model. Anderson-Bogert's previous Riverside Drive model was utilized and included the entire coordination corridor. The Synchro delay methodology is more sensitive to neighboring intersection parameters than the HCM methodology. This likely accounts for the majority of the apparent delay increase. 27 WARRANT ANALYSIS AUXILIARY LANES At the time of this report, Iowa SUDAS design standards specify current guidelines for evaluating potential uncontrolled auxiliary lane warrants. The guidance currently references NCHRP Report 745 (Left Turn Treatments) and NCHRP Report 457 (Right Turn Treatments). NCHRP 745 warrants are not dependent on speed. NCHRP Report 457 was originally based upon rural high- speed roads. Therefore, the research presents warrant criteria that changes as the posted/85th percentile speeds change. The lowest relationship criteria curve provided in this report is 40-mph. All roads within the study area most likely have an 85th percentile speed which is at or below 40 mph. Therefore, the warrant criteria presented in Report 457 are not directly applicable to the curves shown in the tables below. Furthermore, the Myrtle Avenue intersection is signalized. Therefore, the uncontrolled approach warrant criteria do not directly apply. However, its worth consideration for periods during green where southbound traffic is free flowing during the peak hour. The following table shows how the study analysis plots against the closest relevant warrant criteria published in Report 457. Table 10 - Right Auxiliary Lane Warrant Criteria Right -Turn Bay Warrant Benton Street @ Greenwood Drive WBR 140 140 s 120 -40 mph ANNBPM r 120 vX 100 Analysis Volumes Lar 100 80 E 80 > 60PMFFull-Build o > 60 40PMFNo-Build D 40 ton -Build 0 20 AM o, 20 pening 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Major -Road Approach Volume, (one direction), veh/hr Right -Turn Bay Warrant Greenwood Drive @ Development NBR -40 mph X Analysis Volumes 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Major -Road Approach Volume, (one direction), veh/hr Right -Turn Bay Warrant Four -Lane Riverside 140 , Dr @ Myrtle PMF Full -Build AMOFuli-Buil AMFFuII-Build 120 r PMO Full -Build t 100 •`Jn, PMF No -Build MF No -Build E 80 PM Ex/Opening o NB E 60 -40 mph 40 X Analysis Volumes JAMEx/Opening NB 20 0 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 Major -Road Approach Volume, one direction, veh/hr 28 Benton Street @ Greenwood Avenue WBR The table above suggests that the WBR movement from Benton Street to Greenwood Drive does not satisfy warrant criteria even if the 85th percentile speed was 40 mph. Greenwood Drive @ Development NBR The table shows that this location is unlikely to satisfy warrant criteria even if the 85th percentile speed was 40 mph on this road. Riverside Drive @ Myrtle Avenue SBR This is a signalized approach. Therefore, the warrant criteria is not directly applicable. The need for a turn bay is more typically based on capacity and safety operations. It can be noted from the table that if the southbound traffic was uncontrolled (such as may be the case during extended periods of green indication) the PM traffic is heavy enough for all scenarios that the SBR movement would fall comfortably within a warrant for an 85th percentile speed of 40 mph. Although the warrant criteria cannot be directly applied, previous research and guidance from AASHTO and SUDAS both state that providing auxiliary lanes at intersections has been demonstrated to improve safety and operations. Therefore, even though the capacity of the intersection appears to be adequate for all study scenarios, a southbound right dedicated lane may help to improve and prevent rear -end collisions which have been overrepresented at this intersection. As previously discussed, a spike of collisions occurred in 2024 (nearly 5 of 9 collisions) while other years only experienced one or less collisions. This year happened to coincide with adjacent construction at the intersection. Additional monitoring is required to determine if a new pattern has truly been created or if 2024 was an anomaly. The following table demonstrates the left Table 11 - Left Auxiliary Lane Criteria auxiliary lane warrant criteria within the study area. Left -Turn Treatment for Urban/Suburban Arterials -Three Leg The proposed development entrance does not Greenwood Drive @ Development SBL approach the established criteria during either 50 L 45 AMO Full -Build opening day peak hour. In the future, the SBL r 40 PMF No -Build AMF FuII-Build movement could approach the established ? 35 warrant criteria. The table at right shows that o 25 > 20 -Left-Turn Lane Warm nt the AM future scenario only just plots to the right of the warrant curve. 10 75 X Analysis Volumes v pM Ex/O NB AMFNo-Buil pening 5 ° AM Ex/-0pening NB The future data plots are therefore sensitive to 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 the assumptions (existing count inflation and Major Highway OpposingVolume(veh/hr/In) background inflation) made within this report. Therefore, the location should continue to be Left -Turn Treatment for Urban/Suburban Arterials -Three Leg monitored as background traffic grows in order Greenwood Drive @ Benton Street EBL to confirm assumptions within this report. 120 " / AMF Full -Build �c AMFNo-Build 100 AM Ex/Opening NB At the Benton Street and Greenwood Drive > CFuII-Build intersection, the EBL movement consistently " 80 PMFFuII-Build 60 AMO FuII-Build plots well to the right and above the > -Left-Turn lane Warm nt established warrant curve for all scenarios 40 �PMFNo-Bui(' * Analysis Volumes whether the development is constructed or 20 PMEx/OpeningNB not. The capacity analysis earlier suggested ° p Y Y gg ° 100 zoo 300 aoo soo soo goo that the delay for this movement is acceptable Major Highway OpposingVolume(veh/hr/ln) but does suggest that the longest queue is expected to be one vehicle. 29 Therefore, there may be some operational and safety benefits for providing even a short queuing space (50 feet or less) outside of the major eastbound through lane. SIGNALIZED CONTROL Since the intersection along Greenwood Drive at the proposed development operates with good LOS, mostly free of auxiliary lane warrants, and generally free from a significant crash history, it was assumed this intersection would not satisfy signal warrant criteria for any scenario. The challenges involved with the dual private approach could potentially create more operational issues than signalization would solve. On Benton Street at Greenwood Drive, the signal warrant analysis is summarized in the table below. Anderson - Bogert did not collect any new counts for this report, and the CLIENT completed counts while school was not in session during only the assumed peak hours. Therefore, at least 8 hours of count data was not collected for this study. To fully and confidentially state that MUTCD warrant criteria are met, 8 hours of data are needed for volume Warrant 1 and 4 for Warrant 2. Instead, the peak hour counts were extrapolated over 24 hours utilizing a typical municipal streets daily distribution as reported by Iowa DOT in the most recent 2022 Annual Automated Traffic Counter Report. 12am-12pm were extrapolated using the AM peak hour data, and 12pm-12am were extrapolated using PM peak data. The existing data shows a significantly higher volume of traffic on the southbound Greenwood Drive approach in the PM. As a result, the extrapolated 24-hour data is provided in the Appendix shows that most hours where criteria are satisfied tend to follow from the PM peak hour. Therefore, this report cannot definitely state whether signal criteria are fully satisfied. Instead, the extrapolated data based on a typical similar road classification was used to estimate the likelihood of this intersection's potential to satisfy warrant criteria. Table 12 - Signal Warrant Estimate The table above suggests that warrants are not satisfied for either the existing or opening day full -build scenarios. However, as background traffic grows heavier (particularly EB/WB), the intersection may satisfy criteria at a point in the future before the +20-analysis period expires. In particular, Warrant 1 B is geared towards intersections where the major street traffic is so heavy that it causes excessive delay to the minor street (as opposed to Warrant 1 A which is overall volume shared between all approaches). The Benton Street intersection at first glance appears to be heavily weighted to the EBWB movements. We see this reflected in the warrant summary table above under the column for Warrant 1 B. The charts in the Appendix demonstrate that the nearly all the warranted hours are satisfied based on the PM extrapolated data. Therefore, additional counting during regular University operations is recommended in the future as background traffic continues to grow towards the point of fully satisfying warrant criteria. 30 ANALYSIS OF SITE GEOMETRICS ACCESS MANAGEMENT The proposed development has two (2) access points. The primary access is located on the local Greenwood Drive roadway. The alternate access is to be gated and restricted for emergency use only (per the CLIENT). This access is on the collector road. According to SUDAS, direct access to individual properties is generally discouraged along arterials and collectors. It would appear that the proposed site design follows this design guidance with the main entrance being located off of the adjacent collector road. The gated access also falls within the vertical curve portion of Benton Street which reduces sight distance for EB/WB traffic along Benton. Therefore, if this access is to remain, we recommend it is gated and restricted for emergency use only. Figure 17 - Proposed Access The primary site access will replace an existing driveway. There is only one other driveway located on the eastern half of Greenwood Drive. It sits immediately to the east of the proposed site. SUDAS does not list any specific separation requirements for residential driveways on local streets in Table 5L-3.05. Typical best practice is to separate driveways as much as feasible and line them up directly across from other driveways/approaches. The existing site poses grade challenges that may create more safety issues than it solves if the site's driveway is shifted to the west. Furthermore, the intersection has not experienced a statistically significant crash history since 2015 (oldest crash data published on ICAT by the Iowa DOT). Thus, the existing configuration does not seem to cause a correctable pattern of crashes. The previous school has been closed since about 2012, so crash data only covers years where the driveway access has likely not seen regular use. Based on current geometry, it doesn't appear that separating the driveways would result in significant line -of -sight improvements. Therefore, the primary improvement which would provide the most benefit would involve private collaboration to combine both driveways into a single access. However, since no existing safety issues are apparent at this location, additional monitoring may be more appropriate for opening day. 31 MULTI -MODAL ANALYSIS Figure 17 above shows an existing mid -block crossing on Greenwood Drive between the two existing driveways. The proposed site plans in the Appendix appear to show this sidewalk generally reconstructed in this current location. The lone recorded collision at this location since 2020 involved a pedestrian. Figure 18 - Existing Crosswalk Since cyclists and pedestrians may increase as a result of the development, advanced visibility may help improve the safety of this midblock crossing. With the driveways on either side, the current W11-2 warning signs shown in the figure below also contain diagonal downward arrows on supplemental plaques. Typically, this configuration is used when the signs are posted at the actual crossing. In advance, these signs should list the distance to the crossing. With the proposed design, the crosswalk remains wedged between the existing driveways. If one vehicle is queue at both driveways, the pedestrians might be completely obscured to through traffic. The pedestrian's sight line could also potentially be restricted during these instances. The is an existing park with trails located to the northeast of the site. The closest transit route currently runs to the west of the site along Woodside Place. This is the only pedestrian crossing currently designated between Woodside Place and Myrtle Avenue. Therefore, some type of crossing should remain across Greenwood in order to provide a safe location. A few potential ways to improve visibility of the crossing may include: • Reducing the width of Greenwood Drive at the mid -block crossing to create the feeling of mini "bumpouts" where crosswalk warning sign with arrow plaque can be placed at the crossing along with corresponding advanced warning signs on each approach. Signs may be installed with RRFB flashing devices as an additional visibility improvement. • Square up the existing midblock crossing by adjusting the proposed site driveway to be perpendicular to Greenwood Avenue, relocating the northside ramp to the other side of the residential driveway. This is sketched in Figure 19. Relocate crosswalk to east side of the Briarwood driveway, square the development driveway up with Greenwood Drive, consider sidewalk along the south side of Greenwood Drive westward to Woodside Place and provide an additional pedestrian crossing at this location. The combination of these items could improve crosswalk safety, visibility, and overall vulnerable road user accessibility within the corridor. The pedestrian crossing should still receive pavement markings, signage at the crossing, along with advanced signage on the approaches. This may need to be coordinated with existing advanced railroad warning signs. This concept is shown below in Figure 20. 32 Figure 19 - Squared up Crosswalk Figure 20 - Potential Site Driveway Improvements 33 TRANSIT ACCESS The closest transit route is the Oakcrest route which is shown in the figure below. As a result, residents riding public transportation may be likely to exit the site from the north and head westward along Greenwood Drive. Therefore, potentially providing sidewalk along the south side of Greenwood Drive towards Woodside Place, along with a crossing at Woodside Place might provide a logical path for pedestrians that discourages jaywalking. Figure 21 - Transit Route Map Woodsfyo o _ 815 Oakcrest St Brookland Park t Oakcrest Sb8 Woodside Dr Opd eor� Oaknoll Retirement Center #2 v i Benton St & Oaknoll Dr Greenw Dr 8 Bento t x � - o Benton Hill Park S Lot 48 Myrtle �n m O 'owa t^terstate Railroad W Benton St 34 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS The site will generally allow the existing network to continue operating comparably with existing conditions. The site and it's generated traffic are not likely to create any new inherent capacity, safety, and operational issues within the study area. With this in mind, the following conclusions and recommendations were formulated by this report: 1. Consider immediate low-cost safety improvements for Benton Street at Greenwood Drive Intersection relating to existing crash experience This intersection exhibits a high potential for crash reduction and several apparent crash patterns. Several low-cost improvements which could potentially help include better crosswalk or "hidden driveway" signage, particularly on the westbound approach where a vertical curve hides the Greenwood intersection and pedestrian intersection until westbound vehicles are at or within safe stopping distance. An RRFB system could increase visibility of the pedestrian crossing, along with an interconnected advanced flasher for the westbound approach. The flasher system would illuminate when the RRFB's at the ped crossing are activated. An additional immediate improvement to consider would be removal of obstacles from within intersection sight triangles. Particularly between the southbound and eastbound traffic, an overrepresented collision pattern between these two movements is apparent. Increasing visibility between the two movements by relocating utility poles and potentially the existing bus stop away from the intersection could improve line of sight. An additional consideration now or in the future may be to reconfigure the Carriage Hill access as an entrance only, or a right -in -right -out. This would eliminate overlapping SBL between Carriage Hill and Greenwood Drive which could contribute to the existing crash patterns. The MPOJC and Iowa City should continue to monitor this intersection as background traffic grows. As Benton Street traffic grows, Greenwood Drive capacity will continue to degrade, and eastbound left traffic will experience higher delay. Without a dedicated eastbound -left lane, these vehicles may start to regularly queuing in the through lane of Benton Street thereby disrupting traffic. The EBL movement does not currently appear to be causing operational or safety issues at the intersection despite meeting a left - turn bay auxiliary warrant for all existing and full -build scenarios. As background traffic grows, the city should start planning for the potential addition of an EBL auxiliary lane at this location. 2. Monitor the Riverside Drive at Myrtle Avenue Intersection The City should continue to monitor the safety performance of this intersection, particularly for southbound traffic. The existing crash history shows an overrepresented pattern of southbound rear -end collisions. These appear to have spiked in 2024 (5 of 9 crashes since 2020) which coincided with the new development construction at this intersection. The city should monitor the intersection over the next several years to see if something in 2024 changed intersection conditions permanently, or if the southbound collision pattern for 2024 was an anomaly. If collision issues persist, the city should consider countermeasures to reduce this collision pattern. Several countermeasures which could help would include reflective backplates on the signal heads (primarily night visibility), additional supplemental southbound signal heads located on the right side of the road (on the vertical signal pole and/or a near side supplemental head), and potentially a southbound right turning lane. According to established criteria, if Riverside Drive 85t" percentile speeds were 40 mph, this location would comfortably satisfy auxiliary lane criteria (particularly in the PM peak hour). 35 3. Optimize Site Driveway Alignment to Greenwood Drive The proposed site driveway could be modified from the existing alignment to be at a perpendicular (90 degree) angle with Greenwood Drive. This would help improve site lines to Greenwood Drive (which currently is uphill toward the west). This realignment would also give more space for the existing midblock crosswalk (should it remain in place) or allow it to be squared up with Greenwood Drive as well (ideal pedestrian crossing is perpendicular). 4. Improve Visibility and Alignment of Existing Mid -Block Greenwood Drive Pedestrian Crossing and Sidewalk Network With the current dual driveway configuration, this midblock crossing does not have the best visibility for pedestrians or motorists. The warning signing is not quite typical per MUTCD application with the current placement of the W11-2 crossing warning signs and diagonal plaques which are to be installed at the crossing location, not 50' in advance. In conjunction with the potential site driveway perpendicular adjustment, additional improvements can be made to improve crossing safety and visibility. The crossing should be squared up with Greenwood Drive so that crossing is perpendicular to vehicular traffic. Warning signs should be placed at the crossing, and in advance of both approaches per MUTCD guidance. Advanced warning signage may need to be coordinated with the current advanced railroad warning signage to ensure proper visibility and effectiveness of both signs. Additional consideration should be made for potentially relocating the midblock crossing eastward to the other side of existing Briarwood driveway. This would improve geometry and visibility for the crossing compared with the existing location between twin driveways. In conjunction with the mid -block shift, consideration should be given to adding sidewalk along the south side of Greenwood Drive up to Woodside place with a designated crossing to the transit stop. This would be one potential route for pedestrians that would provide safe connectivity to the transit stop, and sidewalk network already along the north side of Greenwood Drive to Benton Street. The Greenwood Drive alignment appears to contain adequate stopping sight distance for design speeds between 30-35 mph. This crosswalk would also require appropriate advanced warning signage to maintain visibility. 36 APPENDICES Previous Shive-Hattery TIS (not attached - available from MPOJC) Synchro Files or Reports - Available Upon Request 37 AFFORDABLE HOUSING o 611 GREENWOOD DRIVE IOWA CITY, IOWA o TRA6 STANDARD LEGEND AND NOTES IW i C4 �P[sPAVINGuLEGEND [rvry o II it r.: sm si suae.s I LU III s� suea.x I Q 611 GR—EENWOOD IOWA w 0 a Z 3 W 3s (ii � G J� REVISIONS IPA I=+= C120 Benton St @ Greenwood Collision Diagram 15 Crashes 8/29/2022 6/16/2022 11/5/2024 3/21/2024- Q@ * 0 s 5/14/2022 12/4/2023 _ 6/13/2 223 4/27/2023 9/244//20�21 7/20/2024 n*- 10/5/2021 =223*- 10/20/2021 1 /17/20231 10/1 /2024 Clear 0 Straight Parked * Fatal Fixed objects: < Stopped Erratic 0 Major o General a Pole Unknown Out of control C Minor Ea Signal o Curb ® Tree �5 Animal Backing Right turn O Injury DUI < Overtaking Left turn Pedestrian a 3rd vehicle Sideswipe U-turn Bicycle p Nighttime Crash Magic Online 6/17/2025 Crash Magic Online Riverside @ Myrtle Collision Diagram 16 Crashes O N O N IN Id 0 Straight < Stopped Unknown Backing Overtaking < Sideswipe N_ N NN NN N N � 2/21/2024--J 7/31 /2021 Clear 2/13/2024� 11 /18/2024-1 .'IT. I� Parked * Fatal Fixed objects: �. Erratic 0 Major ❑ General a Pole Out of control C Minor ® Signal o Curb ® Tree �5 Animal Right turn O Injury DUI Left turn Pedestrian a 3rd vehicle U-turn Bicycle p Nighttime Crash Magic Online 6/17/2025 Crash Magic Online Location: Population: Analysis By: 185,000 JMS Date Data Taken: By: Comment: JMS Existing/Opening Day NB Roadway Major Street Name: Benton Street Number of Approach Lanes: 1 85th Percentile Speed (mph): 30 North -South Street: Critical Stopped Approach # of Lanes: 1 Intersection Legs: 3 Entering Traffic TotalMajor• Hour Benton Street Greenwood Drive Entering Ending INEB WB NB SB Traffic 0100 39 24 1 4 68 0200 25 16 0 3 44 0300 19 12 0 2 33 0400 19 12 0 2 33 0500 36 23 1 4 64 0600 95 59 2 11 167 0700 201 125 4 23 353 0800 436 271 8 50 765 0900 412 256 8 47 723 1000 342 212 6 39 599 1100 360 224 7 41 632 1200 279 343 10 106 738 1300 306 376 11 117 810 1400 300 369 11 114 794 1500 319 392 11 122 844 1600 376 463 13 143 995 1700 396 487 14 151 1048 1800 386 475 14 147 1022 1900 280 344 10 107 741 2000 214 263 8 82 567 2100 171 211 6 65 453 2200 122 149 4 46 321 2300 79 97 3 30 209 2400 48 59 2 18 127 Data Minor Street Greenwood Drive 1 30 x Street Minor Stop Cntrl Stop Cntrl Total Approach Direction Delay, sec 63 4 41 3 31 2 31 2 59 4 154 11 326 23 707 50 668 47 554 39 584 41 622 106 682 117 669 114 711 122 839 143 883 151 861 147 624 107 477 82 382 65 271 46 176 30 107 18 m m p 1A 1B Z3 m D 0 .0 0 X X X X X X X X 1 X1 X I X Hours Met 1 13 14 3 Hours Required I 8 INININ 8 8 4 Warrant Met: N Anderson -Bogert Engineers Surveyors, Inc. Location: Population: Analysis By: 185,000 JMS Date Data Taken: By: Comment: JMS Opening Day FB Roadway Major Street Name: Benton Street Number of Approach Lanes: 1 85th Percentile Speed (mph): 30 North -South Street: Critical Stopped Approach # of Lanes: 1 Intersection Legs: 3 Entering Traffic TotalMajor• Hour Benton Street Greenwood Drive Entering Ending INEB WB NB SB Traffic 0100 39 24 1 6 70 0200 26 16 0 4 46 0300 19 12 0 3 34 0400 19 12 0 3 34 0500 37 23 1 6 67 0600 96 60 2 15 173 0700 203 127 4 31 365 0800 440 275 8 68 791 0900 416 260 8 64 748 1000 345 216 6 53 620 1100 364 227 7 56 654 1200 284 348 10 113 755 1300 311 381 11 124 827 1400 305 374 11 122 812 1500 324 397 11 130 862 1600 383 469 13 153 1018 1700 403 494 14 161 1072 1800 393 482 14 157 1046 1900 284 349 10 114 757 2000 218 267 8 87 580 2100 174 214 6 70 464 2200 124 152 4 49 329 2300 81 99 3 32 215 2400 49 60 2 19 130 Data Minor Street Greenwood Drive 1 30 x Street Minor Stop Cntrl Stop Cntrl Total Approach Direction Delay, sec 63 6 42 4 31 3 31 3 60 6 156 15 330 31 715 68 676 64 561 53 591 56 632 113 692 124 679 122 721 130 852 153 897 161 875 157 633 114 485 87 388 70 276 49 180 32 109 19 m m p 1A 1B Z3 m D 0 .0 0 X X X X X X X X X X X X I X I X1 X Hours Met 3 13 16 3 Hours Required I 8 INININ 8 8 4 Warrant Met: N Anderson -Bogert Engineers Surveyors, Inc. Location: Population: 185,000 Analysis By: JMS Date Data Taken: By: JMS Comment: Future No -Build Roadway Major Street Name: Benton Street Number of Approach Lanes: 1 85th Percentile Speed (mph): 30 North -South Street: Critical Stopped Approach # of Lanes: 1 Intersection Legs: 3 Entering Traffic Total•Highest Hour Benton Street Greenwood Drive Entering Ending EB WB NB SB Traffic 0100 47 29 1 5 82 0200 31 19 1 4 55 0300 23 15 0 3 41 0400 23 14 0 3 40 0500 44 28 1 5 78 0600 116 72 2 13 203 0700 245 152 5 28 430 0800 532 331 10 61 934 0900 503 313 9 58 883 1000 417 259 8 48 732 1100 440 274 8 50 772 1200 339 419 8 130 896 1300 371 459 9 142 981 1400 364 450 9 139 962 1500 387 479 10 148 1024 1600 457 565 11 175 1208 1700 481 595 12 184 1272 1800 469 580 12 180 1241 1900 339 420 8 130 897 2000 260 322 6 99 687 2100 208 257 5 80 550 2200 148 183 4 56 391 2300 96 119 2 37 254 2400 58 72 1 22 153 Data Minor Street Greenwood Drive 1 30 x Critical Critical Street Minor Stop Cntrl Stop Cntrl Total Approach Direction Delay, sec 76 5 50 4 38 3 37 3 72 5 188 13 397 28 863 61 816 58 676 48 714 50 758 130 830 142 814 139 866 148 1022 175 1076 184 1049 180 759 130 582 99 465 80 331 56 215 37 130 22 m m p Warrants 1A 1B Z3 m D 0 .0 0 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Hours Met 3 18 18 4 Hours Required I 8 1NJYJY 8 8 4 Warrant Met: Y Anderson -Bogert Engineers Surveyors, Inc. Location: Population: Analysis By: 185,000 JMS Date Data Taken: By: JMS Comment: Future Full -Build Roadway Major Street Name: Benton Street Number of Approach Lanes: 1 85th Percentile Speed (mph): 30 North -South Street: Critical Stopped Approach # of Lanes: 1 Intersection Legs: 3 Entering Traffic TotalMajor• Hour Benton Street Greenwood Drive Entering Ending INEB WB NB SB Traffic 0100 47 30 1 7 85 0200 31 20 1 5 57 0300 24 15 1 3 43 0400 23 14 1 3 41 0500 45 28 1 7 81 0600 117 73 3 17 210 0700 247 154 7 36 444 0800 536 335 16 79 966 0900 506 317 15 75 913 1000 420 263 13 62 758 1100 443 277 13 65 798 1200 345 424 8 137 914 1300 378 465 9 150 1002 1400 370 456 9 147 982 1500 393 484 10 156 1043 1600 465 572 11 184 1232 1700 489 602 12 194 1297 1800 477 587 12 189 1265 1900 345 425 8 137 915 2000 264 326 6 105 701 2100 212 260 5 84 561 2200 150 185 4 60 399 2300 98 120 2 39 259 2400 59 73 1 23 156 Minor Street Greenwood Drive 1 30 x Street Minor Stop Cntrl Stop Cntrl Total Approach Direction Delay, sec 77 7 51 5 39 3 37 3 73 7 190 17 401 36 871 79 823 75 683 62 720 65 769 137 843 150 826 147 877 156 1037 184 1091 194 1064 189 770 137 590 105 472 84 335 60 218 39 132 23 al m p 1A 1B Z3 m CD D 0 .0 0 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Hours Met 511018 6 Hours Required I 8 1NJYJY 8 8 4 Warrant Met: Y Anderson -Bogert Engineers Surveyors, Inc. Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street and Carriage Hill, Iowa City Pedestrians MMS Project #11603-001 Wednesday 05/21/2025 7:00-9:00am Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound Intersection Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 7:00-7:15 Total 58 1 2 1 50 1 113 5 7:15-7:30 Total 1 83 4 52 2 142 6 2 7:30-7:45 Total 1 101 1 66 1 1 171 1 1 7:45-8:00 Total 1 132 1 51 3 188 3 2 8:00-8:15 Total 11 85 2 2 58 1581 6 8:15-8:30 Total 63 1 65 1 130 4 8:30-8:45 Total 74 2 1 2 58 137 4 5 1 8:45-9:00 Total 1 77 2 54 1 135 1 2 Uninflated Peak 14 401 0 1 0 7 2 227 Inflation Factor 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% Adjusted Peak Total 15 427 0 1 0 7 2 242 Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street and Carriage Hill, Iowa City MMS Project #11603-001 Wednesday 05/21/2025 7:00-9:00am 1 0 0 6 659 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 1 0 0 6 702 Eastbound Left Thru Right Northbound Left Thru Right Westbound Left Thru Right Southbound Left Thru Right 7:00 to 8:00 3 374 0 2 0 7 1 219 1 1 0 6 7:15 to 8:15 14 401 0 1 0 7 2 227 1 0 0 6 7:30 to 8:30 13 381 0 1 0 4 2 240 1 0 0 5 7:45 to 8:45 12 354 0 2 0 5 4 232 0 0 0 4 8:00 to 900 12 299 0 2 0 6 4 235 0 1 0 1 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound 15 5 0 0 16 5 0 0 14 3 0 0 17 2 5 1 15 01 71 1 614 659 0.87633 647 613 560 Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street antl Carriage Hill, Iowa City MMS Project M603-001 Pedestrians W,dnestlay 05/21/2025 4:00-6:00pm Eastbound Northbound Westbountl South bountl Intersection Total Eastbnuntl Westbound Nnrthbnuntl Snuthbnuntl Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 4:00-4:15 Total 76 1 2 2 88 169 1 1 4:15-4:30 Total 2 84 1 104 191 3 11 4:30-4:45 Total 90 1 1 2 118 2 1 1 216 2 3 2 4:45-5:00 Total 1 101 1 4 1 136 244 5 5:00-5:15 Total 83 4 2 136 1 226 1 5:15-5:30 Total 87 1 1 1 2 105 1 198 2 9 5:30-5:45 Total 1 106 7 2 107 223 1 1 5:45-6:00 Total 1 1 84 1 1 1 1 1 1 96 1 1 1 183 1 Uninflatetl Peak 1 361 2 3 0 9 7 495 4 1 0 1 884 Inflation Factor 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% Atllustetl Peak Total 1 384 2 3 0 10 7 527 4 1 0 1 941 820 877 884 891 0.91291 830 Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street and Greenwood Drive, Iowa City Pedestrians MMS Project #11603-001 Wednesday 05/21/2025 7:00-9:00am Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbound Intersection Total Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 7:00-7:15 Total 14 47 49 1 4 2 117 1 7:15-7:30 Total 25 62 45 9 3 7 151 2 1 7:30-7:45 Total 21 80 60 8 2 7 178 7:45-8:00 Total 27 106 1 45 16 1 5 6 205 2 8:00-8:15 Total 12 75 56 8 8 4 163 8:15-8:30 Total 13 51 54 16 1 11 146 1 8:30-8:45 Total 12 63 56 3 4 4 142 8:45-9:00 Total 18 1 61 47 3 2 7 138 Unadjusted Pea 85 323 0 Factor 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% Adjusted Peak 91 344 0 0 0 0 0 206 6.5% 6.5% 0 0 0 0 219 Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street and Greenwood Drive, Iowa City MMS Project 411603-001 Wednesday 05/21/2025 7:00-9:00am 41 18 0 24 697 6.5% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 44 21 0 28 747 Eastbound Left Thru Right Northbound Left Thru Right Westbound Left Thru Right Southbound Left Thru Right 7:00 to 8:00 87 295 0 0 0 0 0 199 34 14 0 22 7:15 to 8:15 85 323 0 0 0 0 0 206 41 18 0 24 7:30 to 8:30 73 312 0 0 0 0 0 215 48 16 0 28 7:45 to 8:45 64 295 0 0 0 0 0 211 43 18 0 25 8:00 to 9:00 55 250 0 0 0 0 0 213 30 15 0 26 Eastbound Westbound 4 2 4 1 3 0 3 0 1 0 651 697 692 656 589 0.85 Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street and Greenwood Drive, Iowa City M MS Project #11603-001 Pedestrians Wednesday 05/21/20254:00-6:00pm Eastbound Northbound Westbound Southbountl Intersection Total 2019 MPO1C Eastbound Westbound Left Thin Right Left Than Right Left Than Right Left Thin Right 4:00-4:15 Total ] 69 78 9 6 12 181 4:15-4:30 Total 3 81 91 9 6 14 204 3 2 4:30-4:45 Total 7 84 102 8 14 1 20 236 2 1 4:45-5:00 Total 11 94 110 4 10 1 26 256 1 1 5:00-5:15 Total 7 80 119 9 8 20 243 1 1 5:15-5:30 Total ]1 81 87 8 11 21 215 2 1 5:30-5:45 Total 6 100 93 7 8 1 14 1 228 213 1 5:45-6:00 Total 6 79 80 1 ] 1 6 1 1 17 1 195 249 Unadjusted Peak 32 339 0 0 0 0 0 418 29 43 2 87 950 Factor 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% Adjusted Peak 34 361 0 0 0 0 0 445 31 49 2 100 1022 Traffic Count Intersection Benton Street and Greenwood Drive, Iowa City MMS Project #11603-001 W etlnestlav 05/21/2025 4:00-6:00om 877 939 950 0.927734 942 881 Traffic Count Intersection Greenwood Drive and Briarwood Entrance, Iowa City, Iowa Pedestrians MMS Project #11603-001 Thursday 05/22/2025 7:00-9:00am Eastbound Northbound Westbound Intersection Total Eastbound Westbound Thru Right Left Right Left Thru 7:00-7:15 Total 12 4 1 2 8 27 12 1 7:15-7:30 Total 14 4 2 3 3 6 32 5 7:30 - 7:45 Total 30 7 3 5 1 8 54 6 7:45-8:00 Total 39 7 2 4 2 12 66 6 1 8:00-8:15 Total 19 4 2 2 3 13 43 11 2 8:15-8:30 Total 15 7 1 2 5 11 411 7 8:30-8:45 Total 16 4 2 5 3 10 40 10 8:45 - 9:00 Total 16 2 1 2 0 7 28 3 179 195 204 0.77 190 152 Uninflated Peak 102 22 9 14 9 39 195 28 3 741 0.772727 0 0 Inflation Factor 15.0% 15.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15.0% 15.0% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% Adjusted Peak Total 117 25 9 14 10 45 220 30 3 789 1 0 0 Traffic Count Intersection Greenwood Drive and Briarwood Entrance, Iowa City, Iowa MMS Project #11603-001 Thursday 05/22/2025 7:00-9:00a m Eastbound Thru Right Northbound Left Right Westbound Left Thru 7:00 to 8:00 95 22 8 12 8 34 7:15 to 8:15 102 22 9 14 9 39 7:30 to 8:30 103 25 8 13 11 44 7:45 to 8:45 89 22 7 13 13 46 8:00 to 9:00 1 66 17 6 11 11 41 Eastbound Westbound 29 2 28 3 30 3 34 3 31 2 Traffic Count Intersection Greenwood Drive and Briarwood Entrance, Iowa City, Iowa Pedestrians MMS Project #11603-001 Thursday 05122120254:00-6:00pm Eastbound Northbound Westbound Intersection Total Eastbound Westbound Thru Right Left Right Left Thru 4:00-4:15 Total 14 4 5 1 2 21 47 3 7 4:15-4:30 Total 2 1 2 2 4 24 35 3 3 4:30-4:45 Total 11 2 5 8 2 34 62 1 4 4:45 - 5:00 Total 16 2 6 4 4 27 59 3 8 5:00-5:15 Total 14 2 4 3 6 22 51 5 6 5:15 - 5:30 Total 21 4 8 3 6 25 67 2 7 5:30-5:45 Total 12 1 3 2 2 14 34 2 9 5:45-6:00 Total 4 1 5 1 1 17 29 5 3 Uninflated Peak Inflation Factor Adjusted Peak Total 203 207 239 0.891791 211 181 62 10 23 18 18 108 239 11 25 631 0.891791 0 0 15.0% 15.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15.0% 15.0% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 71 12 23 18 21 124 269 12 27 672 1 0 0 Traffic Count Intersection Greenwood Drive and Briarwood Entrance, Iowa City, Iowa MMS Project #11603-001 Thursday 05122120254:00-6:00pm Eastbound Northbound Westbound Thru Right Left Right Left Thru 4:00 to 5:00 43 9 18 15 12 106 4:15 to 5:15 43 7 17 17 16 107 4:30 to 5:30 62 10 23 18 18 108 4:45 to 5:45 63 9 21 12 18 88 5:00 to 6:00 51 8 20 91 15 78 Eastbound Westbound 10 22 12 21 11 25 12 30 14 25 File Name: S:\J000G\TRANS\Traffic Counts\Peak Hr\COVID COUNTS\2021\February\Riverside Dr and Myrtle Ave - AM - Feb21 Start Date: 2/18/2021 Start Time: 7:15:00 AM RIVERSIDE DR 11111W MYRTLE AVE RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE From North From East From South From West 15 min Vehicle A roach Totals e Right Thru Lett Pads Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Lett Pees Hight Thm Lett Pees Totals Peak Hr� LEG 1 LEG z LEG 3 LEG a INTERSECT 7:15 AM 9 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 177 12 0 4 0 14 0 302 1348 95 0 189 18 302 7:30 AM 9 126 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 198 16 0 3 0 10 0 362 1325 i 135 0 214 13 362 7:45 AM 15 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 17 0 4 0 12 2 385 1271 .. 145 0 224 16 385 8:00 AM 12 104 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 158 8 0 8 0 9 1 299 a 116 0 166 17 299 8:15 AM 9 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 7 0 2 0 12 1 279 102 0 163 14 279 8:30 AM 8 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 6 2 9 0 9 0 308 127 0 163 18 308 Adjusted Peak Hour 2025 Vol %of—" % of 111 irdffio nnv —t % PHF By Movement Apt oath Intersection Trucks # Trucks # All vehicles % Trucks Bikes # Bikes # All vehicles % Bikes 47 468 0 49 487 0 1% 91% 0% 3% 33% 0% 36% 0.751 0.871 #DIV/0! 0.66 0.66 RIVERSIDE DR 01 0 0 45 446 0 0% 0% #DIV/0! RIVERSIDE DR 0 0 0 45 446 0 0% 0%1 #DIV/0! 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DN/0! #DN/0! 0% 0% 0% 0% #DIV/01 1 #DIV/01 I #DIV/0! #DIV/0! MYRTLE AVE 01 01 0 01 01 0 #DIV/0! I #DIV/0! I #DIV/0! MYRTLE AVE 01 01 0 01 01 0 #DIV/0! I #DIV/0! I #DIV/0! 2 0 777 56 2 0 809 58 0% 93% 7% 0% 55% 4% 59% 1 #DIV/0! I 0.871 0.71 0.66 RIVERSIDE DR 0i 0 0 0 .0 53 #DIV/0! 1 0% 0% RIVERSIDE DR 0 0 0 0 .0 53 #DIV/0! 1 0% 0% 0 20 0 47 3 1415 0 21 0 49 3 30% 0% 70% 1% 0% 3% 5% 1.061 #DIV/01 I0.90 0.94 MYRTLE AVE 0 0 01 1 0 45 0%1 #DIV/0! 1 0% MYRTLE AVE 0 0 0 19 0 45 0%1 #DIV/0! 0% File Name: S:\JCCOG\TRANS\Traffic Counts\Peak Hr\COVID COUNTS\2021 \February\Riverside Dr and Myrtle Ave - PM - Feb21 Start Date: 2/11/2021 Start Time: 4:15:00 PM RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Peds t Thru Left 4:15 PM 5 220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 178 2 0 9 0 11 4:30 PM 18 266 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 213 10 0 13 0 13 4:45 PM 11 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 4 0 19 0 14 5:00 PM 20 223 0 0 0 0 0 1 25 135 11 0 6 0 16 5:15 PM 13 227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 11 0 18 0 14 5:30 PM 24 173 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 151 8 0 11 0 14 Pk hr totals 62 967 0 0 0 0 0 2 25 668 36 0 56 0 57 4%Increase 2 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 27 1 0 2 0 2 Adjusted Peak Hour 64 1006 0 0 0 0 0 2 26 695 37 0 58 0 59 2025 Vol 67 1047 0 0 0 0 0 2 27 723 39 0 61 0 62 %of M-4 6% 9 % 0% #DIV/01 #DIV/01 #DIV/01 3% 92% 5% 50% 0% 50% %of ttl traffic 3% 52% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 36% 2% 3% 0% 3% movement % 555/6 0% 39% 6% PHF By Movement 1 1.411 0.961 1 #DIV/01 I # I #DIV/01 1 1 0.741 IfDIV/0! 1.02 Approach 0.911 #DIV/0! 1.02 0.86 Intersection 0.99 RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE Trucks # Trucks i 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #Allvehicles 62 967 0 0 0 0 25 666 36 56 0 57 %Trucks 0% 0% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0% 0% 0% 0% #DIV/0! 0% RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE RIVERSIDE DR MYRTLE AVE Bikes # Bikes 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 #Allvehicles 62 967 0 0 0 0 25 668 36 56 0 57 %Bikes 0% 0% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1 0% 0% 1 0%1 #DIV/0! 1 0% 11 429 ol 382 1 1871 0 75 1 1946 1 2025 15 min Vehicle A roach Totals Hr? LEG 1 LEG 2 LEG 3 LE4 G INTERSECT 1867 225 0 180 20 425 1871 n 284 0 223 26 533 1720 262 0 178 33 473 243 0 171 22 436 e 240 0 157 32 429 197 0 160 25 382 ATTACHMENT 6 Correspondence From: Chandler Tinsman To: Anne Russett Cc: Carolina Deifelt Streese Subject: 611 Greenwood Dr rezoning comments Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2025 12:30:51 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** This message is from an external sender. To the Planning and Zoning Commission: We are Chandler Tinsman and Carolina Deifelt Streese, residents and homeowners at 606 Greenwood Drive, directly across from 611 Greenwood Drive. We recently received notice regarding the request to rezone 611 Greenwood from Public/Semi-Public to Multi -Family Residential. We fully support the addition of more multi -family housing in Iowa City, as well as the plan to refurbish the school lot into a use that will benefit the community. At the same time, we respectfully ask the Commission to consider the future of the wooded area on the north side of the property, known as Roosevelt Ravine. This ravine contains nature trails historically used by neighborhood residents, provides important habitat for native birds, and serves as a natural buffer against wind and erosion. For these reasons, we request that Roosevelt Ravine remain zoned as Semi -Public, ensuring that it can continue to be preserved, maintained, and enjoyed by the people of Iowa City. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Chandler Tinsman & Carolina Deifelt Streese From: Chandler Tinsman To: Anne Russett Cc: Carolina Deifelt Streese Subject: 611 Greenwood Dr rezoning comments Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2025 12:30:51 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** This message is from an external sender. To the Planning and Zoning Commission: We are Chandler Tinsman and Carolina Deifelt Streese, residents and homeowners at 606 Greenwood Drive, directly across from 611 Greenwood Drive. We recently received notice regarding the request to rezone 611 Greenwood from Public/Semi-Public to Multi -Family Residential. We fully support the addition of more multi -family housing in Iowa City, as well as the plan to refurbish the school lot into a use that will benefit the community. At the same time, we respectfully ask the Commission to consider the future of the wooded area on the north side of the property, known as Roosevelt Ravine. This ravine contains nature trails historically used by neighborhood residents, provides important habitat for native birds, and serves as a natural buffer against wind and erosion. For these reasons, we request that Roosevelt Ravine remain zoned as Semi -Public, ensuring that it can continue to be preserved, maintained, and enjoyed by the people of Iowa City. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Chandler Tinsman & Carolina Deifelt Streese PROTEST OF REZONING TO; HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL I A my, IO A -- CiTY4F10IVri C}TY We, the undersigned, being the o'wnen of property inciuded i� the proposed zoning change, or the owners of property which is located within two hundmd beat of the exterior boundaries of the property for wbich the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoniag of tho following property: CPA25-0002 Raoseveit Ridga Project This protest. is silted and acknowledged with the intezrtion tl3at such rezoning shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three -fourths of all the members of the council, all in accordance, -with Section 414.5 of the Code 0Flowa. Property Address: 612 Wes; Benton Street Iowa Gity, Iowa 52246 Proper'iyfOwnm(s): Sadie & May _ By: INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OV4'NEIt( ): STAFF OF IOA ) JOIMSONI COUNT) ss ; TUis insu-arvont was ackupledged before me on " its ' individual propeyly owner(s), -- - - - 4�"5z1s� !0SEPI-� i!J!`as.EAiT �AL LAY ! �1 fAT Col mission Number $0� 586 My IIm Na qry- t---i! and for the State o AUTMORI ED REPRESENTATIVE SIGNING FOR PROPERTY OWNER( ); STATE OF IOANFA ) JOHNSON COUNTY) ss; — (Date) by (name(s) of. Thus instrammat was acknowle-dged before me on (Date) by N (name() ofpe:rson(s)) as -- - (type oFdutbority, such as officer, trustee) of (name of property owner) . Notary Public ire and for the State of Iowa orig: Council packet 051242? Cc: CA—NDS 612 West Benton St, Iowa City, Iowa 52245 August 15, 2025 Dear Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission: T, Sadie S, May, am writing to address my concerns about the remising application for the Comprehcasive Flan Amen drnent (CPA25-0002? for the Roosevelt Ridge Project Proposal. T own and live at 612. West Benton Street, Iowa City with members of my family. The legal description of my property is atrached to my letton The only privately owned residential property contiguous with the proposed development is mine, which is adversely affected by this plan. I stand iii opposition to this plan. My deep objections are grounded in the second bullet point of the city's Lana! Use; Goals & Strategies of the Comprchensive Plan; Ensure that IiAdl development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed Roosevelt Ridge Project does not meet this criteria in several ways. It is neithex corapati.blo nor complernenttiry to the sure-aunding neighborhoW, My objoctions and concerns are t� follows: The proposed Roosevelt Midge 1'roj e t is not the right proj act to maintain and complerntut the character of the Roosevelt ncighbcrhuod that has existed for decades in Towa City. This davolopment project negatively changes the attributers of the Roosevelt neighborhood of single family Domes on Benton Street. This high density proposal is too large for the acreage amd the existing 1nfrastructutre of the neighborhood. 'L'lle pla-a transforms this alder section of Benton Street bito an apartmeut row, obliterating its longstanding single tarnily residential identity. I am a senior citizen and the primary residential property owner directly impacted by this plan. The implementation of the project wi11 disn.i.pt and dinminish the quality ofmy life on any property and in my neighborhood. i -will lose the peaceful v istas, their pr -vacy and the security afforded by the green spaces in 1ny. owri Yard. Instead, the;ie henettt-, will be replaced by -uol-sC, chaos, pohiition, trash, trespassing, and possible clime, if this proposed project goes ahead. If the Roosevelt Ridge Project.vcTe interest in keeping the character of the neighborhood, they would have put parking on the wesi side of the development wbct•e there are no close existing single family Dames. However, the Roosevelt Midge I-Tuicct proposes parking within 200 feet of my home and property, where there will bo constant light and sound disruptions as residents compete for limited parking spaces around the cloA. This gill only be intensified during football season. In addition, any ho mcowner's insurance will. increase wl7ilc my prolacrty value will be devahtcd. Such a development will make my property undesirable to t intain and watinuc as a single family residential prop arty. ■ Dujijg construction, my life will be impacted by continuous noise, interruption of utilities and disruption of irtftastructure. Disturbance of the soil on the Mill Will irreparably harm my property, thxough erasion and runoff causing damage from rainwater, snow and soil into my va-rd. How will drainage from the complex be addressed so lbat my property is not negatively affected`? What are the plans for &ww removal from the complex and parking lots ire the winter to prevent drainage onto my propa*? N�7hcrc will IT -ash bins and garbage disposal be located so that smells and verrai.n do not infest my property? What barriers will be erected to minimize sound between the Complex and my house? T} cse issiEes are of direct concern to me. 'in relation to my properly. rurthennore, the addition of 187 apartmcnts, with their accorupanying cars will drastically 11)crcase the traffic, noise, and pollution on Benton Street, Greenwood Drive, Hnds,on Avenue, and Miller Avenue, As it is, soinetitnes we have to omit more than flee minutes for traffic to ease for es to get out of oix .r driveway on nongarne days. Miller and Hudson Avenues are currently so ntirrow that only one lane of traffic earl travel to a direction at a time on the street. They arc not designed tar two-way trade. The traffic impact on Oe sinTountking streetts in the neighborhood are detrimental to Briarwood Health C are Center and the EarIy Explorers Daycare Center, It is clear that the proposed high density plan for Roosevelt Ridge dues not offer adequate parking for the number of residents. This means that parking in the neighborhood outside of the complex will hecome even more ditTicaIt, and on game days both the traffic and parking problems intm'dA The Roosevelt Ridge Project will ilnpcde the quality of'life I have enjoyed in this neighborhood far nearly seven decades. ILwi11 also dimiriisb my legacy to my children au grandchildren. 1 support of brdable housing, especially when it presenFes existing residential neighborhoods in a sustainable manner. I contend that the proposed Roosevelt Ridgc development will per7naneniI harm bath my neighborhood and my quality of life. The loss of peace, green space, privacy, security and residential vaiue is too much. The uicreascd traffic, noise, and pollution is too much. The resulting chaos from a high density multi -tin it d eiUng right next door also too much. This project, as currently constituted, decimates the historic naturc of lower I -Vest Benton Street as a residential community of single family 11omQs. T urge this Commission to reject this proposal, Tt is not the right fit for tide Roosevelt neighborhood. Sincerely' r Sadie S. May rWIL sF JOSEPH ENE ENT M&LOY ° rComm issipsl Number s6 Z A' My Coo mission E,�Pi;e !oW p The may property consists of School Commissioner's Subdivision, subdivision pt of Lot 6; Lots 1&2, as well as School Commissioner's Subdivision, subdivision pt of Lot 6, westerly 11 O' Lot B. August 20, 2025 TO: Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commissioners RE: Cases # CPA25-0002 and REZ25-0010 (611 Greenwood Drive, Iowa City) Honorable Commissioners, read with interest these two items on your August 27, 2025 agenda. I am familiar with this property and its recent fall into disrepair. Any proposal for anew and viable use of this property should be looked at favorably, and in the best interest of the community. The one concern I have is that the proposed new development remains long-term affordable housing, as is apparently proposed by the developer. Affordable housing like this is sorely needed in our community. Any project that brings this many affordable units to the city should and would be well received. It also seems an appropriate use of this Large, formerly public property. But, as a former P&Z Commissioner myself, I know the Commission and the City have been duped before by developers who SAID they were going to do one thing but ended up doing something entirely different. I would caution the Commission on this potential. I did not see any conditions recommended by staff that would require the new development to actually be and/or remain affordable housing. I would like to suggest that the Commission add such a condition, to protect the intent and integrity of the project. The city would be giving the developer a significant win by changing the Comp Plan designation and zoning designation of this property. The developer should be held to their original proposal or should be required to come before the Commission and City Council if they wish to change their mind in the future. would also suggest that any condition for affordable housing by the Commission and City Council be made for a minimum of 20 years, if not permanently. Thank you for your consideration, and thank you for the important and challenging work you volunteer to do for the City of Iowa City and it's residents! Sincerely, Mark Signs 1825 Hollywood Blvd Iowa City, IA 52240 From: Paula Swvoard To: Anne Russett Subject: CPA25-0002 and REZ25-0010 Date: Sunday, August 24, 2025 9:42:23 AM Attachments: We sent you safe versions of your files.mso Mans -Miller Orchard area. Swvaard.pdf List of recent developments in MONA.pdf ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caution when opening files. This message is from an external sender. Anne - please forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission for the 8/27/2025 meeting. Thanks. Dear Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, For those of us who live in the Miller Orchard neighborhood, those of us who fought to try to keep Roosevelt Elementary open, those of us whose children attended Roosevelt where they received excellent educations and who still recall fond memories of their years there, this day has been a long time in the making. It is actually a bit of a relief to finally see this day come. I fully support the development of more affordable housing in Iowa City. At first glance, this project brings some interesting promise and I believe it is being proposed in good faith. It does lead me to several questions. Affordable Housing The staff report states the "applicant is working to secure Low Income Housing Tax Credits for the proposed development; therefore, the proposed development is intended to be an affordable housing project." The staff report implies that all 187 units will be affordable. My basic understanding of the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program is that it's a federal government program to encourage the development of affordable rental housing. The program awards developers federal tax credits to offset construction costs in exchange for agreeing to reserve a certain percentage of units as rent -restricted for lower -income households. The requirements to receive the tax credit are complex, but it is reported that the most common option chosen by developers is the one that requires that at least 40% of the units must be rent -restricted and occupied by tenants whose income is 60% or less of the AMI. Also, information I found states the LIHTC program requires that properties remain affordable for a minimum of 30 years which is divided into two parts: a 15-year initial compliance period and a subsequent 15-year extended -use period. 1. Somewhere along the line I've ended up confused. How many of the 187 units will be reserved as rent -restricted for lower income households? All of them? Or will the development meet the 40% rent -restricted units required to receive the LIHTC tax credit which is around 74 units and 113 units will be market -rate units? 2. If the applicant doesn't receive the LIHTC, will any units be affordable and for how long? Parking I'm also confused about the parking requirement for the development. According to the Iowa City Zoning Code 14-417-4: INCENTIVIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING: B. All Other Zones: Owners of land that are not zoned a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation pursuant to Article 14-2G "Riverfront Crossings and Eastside Mixed Use Districts Form Based Development Standards" or a Form -Based Zone pursuant to Article 14-2H "Form -Based Zones and Standards" who voluntarily provide Affordable Housing in accordance with this Article may utilize the following incentives: 1. Parking Reduction: Affordable Housing dwelling units shall be exempt from providing the minimum number of parking spaces otherwise required by the zoning code. " 1. Does that mean that if the unit within the development isn't designated as an affordable unit, then it's not exempt from the parking requirement? If a development has 40% of its total units reserved for affordable housing, is the parking requirement reduced by 40% or does the reduction also apply to units in the development that are rented at market rate so that absolutely no parking is required for the entire complex? 2. As I recall from the Good Neighbor Meeting, it was stated they are going to provide 113 parking spaces (an interesting number), although they didn't have to provide any (all 187 units will be affordable housing?) Coincidentally 113 is 60% of 187. Does that imply that because they are providing 113 parking spaces, 113 units (60%) can/will be rented at market rate and 74 (40% which meets the LIHTC requirement) will be affordable units? Maybe I'm way off base or reading too much into this. Traffic The traffic study, completed while the University was not in session and prior to the full occupancy of Replay at the corner of Myrtle and Riverside, is very thorough, provides a lot of information to digest, and raises some points of concern. And it's easy to fall back on the idea, however simplistic, that these are arterial, high -capacity streets and that's where we put larger developments. However, there's a breaking point and those figures don't translate well into real life experience. It's a point that the neighborhood has brought up again and again and again over the past 10 years every time we've had development after development (all within one-half mile) built in the neighborhood. So again, I'd just like to highlight, one more time, that the report makes no reference to what those of us who live in the area know well — that traffic congestion has greatly increased due to all the recent development (Riverside, Orchard, Riverside/Myrtle) and that cars historically have used Orchard, Hudson, and Miller as cut throughs to/from Hwy 1 and Benton Street as they try to avoid the stop lights and heavy traffic on Riverside. It should be noted that Hudson and Miller are narrower streets which allow parking on one side, making them hard to navigate when faced with opposing traffic and no place to allow them to pass. (see attached map) A final reminder - in approving CPA25-0002 and REZ25-0010, you are recommending a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a land rezoning. While detailed development plans have been provided, once approved by Council, the Comp Plan and land rezoning are done and the actual building doesn't have to adhere to the plans submitted with the application — only with the zoning requirements and any approved rezoning conditions. So, here's yet another question: With the Comp Plan amended and the land rezoned, what gets developed there if the applicant isn't awarded the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and their plans for the property change? Thank you for your service, your time, and your devotion to making Iowa City a city for all. This neighborhood has been rocked by large infill developments during the last 10 years (see attachment) and the character of the neighborhood has forever been changed, the result of how the many layers of City plans have been interpreted and amended, sometimes in a piecemeal fashion, but with good intentions. Please take a minute to look through the attached maps and information to get a feel for the larger neighborhood that will be impacted by the Roosevelt redevelopment. Paula Swygard Iowa City, Iowa Development in the Miller Orchard neighborhood 2016 Riverview West, 629 S. Riverside Drive, 96-101 units 2016 Creation of the Orchard District in Riverfront Crossings. The Orchard District was not part of the original Riverfront Crossings plan. 2017 Property at 627 Orchard Court rezoned to Orchard ❑istrict 2018 Orchard Court Lofts, 627 Orchard Court 45 units. 2018 First expansion of the Orchard District. Area including 224, 226, 330, 650, 652 Orchard Ct, 711, 725, 727, 741, 743 Orchard Street, and 204 W. Benton was rezoned t❑ the Orchard District (RFC-0) 2022 Second expansion of the Orchard District to include 614, 622, 630 Orchard Court. Rezoning with proposal of 187 units defeated as neighbors filed a petition requiring Council supermajority to pass. Area rezoned in 2023 and awaiting redevelopment 2025 Replay Iowa City, designated as student housing, opened August 2025 at Myrtle and Riverside (West Riverfront Subdistrict) with @291 units/648 beds. This project expanded the West Riverfront district and included a Comprehensive Plan amendment, a rezoning from medium density to high density, and an increase in the maximum height bonus. 2025 Roosevelt Ridge proposal. 187 units, affordable housing. All units are a mix of 1, 2, and 3 bedrooms This area has redeveloped to high density within the span of a few years. How many of the units in the Riverfront Crossings zoning include affordable housing and for how long? Or was fee -paid -lieu? That's in addition to the already built apartment buildings from the 1960's and 1970's such as Old Gold Apartments and Michael Street Apartments. All of these developments have resulted in substantially more traffic congestion. Development in area bound by Riverside Drive, Vilest Benton Street, Greenwood Ave, Myrtle Ave l 7 _. finks -tact Ct -F. ._ 4: ti5 To' PLL"J'Y:Ae- 'D6 V- r`"'4 c dot- yet de pJ bpzkt . �n p S wyyod- The- b r 0 0t 4�2c Ip i C- " Zoning and Develbpment in area bound by Riverside Drive, West Benton Street, Greenwood Ave, Myrtle Ave / RM44' rR I J7 k o 7PI, N M44r. N, 6- lt:4 P Swygard Traffic flow in Miller Orchard Neighborhood " 4 �(' �f m 4. -. P. Swygard Orchard, Hudson, and Miller are usod as cut throughs to/from West Benton to avoid stoplights and heavy traffic on Riverside. They provide a quick way to get to/from Walmart, UIHC, etc. There is no parking allowed on Orchard, parking is allowed on the west side of Hudson and the east side of Miller. They are all narrow streets, and it's often difficult to pass oncoming cars. There is a stoplight at M11ler/Hwy 1 and Orchard/Hwy 1 Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; (REZ25-0010) V Ordinance No. Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 9.9 acres of land located at 611 Greenwood Drive from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Medium Density Multi -Family Residential Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-20) (REZ25-0010). Whereas, TWG Iowa City, LP, has requested the rezoning of approximately 9.9 acres of land located at 611 Greenwood Drive from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Medium Density Multi - Family Residential Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-20); and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject area is appropriate for residential development at a density of 16-24 du/acre and the Southwest District Plan envisions Medium to High Density Multi -Family development; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan establishes goals that accommodate all modes of transportation while encouraging walking and bicycling and maximizing the safety and efficiency of the transportation network; and Whereas, due to the topographic challenges with providing a sidewalk along Greenwood Drive, the rezoning creates a public need for the installation of a 10' wide publicly accessible pedestrian connection from West Benton Street north through the subject property to Greenwood Drive; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to screen the parking spaces located within the eastern parking area from the abutting neighbors to the S3 standard in order to maintain an appropriate buffer between the parking area and abutting residential properties; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to restrict vehicular access to Greenwood Drive and ensure that access is provided at a near 90-degree angle with Greenwood Drive; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to improve pedestrian facilities through the installation of a raised crosswalk across Greenwood Drive near the entrance to the site subject to review and approval by the City Engineer; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding the improved pedestrian facilities including a raised crosswalk and a 10' wide public pedestrian path, vehicular access restricted to Greenwood Drive, and the drive to the site on Greenwood Drive at a near 90-degree angle, the rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the owner, TWG Iowa City, LP has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the City. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Ordinance No. Page 2 Section 1 Approval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby classed Medium Density Multi -Family Residential Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-20), as indicated: ALL THAT PART OF LOT 7, IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5T P.M., LYING AND BEING NORTH OF THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY RUNNING EASTAND WEST (BENTON STREET) THROUGH SAID LOT 7, SAID LOT 7 BEING SO DESIGNATED ON A PLAT OF SAID SECTION 16 RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ON MAY 18, 1848. THIS CONVEYANCE IS MADE SUBJECT TO A LEASE COVERING THE PREMISES ABOVE DESCRIBED TO JAMES A. HENNESSEY AND REGINA HENNESSEY, EXPIRING MARCH 1, 1928, WHICH LEASE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE GRANTEE HEREIN. AND BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5r" P.M., WHICH SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS 1927 FEET WEST AND 670 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, RUNNING THENCE WEST 693 FEET, THENCE NORTH 64 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE CENTER LINE OF MYRTLE AVENUE (NOW KNOWN AS GREENWOOD DRIVE) IN IOWA CITY, IOWA, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID MYRTLE AVENUE (GREENWOOD DRIVE) TO A POINT DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, THENCE SOUTH TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. AS A FURTHER CONSIDERATION FOR SAID CONVEYANCE AND AS A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND, THE GRANTEE HEREIN HEREBY AGREES AND COVENANTS THAT THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PREMISES SHALL BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY OPENED AND DEDICATED AS A PUBLIC HIGHWAY OR STREET AND THE SAID GRANTEE SHALL NOT BE PERMIT THE SAME TO BE OBSTRUCTED OR INTERFERED WITH IN ANY WAY AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE SAID HIGHWAY SHALL BE KEPT OPEN FOR THE USE OF THE PUBLIC AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME HAD BEEN PLATTED AND DEDICATED AND THE SAME ACCEPTED BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE ACCEPTANCE THEREOF BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AS A PUBLIC STREET, AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SHALL COMPLETE THE SAID DEDICATION AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME WERE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AT THIS TIME. GRANTEE SHALL CONSTRUCT SUCH FENCES AS SAID GRANTEE MAY DESIRE ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET HEREIN DEDICATED BUT SHALL BE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO CONTRUST (CONSTRUCT) AND FENCES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET SO DEDICATED. Section 11. Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section I 11. Conditional Zoning Agreement. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. Section IV. Certification and Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance and any agreements or other documentation authorized and required by the Conditional Zoning Agreement, and record the same, in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Ordinance No. Page 3 Section V. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section VI. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VII. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication in accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 380. Passed and approved this _ day of , 2025. Mayor City Clerk Approved by City Attor s Office (Alexandra Bright — 08/28/2025) Ordinance No. _ Page No. 4 First Consideration: September 2, 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weil e in NAYS: None ABSENT: None Second Consideration: Vote for passage: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Pass and Adopt: It was moved by , and seconded by , that the ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Alter Bergus Harmsen Moe Salih Teague Weilein Date published: Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (REZ25-0010) Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and TWG Iowa City, LP (hereinafter referred to as "Owner"). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 9.9 acres of property located at 611 Greenwood Drive, legally described below; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject area is appropriate for residential development at a density of 16-24 du/acre and the Southwest District Plan envisions Medium to High Density Multi -Family development; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan establishes goals that accommodate all modes of transportation while encouraging walking and bicycling and maximizing the safety and efficiency of the transportation network; and Whereas, due to the topographic challenges with providing a sidewalk along Greenwood Drive, the rezoning creates a public need for the installation of a 10' wide publicly accessible pedestrian connection from West Benton Street north through the subject property to Greenwood Drive; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to screen the parking spaces located within the eastern parking area from the abutting neighbors to the S3 standard in order to maintain an appropriate buffer between the parking area and abutting residential properties; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to restrict vehicular access to Greenwood Drive and ensure that access is provided at a near 90-degree angle with Greenwood Drive; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to improve pedestrian facilities through the installation of a raised crosswalk across Greenwood Drive near the entrance to the site subject to review and approval by the City Engineer; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding the improved pedestrian facilities including a raised crosswalk and a 10' wide public pedestrian path, vehicular access restricted to Greenwood Drive, and the drive to the site on Greenwood Drive at a near 90-degree angle, the rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Owner is the legal title holder of the property legally described as ALL THAT PART OF LOT 7, IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., LYING AND BEING NORTH OF THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY RUNNING EAST AND WEST (BENTON STREET) THROUGH SAID LOT 7, SAID LOT 7 BEING SO DESIGNATED ON A PLAT OF SAID SECTION 16 RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ON MAY 18, 1848. THIS CONVEYANCE IS MADE SUBJECT TO A LEASE COVERING THE PREMISES ABOVE DESCRIBED TO JAMES A. HENNESSEY AND REGINA HENNESSEY, EXPIRING MARCH 1, 1928, WHICH LEASE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE GRANTEE HEREIN. AND BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 IN SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., WHICH SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS 1927 FEET WEST AND 670 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, RUNNING THENCE WEST 693 FEET, THENCE NORTH 64 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE CENTER LINE OF MYRTLE AVENUE (NOW KNOWN AS GREENWOOD DRIVE) IN IOWA CITY, IOWA, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID MYRTLE AVENUE (GREENWOOD DRIVE) TO A POINT DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, THENCE SOUTH TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. AS A FURTHER CONSIDERATION FOR SAID CONVEYANCE AND AS A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND, THE GRANTEE HEREIN HEREBY AGREES AND COVENANTS THAT THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PREMISES SHALL BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY OPENED AND DEDICATED AS A PUBLIC HIGHWAY OR STREET AND THE SAID GRANTEE SHALL NOT BE PERMIT THE SAME TO BE OBSTRUCTED OR INTERFERED WITH IN ANY WAY AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE SAID HIGHWAY SHALL BE KEPT OPEN FOR THE USE OF THE PUBLIC AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME HAD BEEN PLATTED AND DEDICATED AND THE SAME ACCEPTED BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AS A PUBLIC STREET, AND THE ACCEPTANCE THEREOF BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AS A PUBLIC STREET, AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SHALL COMPLETE THE SAID DEDICATION AS FULLY AND EFFECTUALLY AS IF THE SAME WERE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AT THIS TIME. GRANTEE SHALL CONSTRUCT SUCH FENCES AS SAID GRANTEE MAY DESIRE ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET HEREIN DEDICATED BUT SHALL BE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO CONTRUST (CONSTRUCT) AND FENCES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET SO DEDICATED. 2. Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all requirements of the Zoning Code, as well as the following conditions: a. Owner will install a 10' wide pedestrian connection and dedicate an associated public access easement along the eastern portion of the property to extend from West Benton Street to Greenwood Drive prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Pedestrian path shall also include pedestrian scale lighting to be reviewed and approved by the City during the she plan review process. Owner shall install and maintain lighting. b. Restrict vehicular access to the site from West Benton Street to emergency vehicles only. c. Owner will screen the parking spaces located within the eastern parking area from the abutting neighbors to the S3 screening standard. Only the parking spaces must be screened to the S3 standard, not the driveway. d. Owner will install a raised crosswalk across Greenwood Drive near the entrance to the site prior to issuance of Certifmte of Occupancy, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. e. Owner will ensure that the design of the access drive from Greenwood Drive to the subject property is at or near a 90-degree angle as part of the she plan approval, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 4. The conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2025), and said conditions satisfy the public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties, and shall remain in full force and effect unless and until released of record by the City for the above -described property, upon which occurrence these conditions shall be deemed satisfied and this agreement of no further force and effect. Nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 6. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Owner's expense. Dated this _ day of 2025. City of Iowa City _ TWG Iowa City, Bruce Teague, Mayor — By: r Attest: Kellie Grace, City Clerk Approved by: City Attorney's Office City of Iowa City Acknowledgment: State of Iowa ) ) ss: Johnson County ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2025 by Bruce Teague and Kellie Grace as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa C'Ity. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) My commission expires: TWG Iowa City, LP Acknowledgment: State ofTl✓t)y/W# County of 01 This recorQy was acknowledged befppre me on 2./a Z—"- 2025 by l �lAl� lC/JdF)CE (name) as KVtfW171e P (dtle) of TING Iowa City, LP ulrn•n• No.•ro Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa Newry VUEIIo iu18u4 el In01.n• (Stamp or Seal) cemml..m" xumanOOul.n w c...N.N"[wn. vnaexa Mycommission expires: �- City Council Supplemental Meeting Packet CITY OF (OWA CITY September 2, 2025 Information submitted between distribution of the meeting packet on Thursday and 4:00 pm on Friday. Late Handout(s): 8.a. Rezoning - Maiden Ln. / E. Benton St.: See correspondence from Michael 8.6 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 611 Greenwood Drive & Rezoning - 611 8•C. Greenwood Drive: See correspondence to the Planning and Zoning Commission from Mark Signs and Paula Swygard. September 2, 2025 City of Iowa City Late Handouts Distributed August 20, 2025 TO: Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commissioners 9 -- aq -.a 5 RE: Cases # CPA25-0002 and REZ25-0010 (611 Greenwood Drive, Iowa Cate) Honorable Commissioners, I read with interest these two items on your August 27, 2025 agenda. I am familiar with this property and its recent fall into disrepair. Any proposal for a new and viable use of this property should be looked at favorably, and in the best interest of the community. The one concern I have is that the proposed new development remains long-term affordable housing, as is apparently proposed by the developer. Affordable housing like this is sorely needed in our community. Any project that brings this many affordable units to the city should and would be well received. It also seems an appropriate use of this large, formerly public property. But, as a former P&Z Commissioner myself, I know the Commission and the City have been duped before by developers who SAID they were going to do one thing but ended up doing something entirely different. I would caution the Commission on this potential. I did not see any conditions recommended by staff that would require the new development to actually be and/or remain affordable housing. I would like to suggest that the Commission add such a condition, to protect the intent and integrity of the project. The city would be giving the developer a significant win by changing the Comp Plan designation and zoning designation of this property. The developer should be held to their original proposal or should be required to come before the Commission and City Council if they wish to change their mind in the future. I would also suggest that any condition for affordable housing by the Commission and City Council be made for a minimum of 20 years, if not permanently. Thank you for your consideration, and thank you for the important and challenging work you volunteer to do for the City of Iowa City and it's residents! Sincerely, Mark Signs 1825 Hollywood Blvd Iowa City, IA 52240 Fmm: Paula Swmard Late Handouts Distributed 1: Anne Russet[ subject: CPA25-0002 and RER50010 Date: Sunday, Au9ux, 24, 2025 9:42:23 M1 yes Attachments: We sent you sak wxsonx of wur filesma rs V Ma-M Iler Orchard area oard not a of dewiooments in M RA.M (Date) 1 RrK --This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. " Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caubon when opening files. This message is from an external sender. Anne - please forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission for the 8/27/2025 meeting. Thanks. Dew Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, For those of us who live in the Miller Orchard neighborhood, those of us who fought to try to keep Roosevelt Elementary open, those of us whose children attended Roosevelt where they received excellent educations and who still recall fond memories of their years there, this day has been a long time in the making. It is actually a bit of a relief to finally we this day come. I fully support the development of more affordable housing in Iowa City. At first glance, this project brings some interesting promise and I believe it is being proposed in good faith. It does lead me to several questions. Affordable Housing The staff report states the "applicant is working to secure Low Income Housing Tax Credits for the proposed development; therefore, the proposed development is intended to be an affordable housing project." The staff report implies that all 187 units will be affordable. My basic understanding of the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program is that it's a federal government program to encourage the development of affordable rental housing. The program awards developers federal tax credits to offset construction costs in exchange for agreeing to reserve a certain percentage of units as rent -restricted for lower -income households. The requirements to receive the tax credit are complex, but it is reported that the most common option chosen by developers is the one that requires that at least 40% of the units must be rent -restricted and occupied by tenants whose income is 60% or less of the AMI. Also, information I found states the LIHTC program requires that properties remain affordable for a minimum of 30 years which is divided into two parts: a 15-year initial compliance period and a subsequent 15-year extended -use period. 1. Somewhere along the line I've ended up confused. How many of the 187 units will be reserved as rent -restricted for lower income households? All of them? Or will the development meet the 40% rent -restricted units required to receive the LIHTC tax credit which is around 74 units and 113 units will be market -rate units? 2. If the applicant doesn't receive the LIHTC, will any units be affordable and for how long? Parking I'm also confused about the parking requirement for the development. According to the Iowa City Zoning Code 14-417-4: INCENTIVIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING: B. All Other Zones: Owners of land that are not zoned a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation pursuant to Article 14-2G "Riverfront Crossings and Eastside Mixed Use Districts Form Based Development Standards' or a Form -Based Zone pursuant to Article 14-2H "Form -Based Zones and Standards" who voluntarily provide Affordable Housing in accordance with this Article may utilize the following incentives: 1. Parking Reduction: Affordable Housing dwelling units shall be exempt from providing the minimum number of parking spaces otherwise required by the zoning code. " 1. Does that mean that if the unit within the development isn't designated as an affordable unit, then it's not exempt from the parking requirement? If a development has 40% of its total units reserved for affordable housing, is the parking requirement reduced by 40% or does the reduction also apply to units in the development that are rented at market rate so that absolutely no parking is required for the entire complex? 2. As 1 recall from the Good Neighbor Meeting, it was stated they are going to provide 113 parking spaces (an interesting number), although they didn't have to provide any (all 187 units will be affordable housing?) Coincidentally 113 is 60% of 187. Does that imply that because they are providing 113 parking spaces, 113 units (60%) can/will be rented at market rate and 74 (40% which meets the LIHTC requirement) will be affordable units? Maybe I'm way off base or reading too much into this. Traffic The traffic study, completed while the University was not in session and prior to the full occupancy of Replay at the comer of Myrtle and Riverside, is very thorough, provides a lot of information to digest, and raises some points of concern. And it's easy to fall back on the idea, however simplistic, that these are arterial, high -capacity streets and that's where we put larger developments. However, there's a breaking point and those figures don't translate well into real life experience. It's a point that the neighborhood has brought up again and again and again over the past 10 years every time we've had development after development (all within one-half mile) built in the neighborhood. So again, I'djust like to highlight, one more time, that the report makes no reference to what those of us who live in the area know well — that traffic congestion has greatly increased due to all the recent development (Riverside, Orchard, Riverside/Myrtle) and that cars historically have used Orchard, Hudson, and Miller as cut throughs to/from Hwy t and Benton Street as they try to avoid the stop lights and heavy traffic on Riverside. It should be noted that Hudson and Miller are narrower streets which allow parking on one side, making them hard to navigate when faced with opposing traffic and no place to allow them to pass. (see attached map) A final reminder - in approving CPA25-0002 and REZ25-0010, you are recommending a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a land rezoning. While detailed development plans have been provided, once approved by Council, the Comp Plan and land rezoning are done and the actual building doesn't have to adhere to the plans submitted with the application — only with the zoning requirements and any approved rezoning conditions. So, here's yet another question: With the Comp Plan amended and the land rezoned, what gets developed there if the applicant isn't awarded the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and their plans for the property change? Thank you for your service, your time, and your devotion to making Iowa City a city for all This neighborhood has been rocked by large infill developments during the last 10 years (see attachment) and the character of the neighborhood has forever been changed, the result of how the many layers of City plans have been interpreted and amended, sometimes in a piecemeal fashion, but with good intentions. Please take a minute to look through the attached maps and information to get a feel for the larger neighborhood that will be impacted by the Roosevelt redevelopment. Paula Swygard Iowa City, Iowa Development in the Miller Orchard neighborhood 2016 Riverview West, 629 S. Riverside Drive, 96-101 units 2016 Creation of the Orchard District in Riverfront Crossings. The Orchard District was not part of the original Riverfront Crossings plan. 2017 Property at 627 Orchard Court rezoned to Orchard District 2018 Orchard Court Lofts, 627 Orchard Court 45 units. 2018 First expansion of the Orchard District. Area including 224, 226, 330, 650, 652 Orchard Ct, 711, 725, 727, 741, 743 Orchard Street, and 204 W. Benton was rezoned to the Orchard District (RFC-O) 2022 Second expansion of the Orchard District to include 614, 622, 630 Orchard Court. Rezoning with proposal of 187 units defeated as neighbors filed a petition requiring Council supermajority to pass. Area rezoned in 2023 and awaiting redevelopment 2025 Replay Iowa City, designated as student housing, opened August 2025 at Myrtle and Riverside (West Riverfront Subdistrict) with @291 units/648 beds. This project expanded the West Riverfront district and included a Comprehensive Plan amendment, a rezoning from medium density to high density, and an increase in the maximum height bonus. 2025 Roosevelt Ridge proposal. 187 units, affordable housing. All units are a mix of 1, 2, and 3 bedrooms This area has redeveloped to high density within the span of a few years. How many of the units in the Riverfront Crossings zoning include affordable housing and for how long? Or was fee -paid -lieu? That's in addition to the already built apartment buildings from the 1960's and 1970's such as Old Gold Apartments and Michael Street Apartments. All of these developments have resulted in substantially more traffic congestion Development in area bound by Riverside Drive, West Benton Street, Greenwood Ave, Myrtle Ave. 19'1 ur t5 proposes Orchard .District' peY yet A&VOWPO4 2022 Prolac5ol d' I9i f,I P,era�parfaonl6as 7.o23 the "m rozrnel Ye ripe.Di5frt�t urd 6-u>a,hrij redevrlopmekt � yS cvuts m Zoi$ 0 241 ' , f8 �A 101 Traffic flow in Miller Orchard Neighborhood �+ P. Swygard Orchard, Hudson, and Miller are used as cut throughs to/from West Benton to avoid stoplights and heavy traffic on Riverside. They provide a quick way to get to/from Walmart, UIHC, etc. There is no parking allowed on Orchard, parking is allowed on the west side of Hudson and the east side of Miller. They are all narrow streets, and it's often difficult to pass oncoming cars. There is a stoplight at Miller/Hwy 1 and Orchard/Hwy 1 Item Number: 8.d. I, CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 22.5 acres of property located east of N. Scott Blvd along N. Dubuque Road from Rural Residential (RR-1) zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) zone, and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone. (REZ24-0013) (Second Consideration) Attachments: REZ24-0013 Staff Report-w-attachments PZ 7.16.25 minutes-CPA-REZs Ordinance & CZA Correspondence from Nate Hatz (REZ24-0013) STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ24-0013 GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner/Applicant: Contact Person: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Location Map: Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Date: July 16, 2025 JNB Iowa City, LLC Jim Bergman Iceberg Development Group, LLC 563-505-5611 jim(a�jnbice.com Steve Long Salida Partners 319-621-3462 steve(o)salidapart ners.com Rezoning to Mixed Use (MU) zone for approximately 22.5 acres. To allow for the redevelopment and development of land surrounding the former ACT campus. East of N. Scott Blvd. along N. Dubuque Rd. V K Size: 22.5 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant Land, Vacant Home and Outbuildings; Rural Residential (RR-1) Zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS- 5) Zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) Zone, Interim Development Single - Family Residential (ID-RS) Zone Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Household Living, Rural Residential (RR-1) zone South: Household Living, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) Zone with a Planned Development Overlay East: ICCSD Offices, Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone; Household Living, Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone with a Planned Development Overlay West: City of Iowa City Fire Department, P-1; RM-12 and CC-2 with a Planned Development Overlay Comprehensive Plan: Office Research Development Centers, Pending plan amendment (CPA25-0001) District Plan: Northeast District Plan Public Meeting Notification: Property owners and residents within 500' of the property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. File Date: June 18, 2025 45 Day Limitation Period: August 3, 2025 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Iceberg Development Group, LLC (JNB Iowa City, LLC) recently purchased the former ACT campus and surrounding properties. The owner is working with Shive-Hattery to prepare three applications to allow for the redevelopment of the former ACT campus area located at 101 ACT Drive, as well as the development of the property at 2150 N. Dubuque and the redevelopment of the property at 2041 N. Dubuque Rd. The goal is to allow a variety of commercial uses off of N. Dodge Street and a mix of residential and commercial uses along N. Dubuque Rd. Attachment 3 includes the applicant submittal which illustrates the proposed changes to the zoning map and includes the applicant statement describing the rationale behind the request. The first application to be considered is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA25-0001). The Comprehensive Plan future land use map suggests this area is appropriate for Office Research Development Centers. This area is not included on the Northeast District Plan's future land use 3 map. The proposed amendment would change the future land use designation for the subject property in the Comprehensive Plan to General Commercial along N. Dodge Street, Mixed Use along N. Dubuque Rd, and some Public/Private Open Space for the area constrained by sensitive features. The other concurrently submitted applications include two zoning map amendments (REZ24-0013 and REZ25-0008). This rezoning (REZ24-0013) is a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along N. Dubuque Rd to the Mixed -Use (MU) Zone. REZ25-0008 is a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along N. Dodge Street to the Community Commercial (CC-2) Zone. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment must be approved prior to changes to the zoning map. The applicant has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on Tuesday, June 10, 2025. Several neighbors attended. Attachment 3 incudes the application materials and Attachment 4 provides the good neighbor meeting summary report provided by the applicant ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned several different zoning classifications: Rural Residential (RR-1) Zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) Zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP), and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) Zone. Below is a general description of these zones: Zone Intent Rural Residential (RR-1) Provide a rural residential character for areas that are not projected to have the utilities necessary for urban development in the foreseeable future or for areas that have sensitive environmental features that preclude development at urban densities. Low Density Single -Family Provide housing opportunities for individual households and Residential (RS-5) provide some flexibility for a variety of household types. This zone also allows for some nonresidential uses that contribute to the livability of residential neighborhoods, such as parks, schools, religious institutions, and daycare facilities. RS-5 with a Planned Planned Development Overlays can be needed due to Development Overlay sensitive features or the provision of a variety of house types. Research Development Park Provide areas for the development of office, research, (RDP) production or assembly firms and other complementary uses. Office and research uses should predominate in the zone. Hotels, motels and similar uses should be located along the periphery of the zone or in locations that do not adversely affect the setting and quality of other development for the uses permitted in the zone. Interim Development Single- Provide for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and Family Residential (ID-RS) other nonurban uses of land may continue until such time as the city is able to provide city services and urban development can occur. Upon provision of city services, the city or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the comprehensive plan, as amended. Proposed Zoning: The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to the Mixed Use (MU) zone. The purpose of the MU zone is to provide a transition from commercial and employment centers to less intensive residential zones. The MU zone permits a mix of uses, which requires special consideration of building and site design. CI Table 1 shows the uses that are allowed in the MU zone. It includes a range of residential uses from detached single family to duplexes to multi -family dwellings. Multi -family dwellings are allowed at a density of 2,725 sq ft of lot area per unit. Based on the size of the subject property it could accommodate up to 778 dwelling units. MU also allows office uses and a variety of retail uses. Some institutional uses, like education facilities and religious/private group assembly uses are also allowed. The MU zone does not allow drive -through facilities. Table 1. Uses Allowed in the MU Zone Use Categories Subgroups MU Residential Group living uses Assisted group living PR Fraternal group living Independent group living Household living uses Attached single-family dwellings PR Detached single-family dwellings P Detached zero lot line dwellings PR Duplexes PR Group households PR Multi -family dwellings P Commercial Eating establishments S Office uses General office P Medical/dental office P Retail uses Alcohol sales oriented retail PR Hospitality oriented retail PR Personal service oriented PR Sales oriented PR Community service uses Community service - shelter S General community service S Daycare uses PR Educational facilities General PR Specialized PR Parks and open space uses PR Religious/private group assembly uses PR Communication transmission facility uses PR *P = Permitted; PR = Provisional (subject to additional use specific standards); S = Special Exception (requires review and approval by the Board of Adjustment) Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The future land use map of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Office Research Development Centers. Although the subject property is within the boundary of the Northeast District Plan the subject property is not 9 included on the future land use map. Concurrent with this rezoning, the owner has requested an amendment to the land use policy direction to show this area as appropriate for the Mixed Use land use category. The comprehensive plan currently includes goals and strategies that align with the proposed rezoning. Land Use Goals & Strategies: Encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of extending infrastructure and services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of the city. o Identify areas and properties that are appropriate for infill development. o Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. Plan for commercial development in defined commercial nodes, including small-scale neighborhood commercial centers. o Discourage linear strip commercial development that discourages walking and biking and does not contribute to the development of compact, urban neighborhoods. o Provide for appropriate transitions between high and low -density development and between commercial areas and residential zones. Housing Goals & Strategies: • Encourage a diversity of housing options in all neighborhoods. o Ensure a mix of housing types within each neighborhood, to provide options for households of all types (singles, families, retirees, etc.) and people of all incomes. o Identify and support infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas where services and infrastructure are already in place. o Concentrate new development in areas contiguous to existing neighborhoods where it is most cost effective to extend infrastructure and services. For the reasons above, staff finds the requested rezoning to be consistent with the comprehensive plan amendment and also compatible with the policies of the comprehensive plan. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The subject property is surrounded by a diversity of land uses. Specifically, the subject property is bordered by single-family homes to the north. To the east is the former ACT campus and an administration building for the Iowa City Community School District. To the southeast are three multi -family buildings that make up Oaknoll East. To the west and across the N. Scott Blvd right-of-way is single-family and future attached single-family. The N. Dodge Street fire station is located to the west. Staff is recommending two conditions to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. First, any commercial use that abut residential zones must include a 30' landscaped buffer strip that are landscaped with a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees that are at least 30' upon maturity. The landscaping plan will need to be reviewed and approved by the City Forester. Second, any commercial development will require full cut off light fixtures. Considering the uses that are allowed within the MU zone and the range of uses that currently surround the subject property, staff finds that with the proposed conditions the proposed rezoning will be compatible with the existing neighborhood character. Transportation and Access and Utilities: The subject property is accessed from N. Dubuque Rd. As part of the rezoning, staff requested a traffic study. Attachment 5 includes the traffic study's executive summary. C01 The study determined that the existing lane configuration and stop control at the Dodge Street and ACT Circle Lane (study intersection #5) intersection will not provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. Therefore, the proposed lane configuration and signalized control presented in the figure below is recommended. The study determined that the existing lane configuration and stop control at the N. Scott Blvd. and N. Dubuque Rd. intersection will not provide an acceptable level of service (LOS) through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. However, the LOS issue is limited to the Scooter's Coffee access and is anticipated to arise regardless if the development is built or not. Additionally, the unacceptable LOS is only anticipated to occur for approximately 30 to 45 minutes during the AM peak hour. The City Engineer has reviewed the traffic study as is satisfied with the results. No improvements beyond those discussed below are recommended. Since this area has never been platted, staff is recommending conditions to ensure that as the area develops an interconnected block and street network is established through the subdivision process. Staff is also recommending a condition that prior to final plat approval, the owner must submit construction drawings demonstrating that N. Dubuque Rd. between N. Scott Blvd. and ACT Dr. meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. Regarding other utilities, staff needs more information about the existing sanitary sewer in the area. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition that a flow study be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along N. Dubuque Rd. east of N. Scott Blvd. to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that N. Dubuque Rd. between N. Scott Blvd. and ACT Dr. meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the VA City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). NEXT STEPS: After a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the following will occur: • City Council will need to set a public hearing for both the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning applications. • City Council will consider approval of the comprehensive plan amendment (CPA23-0001) and must hold three readings including the public hearing for the rezonings (REZ24-0013 and REZ25-0008). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Applicant Submittal 4. Good Neighbor Meeting Summary 5. Traffic Study Executive Summary Approved by: Dance a Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map Oodpe 5� RS5 cam\. odge C RS5 ID-RS An application submitted by ACT, Inc. to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land span on both side of N Dubuque Road, east of N Scott Blvd. The applicant requested to rezone the land north t of N Dubuque Road from Rural Residential (11111), south of N Dubuque Road and east of N Scott Blvd from Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5), Interim Development Single - Family Residential (ID-RS) and Research Development Park (RDP) to Mixed -Use (MU). ORP i r CITY OF IOWA CITY ATTACHMENT 3 Applicant Submittal SH IVEHATTERY A R C H I T E C T U R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G May 21, 2025 City of Iowa City Neighborhood & Development Services Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission RE: Rezoning Applicant Statement To Whom It May Concern, On behalf of the current Ownership JNB Iowa City, LLC a rezoning request is respectfully submitted as shown in the provided Rezoning Exhibit. The 22.5 acres highlighted for the rezoning are part of the approximately 400-acre ACT campus which was once home to over 900 employees in multiple office buildings. Post Covid the campus has changed dramatically due to remote work policies and last month Intermediary Ed sold the 400 acres to JNB Iowa City, LLC and JNB Campus, LLC. Just one building is currently occupied and the rest of campus is beautiful, but vacant. There are a variety of zoning classifications in the existing 400-acre site. They include Rural Residential (RR-1), Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5), Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS), and Research Development Park (RDP). The Interim Development zones are intended for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and other nonurban uses of land may continue until such time as the city is able to provide city services and urban development can occur. The applicant is proposing a Mixed -Use (MU) zoning designation for the identified 22.5 acres. The MU designation blends well with the surrounding uses, such as the Iowa City Community School District Center for Innovation, the Iowa City Fire Station, Oaknoll East Retirement Community, and the existing single family residential and light commercial along Scott Boulevard. MU zoning will allow flexibility to provide a potential blend of residential units and supportive retail to this area of Iowa City. The identified parcels are adjacent to North Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque Rd, and near North 1 st Avenue, Highway 1, and Interstate 80. The MU zoning designation facilitates a transition from potential future commercial development along Dodge Street/Highway 1 to the lower -scale residential envisioned to the east. The Mixed -Use (MU) zoning also allows for walkable/bikeable destinations for residents including from future development along Dodge Street/Highway 1 through to the residential areas created to the east which support the city's sustainability goals. In addition, rezoning this portion of the former ACT property allows for opportunities for infill areas already in the city limits and served by city utilities. Public infrastructure appears adequate or can be reasonably upgraded in the area based on existing uses, development and utility mapping. SHIVE-HATTERY, INC Charles "Nick" Hatz II, PE Principal, Civil Engineer Project 2240009880 800.798.0313 1 shive-hattery.com A B C D E F c� REZONING EXHIBIT FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL / // NORTH Z / (ID-RS) / RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR1) / LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY �� LOCATION MAP V Lu RESIDENTIAL (RS5) / RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT PARK (RDP) TO MIXED USE (MU) / y� NORTH W z IOWA CITY, I O WA / / / 0 75 150 300 —L 80 0 0 — INTERSTATE U SCALE IN FEET T T I s- W Lu ui // / LEGEND: I % \\ > i i / y/ /� / 17^ > L 1 PROPOSED REZONING I y / / MIXED USE MU I y V U) > `u -------------1 I �— C01 ZONING // / / -----_ � I "\ �v / I — — � ~ co `°' 2101 ACT CIR 0 ob NDUBUQUERD� / ID -RP ZONING �� I 244 ACT RD Q 000 / RR1 ZONING- I 1851 N DUBUQUE RD / / / / \ I \ j / N DUBUQUE RD 'PROJECTLOCATION e I 1Q, V G� / ,4p OO '� RR1 ZONING I I — �_ \� �' 1��1 /'`\ 2040 N DUBUQUE RD I r M ORP ZONING I ill/ —� uj 101 ACT DR r I / Q----- T RR1 ZONING \ PARCEL 4 I I �/� 2030 N DUBUQUE RD \ 4.8 ACRES I / I z v J EXISTING ZONING - RR1 I HICKORY HILL PARK I I I ' P1 ZONING �� RR1 NOT TO SCALE 2 / �2008 N DUBUQUE RD 1 ZONING i z / \ \ 100217600 W OPD/CC2 ZONING \ `_ _� I — _ _ _ I PARCEL DESCRIPTIONS: OWNER: 5 _ INC. \ 3057 N SCOTT BLVD \ N DUBUQUE RD — I ORP ZONING PARCEL 1 BRAD SPILLMAN 200 ACT DR 500 ACT DR. ' \ I AUDITOR'S PARCEL #2005109, ACCORDING TO THE REVISED PLAT OF SURVEY RECORDED IN BOOK 52, PAGE 144, IOWA CITY, IOWA 52243 O PLAT RECORDS OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. \ J Z \ \ DEVELOPER: \ O W Lu \ \ I PARCEL 2 ICEBERG DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC \ a_\ �\ A \ I JIM BERGMAN COMMENCING AT THE E'/ CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., 7152 ELDORADO POINTE / O W w JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA; THENCE WEST ON THE'/ SECTION LINE 609.0 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; WES DES MOINES, IA 50266 �G w Q 0 \ PARCEL 3 I THENCE NORTH 669.5 FEET TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE OLD SOLON ROAD ALSO KNOWN AS DUBUQUE ROAD AS SHOWN BY THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 160 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF APPLICANT: I p (D 2.0 ACRES JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA; THENCE WESTERLY ON SAID SOUTH SIDE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SE'/, NE'/ OF SAID CTA ACQUISITION IOWA CITY, LLCLu U < P1 ZONING \ OPD/RM12 ZONING EXISTING ZONING - OPD/RS5 I SECTION, WHICH POINT IS 67.5 FEET SOUTH OF A R.O.W. RAIL. THENCE SOUTH ON SAID WEST LINE 710.8 FEET TO A STEVE LONG 00 W \ 2906-2964 N SCOTT BLVD CORNER POST; THENCE EAST 710.3 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT IS SUBJECT TO ROADS AND 308 E BURLINGTON #403 � U O EASEMENTS OF RECORD AND CONTAINS 11.2 ACRES MORE OR LESS TOGETHER WITH THAT PART OF THE SOUTH IOWA CITY, IA 52240 \ — — \ I 1/2 OF OLD SOLON ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS DUBUQUE ROAD, LYING IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE PARCEL 2 I ABOVE -DESCRIBED TRACT. SITE INFORMATION z 11.5 ACRES EXCEPTING THEREFROM: TOTAL AREA = 22.5 ACRES I O \ EXISTING ZONING -RDP P1 ZONING I ENGINEER: LL COMMENCING AT A SET 5/8" REBAR MARKING THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 2, T79N, R6W OF THE 5TH P.M. IN SHIVE-HATTERY, INC. \ y \ THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA; THENCE S86°55'47"W - 604.75 FEET (FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, THE "NICK" < O CHARLES HATZ II \ I EAST LINE OF THE SE 1/4 IS ASSUMED TO BEAR N01°15'42"W) TO A FOUND 5/8" REBAR; THENCE S87°42'41"W- 707.42 U z y \ NHATZ@SHIVE-HATTERY.COM FEET TO A FOUND 5/8" REBAR; THENCE N01 °34'03"E 667.84 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR AND THE POINT OF L - 222 3RD AVENUE, SUITE 300 — BEGINNING; THENCE N01 °34'03"E - 30.97 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR ON THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY R.O.W. LINE OF CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA 52401 3 DUBUQUE ROAD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SAID EXISTING R.O.W. LINE 71.19 FEET ALONG A 606.00 319-364-0227 O — — — — — — FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY WHICH CHORD BEARS S85°25'54"E - 71.15 FEET TO A SET 5/8" J REBAR; THENCE S88°47'49"E - 136.38 FEET ALONG SAID EXISTING R.O.W. LINE TO A SET 5/8" REBAR; THENCE SURVEYOR: W z vJ SOUTHWESTERLY 204.34 FEET ALONG A 817.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY WHICH CHORD SHIVE-HATTERY, INC. BEARS S84°02'18"W 203.80 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR; THENCE S76°52'24"W 5.56 FEET TO THE POINT OF z / - - WADE WAMRE / BEGINNING. L.L O / \ 222 3RD AVENUE, SUITE 300 � — \ CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA 52401 / --- f , v AND PARCEL1 A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED IN WARRANTY DEED IN BOOK �427, PAGE 343, AT - — — OPD/RS5 ZONING \ 4.2 ACRES ORP ZONING z N 00 \ THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 5-65 HICKORY HEIGHTS LN EXISTING ZONING - ID-RS 1001327005 \ U) w o N co OPD/RM12 ZONING COMMENCING AT A SET 5/8" REBAR MAKING THE EAST'/a CORNER OF SECTION 2, T79N, R6W OF THE 5TH P.M. IN xy w o — — — \ 2640-2660 N SCOTT BLVD IOWA CITY, IOWA; THENCE S86°55'47"W - 604.75 FEET (FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, THE EAST LINE OF N — THE SE 1/4 IS ASSUMED TO BEAR N01 °15'42"W) TO A FOUND 5/8" REBAR; THENCE S87°42'41 "W- 707.42FEET TO A \ — — — — OPD/RS5 ZONING \ FOUND 5/8" REBAR AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N01 °34'03"E- 102.32 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR; — \ — — — 10-80 HICKORY I THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY106.33 FEET ALONG A 933.00 FOOD RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY WHICH �z \\ "W HEIGHTS LN I CHORD BEARS S18°24"30"E - 106.27 FEET TO A 5/8" REBAR; THENCE S87°42'41 -36.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO INCLUDING: \\\ / COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH co \ P.M.; THENCE S86°55'47"W - 604.75 FEET (FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, THE EAST LINE OF THE SE N,/ QUARTER IS ASSUMED TO BEAR N01 °15'42"W); THENCE S87°42'41 "W - 707.42 FEET; THENCE N01 °34'03"E - 102.32 FEET Q�vQ TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY 32.89 FEET ALONG A 933.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE co 0 j 0 � Q z 0 O -`'� CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N14°08'09"W - 32.89 FEET: THENCE N13°07'36"W - 514.14 GO FEET; THENCE N76°52'24"E - 144.03 FEET; THENCE S01 °34'03"W- 565.52 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. � Q Of Lu > Lu > � O o -1 o a Lu to / --- �� I PARCEL3 LL LOT 1, LARSON SUBDIVISION, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED 4 IN BOOK 61, PAGE 201, PLAT RECORDS OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. ID -RP ZONING I / I 1001328002 PARCEL4 — ( OPD/RS5 ZONING / I I 1002477001 I BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH IS 1304.1 FEET SOUTH 0 DEGREES 27 MINUTES EAST AND 494 FEET WEST OF THE \ z // / ID-RS ZONING I NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 2, IN TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., THENCE SOUTH 55 z �_ \ / 1002476003 I / DEGREES 32 MINUTES WEST TO THE NORTH SIDE OF OLD SOLON ROAD AS SHOWN BY THE PLAT RECORDED IN m O / PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 160, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, THENCE N I EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF SAID OLD SOLON ROAD TO A POINT THAT IS 1 DEGREE 49 MINUTES WEST OF w X THE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE NORTH 1 DEGREE 49 MINUTES EAST TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. / 0� �� EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS DESCRIBED AS AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2003049 AND 2004033 ACCORDING W TO THE PLATS OF SURVEY RECORDED IN BOOK 47, PAGE 140 AND BOOK 48, PAGE 25, PLAT RECORDS OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. EX1 A B C D E F ATTACHMENT 4 Good Neighbor Meeting Summary i r Summary Report for * - , —4 Good Neighbor Meeting CITY OF IOWA CITY Project Name: ACT West Campus Project Location: 2041 N Dubuque Rd Meeting Date and Time: 6/10 4-6 p.m. Meeting Location: Ferguson Center (200 Act Dr, Iowa City, IA 52243) Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Steve Long, Mark Seabold, Mike Welch Travis Wright Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Anne Russett Number of Neighbors Attending: 20 Sign -In Attached? Yes No x General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - Residents would like to see a restaurant in the Ferguson Center and more services in general. Neighbors supported the idea of ACT Dr connecting into Dodge St. Neighbors liked the idea of commercial along Dodge St with a pedestrian connection to Oaknoll. The idea of more housing and a mix of uses nearby was well received. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - Concerns about traffic on N. Scott Blvd. Indicate the left turn out of Oakknoll onto N. Scott is difficult. Want to know if there would be a second connection to the Oakknoll east property so they could avoid N. Scott. Wanted a pedestrian connection from Oakknoll East to the ACT campus. They currently cut through the ICCSD property but, worry that could be taken away in the future. Neighbors prefer to see housing only along Scott Blvd, but fine with senior facility that includes a cafe/coffee shop that is open to the public. Concern about about removal of trees/open space that neighbors often use for walking. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: No changes intended based on comments from Neighbors. Staff Representative Comments ATTACHMENT 5 Traffic Study Executive Summary Traffic Impact Study: Iceberg Development Group Iowa City, Iowa July 1, 2025 %11111111111 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS ENGINEERING DOCUMENT 41}I/ WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT PERSONAL �tttt ()�F-Sslo/v � SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED �� • . PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF IOWA. Q - r y ;. ERIC J m : 07/01/2025 J MUNCHEL = SIGNATURE DATE 19/42 PRINTED OR TYPED NAME: ERIC J. MUNCHEL LICENSE NUMBER: 19742 MY LICENSE RENEWAL DATE IS: 12/31/2024 PAGES, SHEETS, OR DIVISIONS COVERED BY THIS SEAL: ALL //t/111111111i0 Prepared for: Iceberg Development Group Prepared by: SH1VEHATTERY A R C H I T E C T U R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G 222 V Avenue SE, Suite 300 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (319) 364-0227 Fxecutive Summary The Iceberg Development Group initiated this traffic impact study to identify potential traffic impacts on the adjacent roadway network due to their proposed multipurpose land use development, which will be located on the former ACT Campus in Iowa City, IA. The study area west of the black delineated line in the figure below is the focus of the proposed traffic study. This study builds on the previous study submitted for the rezoning of the 48 acres noted at Area 1.1 through 1.4 in the figure below. Five access points are proposed, with two on Scott Boulevard and two on Dodge Street (Highway 1), and one on 1st Avenue. These access points will be full access points with no turning movement restrictions, except for a right-in/right-out access point on Dodge Street (Highway 1) north of ACT Circle. Existing, opening, and design analysis years are assumed to be 2025, 2027, and 2047, respectively. The following study intersections within the study area were identified for analysis. Please note directional roadway names, for example N Dodge Street have been dropped. Study Intersection #1 — Dodge Street & Scott Boulevard Study Intersection #2 — Scott Boulevard & Dubuque Road/Scooter's Access Point (Scott Boulevard & Dubuque Road hereafter) Study Intersection #3 — Scott Boulevard & 1st Avenue/ACT Place (Scott Boulevard & 1st Avenue hereafter) Study Intersection #4 — Scott Boulevard & Hickory Heights Lane Study Intersection #5 — Dodge Street & ACT Circle Study Intersection #6 — Dodge Street & 1-80 EB Off -Ramp Study Intersection #7 — Dodge Street & 1-80 WB Off -Ramp Study Intersection #8 — Dodge Street & Access Point Study Intersection #9 — 1st Avenue & Access Point The above list assigns each study intersection with a numberthat is used as reference. (e.g., study intersection #1 = Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard). The area immediately surrounding the study intersections incorporates retail, services, office, recreational, residential, and undeveloped land uses. Weekday turning movement volumes were collected at the study intersections in mid and late October 2024. The peak hours of the study intersections were determined based on the highest consecutive four 15-minute turning movement counts between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 AM and 3:00 and 6:00 PM at study intersection #6. Study intersection #6 governs the AM and PM peak hours because it is the study intersection with the highest volume of entering vehicles. The AM peak hour was determined to occur between 7:30 and 8:30. The PM peak hour was determined to occur between 4:15 and 5:15. The raw and refined volume data are provided in Appendix 1. Projected traffic analysis will typically apply an annual growth rate to study intersections' existing turning movement volumes to account for growth in background traffic over future analysis years. In coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County the following growth rates were identified for the study intersection approaches. 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A R C H I T E C T II R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G Page 4 of 53 Figure ES1 Annual Growth Rates These annual growth rates were applied to existing volumes to project future background traffic volume growth, which can be expected through a sustained constant area growth without the potential development. It should be noted over time growth rates generally do not exhibit straight-line growth, but rather tend to level off as the surrounding area continues to develop. Therefore, the use of a straight-line growth rate for the prediction of future events can be thought of as conservative and should be considered as such when reviewing the output of this analysis. The Iowa Crash Analysis Tool (ICAT) website administered by Iowa DOT was used to collect available crash data at the existing (study intersection #8 is not an existing intersection) study intersections for the ten-year period between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2024. Over this period a total of 224 crashes were reported at the existing study intersections. The Iowa DOT Potential for Crash Reduction (PCR) analysis was also reviewed at the existing study intersections. Study intersection #1 (Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard had a medium PCR level. Study intersection #5 did not have a PCR classification. All other study intersections (study intersection #2, #3, #4, #6, and #7) had a negligible PCR classification. Safety improvements are not recommended at the study intersections based on the crash analysis presented above. The development will increase traffic volumes at the study intersections. However, the potential for increased crash frequencies is not anticipated. 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A RL}EITEC I U R E + E N G I N E ER I NG Page 5 of 53 Iowa City Transit provides public transportation in the study area. Figure 10 identifies the North Dodge route (Route 7), which passes through the study area. The Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPOCJC) Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan identifies "Wide Sidewalk/Pathways" within the study area that extend along Dodge Street, Scott Boulevard, and 1 st Avenue. Sidewalks extend along the study roadways, except Interstate 80. The analysis presented herein indicates the study intersection's LOS indices will operate at acceptable levels during the AM and PM peak hour conditions through the 2047 buildout design year scenario, except for study intersections #2 and #5. Additionally, it should also be noted there is an existing queueing issue on the northbound approach at study intersection #1. Based on the analysis presented herein, the northbound approach queue is an existing issue and is anticipated to get worse under all future scenarios at study intersection #1. However, the proposed lane configuration with an additional northbound right -turn bay (presented with Table 20) is anticipated to mitigate the queueing issue and should be considered. Based on the analysis presented herein, the existing lane configuration and stop control at the Scott Boulevard and Dubuque Road (study intersection #2) intersection will not provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. However, the LOS issue is anticipated to arise regardless if the development is built or not. Additionally, the unacceptable LOS is only anticipated to occur for approximately 30 to 45 minutes during the AM peak hour. Based on the analysis presented herein, the existing lane configuration and stop control at the Dodge Street and ACT Circle Lane (study intersection #5) intersection will not provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. Therefore, the proposed lane configuration and signalized control presented in the figure below is recommended. The figure below presents the recommended lane configuration and control at the study intersections, which is anticipated to provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. The changes/improvements to the study intersections are delineated with red ovals in the figure below. The 95th percentile queues at the study intersections were also analyzed. Based on these queue lengths no issues, such as a queue extending upstream to an adjacent intersection are anticipated, with the exception of the northbound approach at study intersection #1. Operational analysis worksheets are contained in Appendix 4. At Intersection #8, it should be reiterated from the assumptions listed in the report that for the purposes of the analysis presented herein, 0 inbound/outbound trips are assumed to use the proposed RIRO access point (study intersection #8). If this access point is not approved it the surrounding intersections would still operate at an acceptable LOS. If this access point is approved, it is anticipated to attract some trips away from study intersection #5 and thereby reduce the vehicle delay reported herein at study intersection #5. 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A R C H I T E C T II R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G Page 6 of 53 Figure ES2 Study Intersections — 2027 Recommended Buildout Lane Configuration & Control A `v ' O� Om cce" Point 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A R C H I T E C T II R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G MINUTES FINAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION J U LY 16, 2025 — 6:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: James Davies, Steve Miller, Scott Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade MEMBERS ABSENT: Kaleb Beining, Maggie Elliott STAFF PRESENT: Liz Craig, Anne Russett, Rachel Schaefer OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Long, Cady Gerlach, Ed O'Connor RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of CPA25-0001, a change to the future land use designation of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for approximately 57 acres of property located south of I-80 and east of North Dodge Street from Office Research Development Centers to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along North Dubuque Road east of North Scott Boulevard to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that North Dubuque Road between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Drive meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along North Dodge Street and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 2 of 22 Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either North Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along North Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the North Dodge Street right-of-way between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on North Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4th leg of the ACT Circle / North Dodge Street intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ25-0009, an application to rezone approximately 37.9 acres of land at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends that Title 14 zoning be amended, as illustrated in attachment one with two revisions related to the map and the dedication cap language, to update the requirements related to Neighborhood Open Space dedication, to continue implementing the City's goal of providing adequate open space for the City's residents. CALL TO ORDER: Quellhorst called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA25-0001: Location: South of 1-80 and east of N. Dodge Street Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 3 of 22 A public hearing to consider an amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from Office Research Development Center to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space for approximately 57 acres of property. Russett began the staff report showing an aerial map the subject property and also a map that shows the zoning of the property which is a mix of Research Park, Single Family, and Rural Residential. She explained this is the former ACT property that was recently purchased by JNB Iowa City, LLC. and there are several items on the agenda that are all interrelated with this property. This item, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, needs to be considered before the subsequent rezoning applications are considered. The amendment is to the Future Land Use Map to change these 57 acres of property from Office Research Development Center to General Commercial, Mixed Use and a bit of open space. After the Amendment is approved then there are two rezoning requests. One is for land that is off North Dubuque Road, 22.5 acres, and that request is a rezoning to the Mixed Use zone to align with the requested Future Land Use Map Amendment to Mixed Use. The other rezoning is for 33 acres of land to the east of North Dodge Street, which is a request to change the zoning from Office Research Park to Community Commercial. Russett noted the applicant did hold a good neighbor meeting on June 10 on all three of these applications. She shared a map that shows the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Quellhorst asked why this is a Comprehensive Plan change and not just a rezoning. Russett explained because the direction in the Comprehensive Plan is that this area should be for Office Research and Office Parks but since they want to do something different they need to amend the Plan so that the rezonings would then align with the Comprehensive Plan. Without the amendment staff can't make a positive recommendation for the rezonings. Russett explained when they look at Comprehensive Plan Amendments there are two approval criteria. The first is that circumstances have changed, or additional information or factors have come to light such that the amendment is in the public interest. The second criteria is that the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. In terms of the first criteria, circumstances have changed, the IC 2030 Plan was adopted in 2013 and at that time identified this area as appropriate for Office Research Park. At that time, the former ACT campus was in use and therefore the Comprehensive Plan aligned with the existing land use of Office Research Park. Since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted interest in offices locating within downtown became more popular and a lot of offices were leaving office research parks and relocating downtown. Additionally, there was the pandemic and that caused multiple vacancies in office buildings. ACT formerly employed around 1200 people on their campus and in their buildings (that was about 350,000 square feet). Currently they have 75 employees on site in those 54,000 acres square feet. Russett stated there has been a lot that has changed since the Comprehensive Plan was originally adopted as well such as the City has a real need for housing and this change in the Comprehensive Plan can help support that increase in supply of housing. The second criteria is that the amendment is compatible with other policies within the Comprehensive Plan. Russett reiterated when the Plan was adopted ACT was fully operational. Also, the Plan recognizes that the amount of Office Research Park identified may be unrealistic, Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 4 of 22 and since the adoption of the Plan the likelihood of more office research parks in this area has further declined. Not only has the ACT campus closed, but Pearson's has also closed. In addition, there are a variety of land use goals and strategies that this amendment would align with such as encouraging compact and efficient development, identifying areas that are appropriate for infill planning for commercial development, and then in terms of housing goals it is encouraging a diversity of housing options throughout the community, identifying and supporting infill development and concentrating new development in areas that's contiguous to existing neighborhoods. Therefore, staff does find that this proposal meets those two criteria. Staff recommends approval of CPA25-0001, a change to the future land use designation of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for approximately 57 acres of property located south of 1-80 and east of North Dodge Street from Office Research Development Centers to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space. In terms of next steps, staff will be asking City Council to set a public hearing after a recommendation from the Commission. Townsend noted on the letter from Shive Hattery, it mentioned it would also function as a neighborhood center, what does that mean, are they going to have something for children or parks or what. Russett explained at this point, there's no specific development proposed, they're just requesting for a change in the policy direction of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is likely to share more details on their vision. Townsend noted the section that encourage a reasonable level of housing diversity, what does that actually mean. Russett again noted the applicant can address that. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Steve Long (Salida Partners) is part of the ownership group and stated they are excited about the opportunity to reinvigorate the once full campus. He was before this Commission a few months ago when they rezoned the central part of the campus to Mixed Use and they've already started working with an architect to convert some of those buildings into 55 plus senior housing. Now they're excited to work on the east and south but the Commission will be seeing a lot of him over the next few years as there's 400 acres and right now they've only worked on about 100. Long noted they are waiting to work with the City and the City staff and the community as the City updates its Comprehensive Plan for the next 10 years. He stated their intention here today is to do what is allowed by the City Code and the market they are working with, which is Mixed Use. They've had some interested parties or entities that want to be compatible to what's in the immediate area and their focus is senior housing experiences and mixed use land uses, which is part of the land that was rezoned a few months ago. Since then, they've applied for a low income housing tax credit (LIHTC senior housing) and were approved. There will be 44 units on the corner of Scott Boulevard and 1 st Avenue and for the proposed mixed use they would like to have something similar. Long stated having the mixed use designation allows them to have a mix of uses and something that would be focused on is the immediate neighborhoods and the residents they anticipate having in the hundreds of residents living on the current campus in the next few years. For the commercial portion he stated they've had a lot of interest, he can't give specifics, but it would be community focused uses and because it's on the intersection of the highway and the interstate, focused on those uses. Long also noted they will follow the City's Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 5 of 22 Plan and plan to put a stop light on that corner of ACT Circle and Dodge Street as well. Davies asked about the small amount of public/private open space and how they envision that being tied to the existing infrastructure and natural setting in the area. Long stated they are envisioning trail connections or connecting to existing infrastructure. He added it's part of the buffer and when they sit down with the site plan and work with City staff they will have a better handle. He acknowledged they're going to be following the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as there's a tremendous amount of woodlands and ponds and wildlife corridors that they want to protect and keep. Long also stated he has already had their facilities crew mow the trails to encourage residents to use the trails. Townsend noted concerns about the traffic going around that circle, 1 st Avenue to Scott Boulevard, there is traffic all the time there right now and there's only two exits/entrances to the ACT campus. Long confirmed there are currently only two exits/entrances to the ACT campus and they're both off of that circle however there will be a new entrance off of North Dodge Street in the next year. Cady Gerlach (Vice President of Programs, Greater Iowa City, Inc, and Executive Director of Better Together 2030) is here tonight to voice support for the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the redevelopment of the former ACT campus and surrounding 57 acres. This proposal reflects the kind of forward thinking land use the region needs, it repurposes an underutilized employment center, it aligns with changing market realities around office space, post pandemic work patterns and community realities and growth. The blend of general, commercial, mixed use and public/private open space directly supports the community's need for more diverse housing options, accessible services and walkable neighborhoods. At Greater Iowa City, Inc, they advocate for efficient, connected development that strengthens the economic foundation and improves quality of life. This proposal checks those boxes by leveraging existing infrastructure and arterial roadways for future growth, creating space for a mix of commercial and residential development that serves both neighbors and regional commuters, preserves environmentally sensitive areas while enhancing pedestrian and bike access and supports compact sustainable development patterns that help reduce barriers to housing and retail access. As outlined in both the IC 2030 Comprehensive Plan and regional economic goals Gerlach stated this site is well positioned to evolve into a neighborhood scale hub that will blend commerce, housing and natural features while contributing meaningfully to the vitality of Iowa City's north side. They respectfully urge the Commission's recommendation of approval and thank them for their continued leadership in advancing a more connected, inclusive and resilient Iowa City. Gerlach also noted that rather than speaking multiple times this evening, her comments should be registered for CPA25-0001, REZ24-0013 and REZ25-0008. Quellhorst closed the public hearing. Townsend moved to recommend approval of CPA25-0001, a change to the future land use designation of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for approximately 57 acres of property located south of 1-80 and east of North Dodge Street from Office Research Development Centers to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space. Miller seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 6 of 22 Townsend stated she was glad to that large area put to use. Wade is also glad to see the reuse and Comprehensive Plan update to match it and will look forward to this being added as well in a new Plan that's in progress next year. Davies stated he is fully in support of a more flexible use and thinks it's really encouraging to see. He will be watching very closely just to see how the natural setting is preserved and how connectivity of the bike trails and pedestrian access is maintained as that's an important feature of that area. Quellhorst agrees they're changing times as the demand for office spaces is down so it's important that they're flexible as a community and make productive use of the property that they have. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. REZONING ITEMS: CASE NO. REZ24-0013: Location: East of N. Scott Blvd on N. Dubuque Rd An application for a rezoning of approximately 22.5 acres of land from Rural Residential (RR- 1) zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) zone, and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone. Russett explained this is one of two rezonings that are connected to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment that just passed. This one is for 22.5 acres on North Dubuque Road, land colloquially known as Gatens Farm. The land just to the west is the Iowa City Community School District property, and the land to the north is vacant and heavily wooded, as is the area to the south. Russett shared the current zoning noting there are four or five different zoning designations currently, Rural Residential, Low Density Single Family, Low Density Single Family with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park and Interim Development Single Family. Due to the five different zoning designations there's no consistency in terms of what could be developed in any type of development pattern for this land and the request is to zone it all Mixed Use, which would allow both residential and non-residential uses that would include things like assisted group living, multifamily, office, retail, restaurants and such. Russett stated the two criteria that staff looks at for rezoning is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with the neighborhood. Russett explained with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment that was just voted on, this rezoning would directly align with that request to amend the Future Land Use Map. The Comprehensive Plan also has a variety of goals and strategies that align with this request, encouraging compact efficient development, planning for commercial development, discouraging linear strip commercial development, and providing for appropriate transitions. Russett noted the buffer areas come into play in encouraging a diversity of housing options which this zone would do. In terms of compatibility with the neighborhood, similar to the hodgepodge of zoning Russett Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 7 of 22 noted there's a variety of different land uses, there is some single family to the north along North Dodge Street, there's the former ACT campus to the east and the School District office and to the southeast is multifamily with Oaknoll East. Staff is recommending a couple of conditions to ensure compatibility. One is that any commercial development that abuts residential zones incorporate a 30 foot landscaped buffer to provide additional separation between those residential uses and the commercial uses. Additionally required would be full cut off light fixtures for any commercial development. In terms of transportation, access and utilities, the City did request a traffic study to correspond with this proposed rezoning. The traffic study found that the North Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque Road intersection will not provide an acceptable level of service through 2047, really limited to accessing Scooters Coffee Shop, and this congestion is anticipated regardless of the proposed rezoning and that congestion is limited to a small period during the day (am peak hours). Russett stated the City Engineer has reviewed the traffic study and concurs with the findings. In regard to sanitary sewer, the City would like more information on the existing sanitary sewer in the area and its capacity and therefore have several conditions that they're recommending. One is approval of a preliminary and final plat, since this area has never been subdivided and the subdivision process will lay out the street network, lots and blocks. Staff also wants to ensure that North Dubuque Road meets City standards for a 28 foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. And lastly, a flow study in relationship to the sanitary sewer system will need to be completed. Specifically, for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. The applicant will work with the Public Works Department to study that area. Staff recommends approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along North Dubuque Road east of North Scott Boulevard to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that North Dubuque Road between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Drive meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 8 of 22 In terms of next steps, City Council will set a public hearing and consider the rezonings at future meetings. Quellhorst asked why staff doesn't believe that the existing zoning code is sufficient for separation between property types and why the added 30' buffer is necessary. Russett explained because of the existing single family to the north is Rural Residential which are large lot single family and typically they'd see a transition to higher density housing and then commercial development, but these large single family lots will be next to Mixed Use which could be multifamily, retail, or restaurants so this is adding a little bit of extra space to provide more of a transition. Townsend noted concern about the traffic and if they're going to have additional entrances onto North Scott Boulevard and Dubuque Road. Russett replied there will be no access to this property from North Dodge Street because this particular rezoning does not border North Dodge Street. In the next rezoning that is a consideration they will discuss. Townsend stated the circle there at Scott Boulevard and 1 st Avenue has a lot of traffic there and she just wants to make sure that they aren't making it worse for those that have to travel it every day. Wade asked about the traffic study level of service, at North Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque Road is the requirement to improve North Dubuque Road solving the level of service or is it more about that whole intersection with Scott Boulevard and Scooters and everything at that end. Russett stated the level of service issue is related to Scooters and regardless the improvements to North Dubuque Road will not address that, and that's going to be an issue even without this rezoning, so that becomes a City item. What staff is requesting here is that the street be upgraded so it has curb and gutter and sidewalk and meets the standards for a city street. Wade asked if there will be another pedestrian crossing at Hickory Heights or will it all funnel to Dubuque Road. Russett stated in terms of pedestrian crossings there's the controlled intersection at North Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard but there's no sidewalk on the southern portion, which will be discussed in the next rezoning. There's also a median on North Scott Boulevard that provides a pedestrian refuge for anyone crossing from the west side of North Scott to the east side but there isn't any pedestrian crossing down at Hickory Heights. Miller noted regarding the landscape buffer it makes sense to have it next to the single family, he is curious is it a standard to have it between CC-2 and Mixed Use. Russett stated there probably will not be a buffer there as they are both commercial zones. Wade asked if the core campus was rezoned to Mixed Use. Russett confirmed that was correct it was rezoned from Office Research Park to Mixed Use. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Seeing no public comments, Quellhorst closed the public hearing. Miller moved to recommend approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along North Dubuque Road east of North Scott Boulevard to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 9 of 22 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that North Dubuque Road between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Drive meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). Wade seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CASE NO. REZ25-0008: Location: East of N. Dodge St. and South of 1-80 An application for a rezoning of approximately 33.64 acres of land from Office Research Park (ORP) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. Russett stated this is the last of the three related items for the former ACT campus. This is a request to rezone about 34 acres to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. She shared an aerial map of the proposed rezoning noting it includes some of the existing buildings on the former ACT campus and also includes some land that abuts 1-80 to the north. Russett next reviewed the existing intersection for the site, there's currently three legs but ACT Circle that does not extend into the site which she will discuss shortly. The current zoning designation is Office Research Park which is intended to allow large scale offices and research firms. The Community Commercial zone allows a variety of both residential and non-residential uses, it allows upper floor multifamily as a provisional use and allows restaurants, retail, office and even some more intensive commercial uses such as very low scale manufacturing would be allowed, and vehicle repair. Russett stated again there are the two criteria to be reviewed, first is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and again, with the request of changing the Future Land Use Map to General Commercial this rezoning request would directly align with the Comprehensive Plan's Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 10 of 22 Future Land Use Map and encourages compact and efficient development, diversity of housing options, planning for commercial development and providing for some appropriate transitions. In addition in terms of the economic development goals of the Comprehensive Plan this rezoning could help increase and diversify the property tax base, provide an environment that supports quality employment, encourage a healthy mix of both independent and national businesses, improving the environmental and economic health of the community. In terms of transportation, the City is looking at ways to encourage all modes of transportation, especially off of the arterial streets, and having sidewalks and bike connections is recommended. In terms of compatibility with the existing neighborhood Russett noted the property is just a portion of the former ACT campus, the remainder of the campus is to the east. Staff is recommending a couple of conditions to ensure compatibility, one, recommending that 30' landscape buffer between commercial uses along North Dodge Street and any commercial development on this site. The North Dodge Street strip should be landscaped with a mix of plantings that would be approved by the City Forester. Russett stated this is a gateway to the community which is why staff is recommending the landscaping here to ensure that it looks nice and welcomes people to the community. Second is a residential buffer, especially where a portion of the development abuts the existing single family homes. Russett reiterated a traffic study was done to look at this rezoning and it determined that the existing lane configuration and stop control at North Dodge Street and ACT Circle would not provide an acceptable level of service. The traffic study recommends a few things, first is a traffic signal so that it becomes a signalized intersection, second is the installation of a fourth leg off the traffic circle that would provide access to the subject property. The traffic study also recommends a dedicated northbound right turn lane so if one is heading out of town on North Dodge Street there would be a dedicated right turn lane into the subject property and if they are heading south on North Dodge Street there's a dedicated left bound turn lane to turn into the property. Russett confirmed the City Engineer does concur with the findings of this study. Russett also wanted to note the City will be the one installing the traffic signal and the pedestrian components, that's something was already planned. Other conditions will be the City would like the applicant to explore the existing sanitary sewer in the area, that the land be subdivided to help identify streets, lots, and block network, they're also requesting the installation of a 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern portion of North Dodge Street from North Scott Boulevard and the sidewalk will run from North Scott Boulevard to the proposed intersection at ACT Circle, and that 10' wide sidewalk could accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. Then related to that intersection, the applicant will be responsible for installing the southbound left turn lane and the northbound right turn lane at the future intersection at North Dodge Street and ACT Circle and installing that fourth leg to provide access to their property. Russett noted the applicant has also expressed an interest in having another access to the north of ACT Circle off of Dodge Street and that would need to be approved by both the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT so the condition that staff is recommending is that any request for an additional access up on North Dodge Street be limited to right in, right out only. The final condition is that flow study related to the sanitary sewer system. Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along North Dodge Street and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 11 of 22 subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either North Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along North Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the North Dodge Street right-of-way between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on North Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4th leg of the ACT Circle / North Dodge Street intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Russett stated this rezoning would be on the same timeline as the previous rezoning for next steps. Wade asked about the preliminary plat process and if that goes through Planning and Zoning or is just a City approval. Russett confirmed it does go through the Planning and Zoning Commission who would then make a recommendation to Council. Wade asked then if the final road design would be part of that preliminary plat. Russett stated presumably the preliminary plat will identify the proposed street network and then through the final platting process is when the actual design of the streets are finalized. Miller asked about the 30' buffer along Dodge Street and is the 10' sidewalk within that 30' buffer. Russett explained no, the 30' buffer is on the private property and the 10' sidewalk will be in the City's right of way and any development would start behind the 30' foot buffer. Davies asked with CC-2 zoning is it required to have the parking behind the buildings. Russett replied it does not require that and there could be parking between the street and the building. Miller noted further down on Dodge Street, across from Hy Vee, it was the City's preference on a past project to put the building closer to the road and conceal the parking, is that just a preference and is that dealt with on a case by case basis. Russett explained that's something Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 12 of 22 that the City did discuss with the applicant on this particular project, the Commission could make a recommendation to add a condition related to parking but the applicant can probably speak better to their concerns with that. She also noted the street network for this area is unknown, there could be lots that are fronted on three sides so trying to figure out the parking may end with some being behind the building and others not. If the goal is to ensure that there's no parking along North Dodge Street that's something that could be considered, but there probably will be a need for at least some parking located between the street and the building. Davies asked if there has been any discussion about the ACT road that proceeds to the north and then just dead ends, is the plan still to have that just remain as a dead end. Russett replied that is something to be figured out as part of the subdivision process. Miller stated regarding the building frontage question, is it in the subdivision process that there'd be more detail about the building. Russett explained likely not, because it would just be the lots and streets, and the preliminary plat will have no information on the buildings. Davies asked if it would be possible at that time for staff or the Commission to make a recommendation about that Russett stated they have never added conditions to a preliminary plat they've always been done at the rezoning stage. Miller stated with the buffer they're probably okay as it covers that walkability and entry corridor aesthetics. He assumes the type of businesses that would want to go here probably would encourage pedestrian oriented development, attractive, functional streetscapes to make it comfortable to walk and the sidewalks on both sides. Russett noted because of that language in the Comprehensive Plan staff is adding those conditions about the sidewalk along North Dodge Street so there's a way to accommodate other modes of transportation. This is a CC-2 zone and it does allow things like drive throughs, for example, through special exceptions, which are not necessarily pedestrian friendly so through that process the City tries to incorporate connections for pedestrians to the building. Miller noted the other language that stuck out at him in one of the conditions was the City's priorities to discourage strip retail. What language in CC-2 discourages that because he feels like that might be attractive to have a strip retail in this area. Russett explained the zone would allow the uses that are allowed in the zone, it's the subdivision process that is really important identifying street connections and actual blocks and lots. There could potentially be strip development here, there's nothing that would not allow that. Davies asked if the sidewalk on North Dodge Street is the applicant's responsibility or City's. Russett stated it is the applicants. Wade remembers back when ACT Circle used to go up to ACT and then it was abandoned and turned into grass, was that a DOT recommendation and will they have to review this now. Russett confirmed the DOT will have to be part of the approval for the intersection in addition to the City. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Steve Long (Salida Partners) stated there's also a significant grade change from Dodge Street to this site, it ranges from 8' to 20' and that's even after a regrade for whatever is going to be built Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 13 of 22 there. He also confirmed there was a road that connected there but ACT removed it in 2002, so they'll be following essentially the same path of that road that was taken out. He also stated the building seen there will be taken down, the original ACT building, the Lindquist Building, it was abandoned during COVID and heating and cooling was shut off so the police department has been using it for practice, and it's filled with mold. Long stated they are happy about the 10' sidewalk for connectivity, actually everything that's suggested they're fine with noting it's going to improve their development with the improvements to the traffic, the extra turn lanes, etc. He reiterated they've had a lot of interest for commercial development for this area, without even advertising. As far as the frontage, they also want to make the development pedestrian friendly from the inside of the development as there's going to be hundreds of units on the east side of the development, so the west side or along Dodge Street/Highway One there are something like 28,000 cars a day on Dodge Street and Interstate 80 is close to 40,000 so they were thinking if they keep the commercial closer to the east and make it more accommodating to the residents to the east, but they'll figure that out through the site planning process. Quellhorst closed the public hearing. Davies moved to recommend approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along North Dodge Street and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either North Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along North Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the North Dodge Street right-of-way between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on North Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4th leg of the ACT Circle / North Dodge Street intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 14 of 22 prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Wade seconded the motion. Davies stated he generally supports this item and will be very curious to see how the streets shake out as it seems tricky, but an important part of it. Wade stated he is glad to see it come together. Townsend agreed noting it's long overdue and that land has been sitting there for quite a while, so it'll be interesting to see what goes up there. Miller stated he is in support of it Quellhorst agrees and notes Commissioner Miller asked some good questions about tasteful development and doing what they can to prevent strip malls or any other kind of distasteful commercial development. A lot still has to be done, and it will come down to doing a good job of planning and plats and he has got confidence in the staff to do that appropriately. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CASE NO. REZ25-0009: Location: 2510 N. Dodge Street An application for a rezoning of approximately 37.9 acres of land from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Russett stated this is the former Pearson site at North Dodge Street with Interstate 80 to the south and Moss Ridge Road to the north. It's currently zoned Research Development Park, similar to that ACT property, where it envisions office parks or research firms, to the west is land that was rezoned to CI-1 a few years ago, and there is CH-1 Highway Commercial to the east. Russett stated this land was annexed into the City in the 1970s, it was initially developed for Westinghouse Educational Services and was later transferred to Pearson in 2014 and the City approved a rezoning of the property from Office Research Park to Research Development Park. The former Pearson site was recently purchased by GSD North Dodge LLC after it sat vacant for nearly five years and the new owners are looking to repurpose the existing buildings with a variety of land uses, including office, indoor commercial recreational uses, warehousing, retail, restaurants and many of those uses are not allowed in the current Research Development Park zone. The Research Development Park zone is pretty limited to large office and research firms. The Intensive Commercial zone allows a variety of different land uses but is a more intense zoning designation than the Community Commercial that was just discussed. The Intensive Commercial zone allows things like warehousing and freight movement, which the applicant is interested in continuing, it does not allow residential uses and it also allows indoor commercial recreation uses which the applicant can speak to as they've had some interest for some sporting Prepared by: Anne Russell, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; (REZ24-0013) Ordinance No. 25-4962 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 22.5 acres of property located east of N. Scott Blvd along N. Dubuque Road from Rural Residential (RR-1) zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) zone, and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID- RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone. (REZ24-0013) Whereas, JNB Iowa City, LLC has requested the rezoning of property located east of N. Scott Blvd along N. Dubuque Rd from Rural Residential (RR-1) zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) zone, and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject area is appropriate for uses consistent with Mixed Use and Public/Private Open Space; and Whereas, the property has never been platted and the rezoning allows for increased development potential and creates a public need to subdivide the property to ensure an interconnected street and block network prior to the issuance of any building permit for the construction of new buildings or additions to existing buildings; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to verify that the existing street and sanitary sewer infrastructure can accommodate the increased development by ensuring that the N. Dubuque Rd. between N. Scott Blvd and ACT Dr. meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks as determined by the City Engineer, and a flow study is prepared to ensure that the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of Connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer has the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned; and Whereas, due to the increased development potential the rezoning also creates a public need to provide a transition from existing residential uses by ensuring that any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include a 30' wide landscaped buffer strip landscaped according to the plan approved by the City Forester; and that commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures, allowing no light to be emitted above 90 degrees; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with reasonable conditions regarding the approval of a preliminary and final plat, ensuring that the streets meet City standards and are upgraded as determined by the City Engineer, and the existing sewer system has capacity to support the rezoned area, and commercial uses that abut residential zones include a landscaped buffer strip, and that commercial uses incorporate fully cuts off light fixtures, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the owner, JNB Iowa City, LLC, has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the City. Ordinance No. 25-4962 Page 2 Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Auditor's Parcel 2005109, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, according to the plat thereof recorded in Book 52, page 144, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa. As well as Commencing at the E Y. comer of Section 2, Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the Sth P.M., Johnson County, Iowa; Thence West on the Y. Section line 609.0 feet to the Point of Beginning; Thence North 669.5 feet to the South side of the Old Solon Road also known as Dubuque Road as shown by the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, page 160 in the Office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa; Thence Westerly on said south side to the West Line of the SE'/., NE'/. of said section, which point is 67.5 feet south of a R.O.W. Rail. Thence South on said West line 710.8 feet to a corner post; Thence East 710.3 feet to the Point of Beginning. Said tract is subject to roads and easements of record and contains 11.2 acres more or less together with that part of the South 1/2 of Old Solon Road, also known as Dubuque Road, lying immediately North of the above -described tract. Excepting therefrom: Commencing at a set 5/8" rebar marking the East 1/4 corner of Section 2, T79N, R6W of the Sth P.M. in the City of Iowa City, Iowa; thence S86°55'47"W - 604.75 feet (for the purpose of this description, the East line of the SE 1/4 is assumed to bear N01°15'42"W) to a found 5/8" rebar; thence S87"42'41 "W - 707.42 feet to a found 5/8" rebar; thence N01 `34'03"E - 667.84 feet to a set 5/8" rebar and the Point of Beginning; thence N01"34'03"E - 30.97 feet to a set 5/8" rebar on the existing Southerly R.O.W. line of Dubuque Road; thence Southeasterly along the said existing R.O.W. line 71.19 feet along a 606.00 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly which chord bears S85°25'54"E - 71.15 feet to a set 5/8" rebar; thence S88°47'49"E - 136.38 feet along said existing R.O.W. line to a set 5/8" rebar; thence Southwesterly 204.34 feet along a 817.00 foot radius curve concave Southeasterly which chord bears S84"02'18"W - 203.80 feet to a set 5/8" rebar; thence S76"52'24"W - 5.56 feet to the Point of Beginning. And A part of the Southwest corner of real estate described in Warranty Deed in Book 427, Page 343, at the office of the Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a set 5/8" rebar making the East Y. corner of Section 2, T79N, R6W of the 5th P.M. in Iowa City, Iowa; thence S86"55'47"W - 604.75 feet (for the purpose of this description, the East line of the SE 1/4 is assumed to bear N01"15'42"W) to a found 5/8" rebar; thence S87'42'41"W- 707.42feet to a found 5/8" rebar and the Point of Beginning; thence N01'34'03"E- 102.32 feet to a set 5/8" rebar; thence Southeasterlyl 06.33 feet along a 933.00 food radius curve concave Northeasterly which chord bears S18"24"30"E - 106.27 feet to a 5/8" rebar: thence S87°42'41"W -36.39 feet to the Point of Beginning. Owner is also the legal title holder of the property legally described as: Commencing at the East quarter corner of Section 2, Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M.; thence S86"55'47"W - 604.75 feet (for the purpose of this description, the East line of the SE quarter is assumed to bear N01°15'42"W); thence S87°42'41"W - 707.42 feet; thence N01'34'03"E - 102.32 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence Northwesterly 32.89 feet along a 933.50 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly the chord of which bears N14°08'09"W - 32.89 feet: thence N13°07'36"W - 514.14 feet; thence N76"52'24"E - 144.03 feet; thence S01 "34'03"W- 565.52 feet to the Point of Beginning. Ordinance No. 25-4962 Page 3 And Lot 1, Larson Subdivision, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, according to the plat thereof recorded in Book 61, Page 201, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa. As well as Beginning at a point which is 1304.1 feet south 0 degrees 27 minutes east and 494 feet west of the northeast corner of Section 2, in Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M., thence south 55 degrees 32 minutes west to the north side of Old Solon Road as shown by the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 160, in the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, thence easterly along the north side of said Old Solon Road to a point that is 1 degree 49 minutes west of the point of beginning, thence north 1 degree 49 minutes east to the point of beginning. Excepting therefrom those portions described as Auditor's Parcel 2003049 and 2004033 according to the Plats of Survey recorded in Book 47, Page 140 and Book 48, Page 25, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa. Section I Approval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby classified Mixed Use (MU) zone, as indicated: Section II. Zoning Mao. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Conditional Zoning Agreement The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. Section IV. Certification and Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance and any agreements or other documentation authorized and required by the Conditional Zoning Agreement, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section V. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section VI. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VII. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication in accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 380. Passed and approved this end day of auiemher 2025. mmaw Ordinance No.25-4962 Page 4 Attest: G2� City Clerk Approved by i !7 City Attorneys P ffice — 08/14/2025 First Consideration: August 19, 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Moe, Harmsen, Salih, Teague, Weil e in NAYS: None ABSENT: None Second Consideration: It was moved by Moe , and seconded by Salih , that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Alter, Bergus, Moe, Harmsen, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS:None ABSENT: Pass and Adopt: It was moved by agar , and seconded by salih that the ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Alter x Bergus x Harmsen x Moe x Salih x Teague Weilein Date published: September 11, 2025 Prepared by: Anne Russei Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa CM, IA 52240 (REZ24-0013) Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), JNB Iowa City, LLC. (hereinafter referred to as "Owner"). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 22.5 acres of property located east of N. Scott Blvd along N. Dubuque Road legally described below; and Whereas, the Owner has requested the rezoning of said property legally described below from Rural Residential (RR-1) zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (IRS-5) zone, RS-5 wfth a Planned Oevelopment Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) zone, and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone; and Whereas, the property has never been platted and the rezoning allows for increased development potential and creates a public need to subdivide the property to ensure an interconnected street and block system prior to the issuance of any building permit for the construction of new buiklings or additions to existing buildings; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to ensure that N. Dubuque Rd. between N. Scott Blvd and ACT Dr. meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks as determined by the City Engineer, and a flow study is prepared to ensure that the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to fts point of Connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer has the rapacity to support the full buiklout of the area being rezoned; and Whereas, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include a 30' wide landscaped buffer strip landscaped according to the plan approved by the City Forester; and that commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures, allowing no light to be emitted above 90 degrees; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding the approval of a preliminary and final plat, ensuring that the streets meet City standards and are upgraded as determined by the City Engineer, and the existing sewer system has capacity to support the rezoned area, and commercial use that abuts residential zones includes a landscaped buffer strip plan as determined by the City Forester, and the commercial requirement fully cuts off light fixtures, and the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Owner is the legal title holder of the property legally described as: Auditor's Parcel 2005109, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, according to the plat thereof recorded in Book 52, page 144, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa. As well as Commencing at the E 1/4 corner of Section 2, Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M., Johnson County, Iowa; Thence West on the'1/4 Section line 609.0 feet to the Point of Beginning; Thence North 669.5 feet to the South side of the Oki Solon Road also known as Dubuque Road as shown by the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, page 160 in the Office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa; Thence Westerly on said south side to the West Line of the SE'/., NE 1/4 of said section, which point is 67.5 feet south of a R.O.W. Rail. Thence South on said West line 710.8 feet to a comer post; Thence East 710.3 feet to the Point of Beginning. Said tract is subject to roads and easements of record and contains 11.2 acres more or less together with that part of the South 112 of Old Solon Road, also known as Dubuque Road, lying immediately North of the above -described tract. Excepting therefrom: Commencing at a set 5/8" rebar marking the East 1/4 comer of Section 2, T79N, R6W of the 5th P.M. in the City of Iowa City, Iowa; thence 886"55'47"W - 604.75 feet (for the purpose of this description, the East line of the BE 1/4 is assumed to bear N01*15'42' Vy to a found 5/8" rebar; thence S87"42'41 "W - 707.42 feet to a found 5/8" rebar, thence N01"34'03"E - 667.84 feet to a set 5/8" rebar and the Point of Beginning; thence N01"34'03"E - 30.97 feet to a set 5/8" rebar on the existing Southerly R.O.W. line of Dubuque Road; thence Southeasterly along the said existing R.O.W. line 71.19 feet along a 606.00 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly which chord bears S85"25'54"E - 71.15 feet to a set 5/8" rebar; thence S88"47'49"E - 136.38 feet along said existing R.O.W. line to a set 518" rebar; thence Southwesterly 204.34 feet along a 817.00 foot radius curve concave Southeasterly which chord bears S84`02'18"W - 203.80 feet to a set 5/8" rebar; thence S76"52'24"W - 5.56 feet to the Point of Beginning. And A part of the Southwest comer of real estate described in Warranty Deed in Book 427, Page 343, at the office of the Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a set 5/8" rebar making the East 1/4 comer of Section 2, T79N, R6W of the 5th P.M. in Iowa City, Iowa; thence S86'55'47"W - 604.75 feet (for the purpose of this description, the East line of the BE 114 is assumed to bear N01°15'42"" to a found 518" rebar; thence S87"42'41"W- 707.42feet to a found 5/8" rebar and the Point of Beginning; thence N01°34'03"E- 102.32 feet to a set 5/8" rebar; thence Southeasterly106.33 feet along a 933.00 food radius curve concave Northeasterly which chord bears S18"24"30"E - 106.27 feet to a 5/8" rebar; thence S87°42'41"W -36.39 feet to the Point of Beginning. Owner is also the legal title holder of the property legally described as: Commencing at the East quarter corner of Section 2, Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M.; thence S86"55'47"W - 604.75 feet (for the purpose of this description, the East line of the SE quarter is assumed to bear N01*15'42'W; thence S87°42'41"W - 707.42 feet; thence N01°34'03" E - 102.32 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence Northwesterly 32.89 feet along a 933.50 fool radius curve concave Northeasterly the chord of which bears N14*08'09W - 32.89 feet: thence N13°07'36"W - 514.14 feet; thence N76°52'24"E-144.03 feet; thence S01 `34'03' W- 565.52 feet to the Point of Beginning. And Lot 1, Larson Subdivision, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, according to the plat thereof recorded in Book 61, Page 201, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa. As well as Beginning at a point which is 1304.1 feet south 0 degrees 27 minutes east and 494 feet west of the northeast comer of Section 2, in Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M., thence south 55 degrees 32 minutes west to the north side of Old Solon Road as shown by the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 160, in the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, thence easterly along the north side of said Old Solon Road to a point that is 1 degree 49 minutes west of the point of beginning, thence north 1 degree 49 minutes east to the point of beginning. Excepting therefrom those portions described as Auditor's Parcel 2003049 and 2004033 according to the Plats of Survey recorded in Book 47, Page 140 and Book 48, Page 25, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa. 2. Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all requirements of the Zoning Code, as well as the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of building permits for the construction of new buildings or additions to existing buildings, the subject property shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. b. Prior to final plat approval, owner shall submit construction drawings demonstrating that N. Dubuque Rd. between N. Scott Blvd. and ACT Dr. meet City standards for a 28-foot-wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Owner shall install improvements prior to issuance of a building permit. c. Prior to final plat approval, owner shall prepare a flow study for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full builoout of the area hereby rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. d. A site plan must show landscaped buffer strips in any commercial use that abuts residential zones prior to approval of that she plan. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. e. Commercial uses shall include full cutoff light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). 4. The conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2025), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties, and shall remain in full force and effect unless and until released of record by the City for the abovedescribed property, upon which occurrence these conditions shall be deemed satisfied and this agreement of no further force and effect. Nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 5. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Owner's expense. Dated this 2nd day of September C Iowa City Brbee Teague, Mayor n Attest: U Kellie Grace, City Clark Approv y: City Attorney's Office KIK-1 JNB low City, LLC By: City of Iowa City Acknowledgement: State of Iowa ) as: Johnson County ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on sen[ember 2 , 2025 by Bruce Teague and Kellie 6ra.c:z as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. L�f,f ILsds� �Q � No ry Public in and for the State of Iowa YULI SA CASO Commission Number p863364 (Stamp or Seal) My commission expires: JNB Iowa City, LLC Acknowledgement State off_ County of-Tv)Axt,snh This record was acknowledged before me on 2025 by 14_We _ l..o" (name) as ) (title) of JNB Iowa City, LLC Notary Publ' in and for the St to of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) cr ' nr Comnisaon My commission expir Kellie Grace From: Danielle Sitzman Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 8:33 AM To: Kellie Grace Subject: FW: ACT Development - Comprehensive Plan & MU Rezoning Reading Collapse Request Danielle L. Sitzman, AICP Deputy Director Development Services City of Iowa City, IA (319) 356-5252 From: Nick Hatz <nhatz@shive-hattery.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 8:16 AM To: Anne Russett <ARussett@iowa-city.org>; Danielle Sitzman <dsitzman@iowa-city.org> Cc: Steve Long <steve@salidapartners.com>; Mark T. Seabold <mseabold@shive-hattery.com>; Mike Welch (michael@welchdesigndevelopment.com) <michael@welchdesigndevelopment.com> Subject: ACT Development - Comprehensive Plan & MU Rezoning Reading Collapse Request ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** This message is from an external sender. Hello Anne and Danielle, On behalf of the developer we'd like to request that further readings of the ACT Comprehensive Plan Amendment and MU Rezonings be collapsed given the unanimous support received thus far from P&Z and Council. Let us know if that is acceptable. I believe a similar request for collapse of the Dodge street commercial is forthcoming from Mike, CC'ed. Great job presenting to Council last night Danielle. Thanks, Nick Nick Hatz, P.E. HelHimlHis Managing Director —Cedar Rapids, Civil Engineer Shive-Hattery 222 Third Avenue SE I Suite 300 1 P.O. Box 1803 1 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (o) 319.364.0227 1 (d) 319.892.3618 1 (c) 319.560.8880 SH1VEHATTERY Item Number: 8.e. a CITY OF IOWA CITY "QF T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 33.6 acres of property located east of N. Dodge St, and south of 1-80 from Office Research Park (ORP) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. (REZ25-0008) (Second Consideration) Attachments: REZ25-0008 Staff Report-w-attachments PZ 7.16.25 minutes-CPA-REZs Ordinance & CZA Council correspondence from Michael Welch (REZ25-0008) STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Item: REZ25-0008 Date: July 16, 2025 GENERAL INFORMATION Owner/Applicant: JNB Iowa City, LLC Jim Bergman Iceberg Development Group, LLC 563-505-5611 jim(a�jnbice.com Contact Person: Steve Long Salida Partners 319-621-3462 steve(a)sal i d apart n ers. com Requested Action: Rezoning to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for approximately 33.64 acres. Purpose: To allow for the redevelopment and development of land surrounding the former ACT campus. Location: East of N. Dodge St and south of 1-80. Location Map: 1 uAk, i -4 AL r' Size: 33.64 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant Land, Former portion of the ACT Campus; Office Research Park (ORP) Zone Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Hotel, Gym, Restaurant; Highway Commercial (CH-1) zone South: Former ACT Campus, Iowa City Community School District Office, Mixed Use (MU) zone and K Comprehensive Plan: District Plan: Public Meeting Notification: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone East: Vacant; ORP zone West: Household Living, Vacant; Rural Residential (RR-1) zone Office Research Development Centers, Pending plan amendment (CPA25-0001) Northeast District Plan Property owners and residents within 500' of the property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. June 18, 2025 August 3, 2025 Iceberg Development Group, LLC (JNB Iowa City, LLC) recently purchased the former ACT campus and surrounding properties. The owner is working with Shive-Hattery to prepare three applications to allow for the redevelopment of the former ACT campus area located at 101 ACT Drive, as well as the development of the property at 2150 N. Dubuque and the redevelopment of the property at 2041 N. Dubuque Rd. The goal is to allow a variety of commercial uses off of N. Dodge Street and a mix of residential and commercial uses along N. Dubuque Rd. Attachment 3 includes the applicant submittal which illustrates the proposed changes to the zoning map and includes the applicant statement describing the rationale behind the request. The first application to be considered is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA25-0001). The Comprehensive Plan future land use map suggests this area is appropriate for Office Research Development Centers. This area is not included on the Northeast District Plan's future land use map. The proposed amendment would change the future land use designation for the subject property in the Comprehensive Plan to General Commercial along N. Dodge Street, Mixed Use along N. Dubuque Rd, and some Public/Private Open Space for the area constrained by sensitive features. The other concurrently submitted applications include two zoning map amendments (REZ24-0013 and REZ25-0008). This rezoning (REZ25-0008) is a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along N. Dodge Street to the Community Commercial (CC-2) Zone. REZ24-0013 is a request to rezoning 22.5 acres of land along N. Dubuque Rd to the Mixed -Use (MU) Zone. The applicant has used the Good Neighbor Policy and held a Good Neighbor Meeting on Tuesday, June 10, 2025. Several neighbors attended. Attachment 3 incudes the application materials and Attachment 4 provides the good neighbor meeting summary report provided by the applicant ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned Office Research Park (ORP) zone. The purpose of this zone is to provide areas for the development of large office and research firms and other complementary uses. The requirements of this zone protect uses in the zone from adverse impact of uses on adjacent land and protect adjacent more restrictive uses. Hotels, 3 motels and similar uses should be located along the periphery of the zone or in such other locations that do not adversely affect the setting and quality of development for the permitted uses of this zone. Proposed Zoning: The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. The purpose of CC-2 zone is to provide for major business districts to serve a significant segment of the total community population. In addition to a variety of retail goods and services, these centers may typically feature a number of large traffic generators requiring access from major thoroughfares. While these centers are usually characterized by indoor operations, uses may have limited outdoor activities; provided, that outdoor operations are screened or buffered to remain compatible with surrounding uses (14-2C-1 F). Table 1 shows the uses that are allowed in the CC-2 zone. It includes a mix of residential and commercial uses, including restaurants, retail, and office, as well as more intensive commercial uses such as vehicle repair uses. The CC-2 zone also allows for some lower intensity industrial zone. For example, light manufacturing is allowed; however, it is restricted to 5,000 sq ft and the manufacturing must be small scale with an on -site retail component. Table 1. Uses Allowed in the CC-2 Zone Use Categories Subgroups CC-2 Residential uses Group living uses Assisted group living PR Household living uses Group households PR Multi -family dwellings PR/S Commercial uses Animal related commercial uses General PR Intensive Building trade uses PR Commercial recreational uses Indoor P Outdoor S Drinking establishments PR Eating establishments P Office uses General office P Medical/dental office P Quick vehicle servicing uses PR/S Redemption Centers PR Retail uses Alcohol sales oriented retail P Delayed deposit service uses PR Hospitality oriented retail P Outdoor storage and display oriented PR Personal service oriented P Repair oriented P Sales oriented P Tobacco sales oriented PR Surface passenger service uses P CI Vehicle repair uses S Industrial uses Manufacturing and production uses General manufacturing PR Technical/light manufacturing PR Self-service storage uses S Institutional and civic uses Basic utility uses PR/S Community service uses Community service - shelter S General community service P Daycare uses PR Educational facilities General S Specialized P Parks and open space uses PR Religious/private group assembly uses P Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems S Other uses Communication transmission facility uses PR/S *P = Permitted; PR = Provisional (subject to additional use specific standards); S = Special Exception (requires review and approval by the Board of Adjustment) Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The future land use map of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Office Research Development Centers. Although the subject property is within the boundary of the Northeast District Plan the subject property is not included on the future land use map. Concurrent with this rezoning, the owner has requested an amendment to the land use policy direction of the comprehensive plan to show this area as appropriate for the General Commercial land use category. The comprehensive plan currently includes goals and strategies that align with the proposed rezoning. Land Use Goals & Strategies: • Encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of extending infrastructure and services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of the city. o Identify areas and properties that are appropriate for infill development. o Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. • Plan for commercial development in defined commercial nodes, including small-scale neighborhood commercial centers. 9 o Discourage linear strip commercial development that discourages walking and biking and does not contribute to the development of compact, urban neighborhoods. o Provide for appropriate transitions between high and low -density development and between commercial areas and residential zones. Economic Development Goals & Strategies: • Increase and diversity the property tax base by encouraging the retention and expansion of existing businesses and attracting businesses that have growth potential and are compatible with Iowa City's economy. • Provide an environment that supports quality employment and living wages and that enhances workforce skills and educational levels. • Encourage a healthy mix of independent, locally -owned businesses and national businesses. • Improve the environmental and economic health of the community through efficient use of resources. o Encourage new business development in existing core or neighborhood commercial areas. o Support projects that provide opportunities for workers to live close to their place of employment... Transportation Goals and Strategies: • Accommodate all modes of transportation on the street system. o Design arterial streets as "complete streets" where all modes of transportation are considered... o Require sidewalks on both sides of city streets. Encourage walking and bicycling. o Encourage pedestrian -oriented development and attractive and functional streetscapes that make it safe, convenient, and comfortable to walk. o Provide crosswalks and pedestrian signals where appropriate. For the reasons above, staff finds the requested rezoning to be consistent with the comprehensive plan amendment and also compatible with the policies of the comprehensive plan. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The subject property is a portion of the former ACT campus that is now largely vacant. To the east is the remainder of the former campus. To the south is the Iowa City Community School District offices. Across the N. Dodge St. right-of- way are a variety of commercial uses, including a gym, restaurant, hotel, and gas station. To the west is an existing single-family home that is separated from the subject property by a small woodland. Staff is recommending one condition to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either N. Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be 30' wide and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. Transportation and Access and Utilities: The subject property is currently accessed from N. Dubuque Rd. and ACT PI. There is currently no access to the site from N. Dodge St. As part of the rezoning, staff requested a traffic study. Attachment 5 includes the traffic study's executive summary. The study determined that the existing lane configuration and stop control at the N. Dodge St. and ACT Circle intersection will not provide an acceptable level of service (LOS) through the 2047 C01 buildout design year. Therefore, the traffic study recommends the following for the N. Dodge St. / ACT Circle intersection: 1) a signalized intersection, 2) installation of a fourth leg that would provide access to the subject property, and 3) a dedicated northbound right turn lane and south bound left turn lane. The figure below denotes the recommended new improvements with red circles. Figure 1. Recommended Improvements — ACT Circle/N Dodge St Intersection Staff has several recommended conditions related to the transportation system. Regarding the N. Dodge St and ACT Circle intersection, the City will be installing a traffic signal at this intersection. The City portion of the project will include the full traffic signal and associated pedestrian signal accommodations (currently included in the adopted Capital Improvements Program for 2025). Through the proposed conditions, the applicant will be responsible for constructing the 41" leg (i.e. access to the subject property) of the ACT Circle / N. Dodge St intersection. Also related to this intersection, staff is recommending the applicant install a dedicated southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT — as recommended by the traffic study. The applicant is also interested in an additional driveway access north of the N. Dodge St/ACT Circle intersection to the subject property. Any access would require review and approval by the Iowa DOT and the City Engineer. Staff is recommending a condition that if the applicant pursues an Iowa DOT permit for an additional access that it be limited to right-in/right-out only. Since this area has never been platted, staff is recommending conditions to ensure that as the area develops an interconnected block and street network is established through the subdivision process. Staff is also recommending a condition to fill in an existing sidewalk gap along the east/south side of N. Dodge St. between N. Scott Blvd and the ACT Circle. Staff is recommending a 10' wide sidewalk to be installed by the applicant as part of the rezoning. Regarding other utilities, staff needs more information about the existing sanitary sewer in the area. Therefore, staff is also recommending a condition that prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. VA STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along N. Dodge St. and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either N. Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along N. Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the N. Dodge Street right-of-way between N. Scott Blvd and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left - turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on N. Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4t" leg of the ACT Circle / N. Dodge St intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the N. Dodge St/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. NEXT STEPS: After a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the following will occur: • City Council will need to set a public hearing for both the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning applications. • City Council will consider approval of the comprehensive plan amendment (CPA23-0001) and must hold three readings including the public hearing for the rezonings (REZ24-0013 and REZ25-0008). E:3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Applicant Submittal 4. Good Neighbor Meeting Summary 5. Traffic Study Executive Summary Approved by: DanieTfe Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map ACT Crr cap � a I N Dubuque- t y An application to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land Acii]r� located south of I-80 and east of N. Dodge Street from Office Research Park [ORP] zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) + + zone. , a � t CITY OF IOWA CITY N Dodge St Nb to 8n.Eb ` — J �� .Jib■ f ip�t •� z � NN Soott BBI_ _ _ ' ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map ATTACHMENT 3 Applicant Submittal June 10, 2025 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT FOR REZONING JNB Iowa City — Dodge Street Commercial Please accept the following Applicant Statement submitted on behalf of JNB Iowa City, LLC. JNB Iowa City, LLC (Applicant) has recently purchased the 400-acre former ACT Campus which was once home to more than 900 employees in multiple office buildings. The use of the campus changed dramatically over the past several years and now only one building is utilized. The remaining buildings are vacant with the former Lindquist Buildings slated for razing this summer. The 400-acre campus contains numerous zoning classifications currently. These include Rural Residential (1111-1), Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5), Office Research Park (ORP), Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS), Research Development Park (RDP), and recently added Mixed Use (MU). The Interim Development zones are intended for areas of managed growth in which agricultural and other nonurban uses of land may continue until such time as the city is able to provide city services and urban development can occur. The Applicant is requesting to rezoning 33.64 acres along N. Dodge Street and Interstate 80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. The affected property is currently zoned Office Research Park (ORP). According to the city code, the Community Commercial zone is intended to "provide for major business districts to serve a significant segment of the total community population. In addition to a variety of retail goods and services, these centers may typically feature a number of large traffic generators requiring access from major thoroughfares." The request for the CC-2 zone reflects the property's location along N. Dodge Street, a major arterial street, and the proximity to Interstate 80. N. Dodge Street experiences more than 20,000 vehicles per day and Interstate 80 experiences more than 40,000 vehicles per day. The properties on the opposite side of Dodge Street are currently zoned CH-1. There are two properties to the south along N. Dodge Street that are currently zoned single-family residential. The topography between these properties and the developable portion of the subject property provides a natural buffer. This property is surrounded by developed properties and city services are currently available. Rezoning to Highway Commercial allows for redevelopment of this portion of the former ACT site to bring commercial services this important corridor in Iowa City. Thank you for your consideration of this rezoning application. Sincerely, Michael J. Welch, PE Shoemaker 4,o" Haaland Project No. 24381.40 Page 1 0 LD CN N73 50 43 E 11.07 N7302554"E N73052'08"E 183.16 ACT CIRCLE 215.20' HOLDINGS LLC ZONING Col2400' N DODGE, LLC ZONING �j� � INTERSTATE 80 /-------------- --- --- — -- _ - REZONING EXHIBIT DODGE STREET COMMERCIAL -------------------------------- --- IOWA CITY, IA — — — — CD -------------- CH1 N58°59'27"E ` �.� Z; i �' _ MIDAMERICAN ENERGY LEGAL DESCRIPTION � ._ oo_- - ZONING 235.92' oQ� "' JNB IOWA CITY, LLC ID—RS _Lu . _ \ N60018'11"E 4 / ZONING ID—RS I Z/ 213.93 ONING Col N49052'15"E o -v / 22>4' i —C7/ JAYA HOTELS, LLC µ k. i ZONING / Co1��S88°31'12"W SAfdTILIAN INVEST�402'09. JNB CAMPUS, LLC ZONING ;�, � � �.. z ZONING ND REAL ESTATE CH ` ' /�� 1 � �� ID—RS ZONING `/'% �ti .. x, 0 i N,` 11 11 AREA A ACT CIRCLE - 33.64 Ac HOLDINGS LLC ZONING / 11465,216 SF " — — C01 / �l�j JNB IOWA CITY, LLC ZONING ID RP JNB IOWA CITY, LLC 1 / ZONING " /_�S01°50'00"E — — / N22° 03 06 WID—RP � — — — — 103.86' — ` 150.00' / � � Zr "WN85°04'45"W /\�,S88010'00 , _ I 255.23 / 315.20 / S05034'20"E GZON rxI � IjUERRERO�I 140 77' RS—: Ln CRAWLEY ZONING � -°,�° - � �� R=473.80' e. L=179.68' " RS-5 I� JNB IOWA CITY, LLC ZONING o o - I S00°00'00"E CH=178.60 o �� JNB CAMPUS, LLC RS-5 229.52 CB=S05 30 01 W ZONING MU S8804121"W N. DUBUQUE RD t777t7 129.33' ° 1 II S89 48 3 W S81048 39 W 222.27 5 W o� 121.43 73.31' q� G� 03 ICCSD ZONING G ` I ID -RP JNB IOWA CITY, LLC ICKORY ZONING RDP HEIGHTS ZONING OPD / RS-5 _ T JNB CAMPUS, LLC JNB CAMPUS, LLC ZONING ZONING f JNB IOWA CITY, LLC MU _ MU ZONING ID—RS PC� VVf -OAKKNOLL EAST ZONING OPD RM-12 i MONUMENT FARMS, Lb --GI OF IOWA CITY ZONING ZONING ID —RP _ OPD / RS-5 0 100 200 Soo 400 N 1 REVISE ZONING DESIGNATION FEET 0 INITIAL APPLICATION INO. REVISION Shoemake 06-10-25 H a a I a n d 05-28-25 DATE JNB CAMPUS, LLC ZONING ID—RS JNB CAMPUS, LLC ZONING — ID—RS NORTH SCOTT BOULEVARD HARVEST J PRESERVE AREA "A" AUDITOR'S PARCEL #96022, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 37 - PAGE 4, AND A PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL #96016, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 36 - PAGE 348, AND AUDITOR'S PARCEL #96015, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 36 - PAGE 347, AND A PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL #96021, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 37 - PAGE 3, AND A PORTION OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2005047, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 49 - PAGE 123, AND A PORTION OF SURVEY PLAT, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 17 - PAGE 27 AND A PORTION OF A SURVEY PLAT, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4 - PAGE 160, AND A PORTION OF THE N1/2 NW FRACTIONAL 1/4, SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6W OF THE FIFTH P.M, AND ALL LOCATED WITHIN THE E1/2 NE 1/4, SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH P.M, AND THE SW 1/4 SW 1/4 SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 80 NORTH RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH P.M, AND THE SE 1/4 SW 1/4 SECTION 36 TOWNSHIP 80 NORTH RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH P.M, AND THE N1/2 NW FRACTIONAL 1/4, SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE FIFTH P.M, AND ALL LOCATED WITHIN WARRANTY DEED AS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 6644 - PAGE 171 AND RECORDED IN JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A 5/8" IRON ROD WITH AN IDOT CAP LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERN RIGHT OF WAY OF INTERSTATE 180 AND THE SW CORNER OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 96022; THENCE N73° 25' 54"E-183.16 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SW1/4 SW1/4 SECTION 36-80-06, WHICH IS ALSO THE NE CORNER OF SAID AUDITOR'S PARCEL, THENCE N73050'43"E -11.07 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERN RIGHT OF WAY, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE EXTENSION LINE OF THE EAST LINE OF THE NW 1/4 NW 1/4 SECTION 01-79-06; THENCE S01°46'34"E - 584.70 FEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE; THENCE S88°31'12"W - 402.09 FEET; THENCE S43°10'00" - 851.17 FEET; THENCE S01 50'00"E-150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERN LINE OF THE NW 1/4 NW 1/4, SECTION 01-79-06; THENCE S88°10'00"W - 255.23 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERN LINE, THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF OLD SOLON RD., WHICH IS NOW ACT DR.; THENCE S05°34'20"E - 140.77 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE S05°30'01"W-179.68 FEET ALONG A 473.80 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY, WITH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 21 °43'42", HAVING A CHORD LENGTH OF 178.60 FEET, ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE S00°00'00" - 229.52 FEET; THENCE S88°41'21 "W - 129.33 FEET; THENCE S81 °04'58"W - 222.27 FEET; THENCE S81 °48'39"W - 73.31 FEET; THENCE S89048'36"W-121.43 FEET TO THE SE CORNER OF PROPERTY SURVEY RECORDED IN BK 4 - PG 160, WHICH IS ALSO ON THE NORTHERN RIGHT OF WAY OF OLD SOLON RD; THENCE N00°18'17"W - 568.41 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PROPERTY SURVEY; THENCE N85°04'45"W - 315.20 FEET; THENCE N22003'06"W - 103.86 FEET TO THE NW CORNER OF SAID PROPERTY SURVEY TO AN IRON ROD WITH CAP #15747, ALSO LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERN RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH DODGE STREET AND HIGHWAY 1; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERN HIGHWAY 1 RIGHT OF WAY THE FOLLOWING COURSES: N55002'56"E-1007.60 FEET; N49°52'15"E - 228.74 FEET; N60°18'11"E - 213.93 FEET; THENCE N58059'27"E - 235.92 FEET TO THE NW CORNER OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 96016, WHICH IS ALSO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF INTERSTATE 180; THENCE N58°01'55"E - 397.37 FEET; THENCE N73052'08"E - 215.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE DESCRIBED AREA CONTAINS 33.64 ACRES MORE OR LESS AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. FOUNDATION APPLICANT INFORMATION p� ZONING ID—RS U MONUMENT FARMS, LLC / ZONING ID —RP Fa -- PROPERTY OWNER JNB IOWA CITY, LLC STEVE LONG 7152 ELDORADO PT WEST DES MOINES, IA 50266 STEVE@SALIDAPARTNERS.COM CIVIL ENGINEER SHOEMAKER AND HAALAND MICHAEL J. WELCH, PE 160 HOLIDAY ROAD CORALVILLE, IA 52241 319-351-7150 ZONING INFORMATION CURRENT ZONING ORP - OFFICE RESEARCH PARK PROPOSED ZONING CC2 - COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL CLIENT PROJECT SHEET TITLE r JNB IOWA CITY, LLC ACT WEST CAMPUS REZONING EXHIBIT N. DODGE STREET PROJECT NUMBER: 24381.40 ISSUED DATE: 06-10-2025 DRAWN BY: CHECK BY: MJW APPROVED BY: MJW SHEET NUMBER EX-1 /0\ REV ATTACHMENT 4 Good Neighbor Meeting Summary i r Summary Report for * - , —4 Good Neighbor Meeting CITY OF IOWA CITY Project Name: ACT West Campus Project Location: 2041 N Dubuque Rd Meeting Date and Time: 6/10 4-6 p.m. Meeting Location: Ferguson Center (200 Act Dr, Iowa City, IA 52243) Names of Applicant Representatives attending: Steve Long, Mark Seabold, Mike Welch Travis Wright Names of City Staff Representatives attending: Anne Russett Number of Neighbors Attending: 20 Sign -In Attached? Yes No x General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - Residents would like to see a restaurant in the Ferguson Center and more services in general. Neighbors supported the idea of ACT Dr connecting into Dodge St. Neighbors liked the idea of commercial along Dodge St with a pedestrian connection to Oaknoll. The idea of more housing and a mix of uses nearby was well received. Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - Concerns about traffic on N. Scott Blvd. Indicate the left turn out of Oakknoll onto N. Scott is difficult. Want to know if there would be a second connection to the Oakknoll east property so they could avoid N. Scott. Wanted a pedestrian connection from Oakknoll East to the ACT campus. They currently cut through the ICCSD property but, worry that could be taken away in the future. Neighbors prefer to see housing only along Scott Blvd, but fine with senior facility that includes a cafe/coffee shop that is open to the public. Concern about about removal of trees/open space that neighbors often use for walking. Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: No changes intended based on comments from Neighbors. Staff Representative Comments ATTACHMENT 5 Traffic Study Executive Summary Traffic Impact Study: Iceberg Development Group Iowa City, Iowa July 1, 2025 %11111111111 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS ENGINEERING DOCUMENT 41}I/ WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT PERSONAL �tttt ()�F-Sslo/v � SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED �� • . PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF IOWA. Q - r y ;. ERIC J m : 07/01/2025 J MUNCHEL = SIGNATURE DATE 19/42 PRINTED OR TYPED NAME: ERIC J. MUNCHEL LICENSE NUMBER: 19742 MY LICENSE RENEWAL DATE IS: 12/31/2024 PAGES, SHEETS, OR DIVISIONS COVERED BY THIS SEAL: ALL //t/111111111i0 Prepared for: Iceberg Development Group Prepared by: SH1VEHATTERY A R C H I T E C T U R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G 222 V Avenue SE, Suite 300 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (319) 364-0227 Fxecutive Summary The Iceberg Development Group initiated this traffic impact study to identify potential traffic impacts on the adjacent roadway network due to their proposed multipurpose land use development, which will be located on the former ACT Campus in Iowa City, IA. The study area west of the black delineated line in the figure below is the focus of the proposed traffic study. This study builds on the previous study submitted for the rezoning of the 48 acres noted at Area 1.1 through 1.4 in the figure below. Five access points are proposed, with two on Scott Boulevard and two on Dodge Street (Highway 1), and one on 1st Avenue. These access points will be full access points with no turning movement restrictions, except for a right-in/right-out access point on Dodge Street (Highway 1) north of ACT Circle. Existing, opening, and design analysis years are assumed to be 2025, 2027, and 2047, respectively. The following study intersections within the study area were identified for analysis. Please note directional roadway names, for example N Dodge Street have been dropped. Study Intersection #1 — Dodge Street & Scott Boulevard Study Intersection #2 — Scott Boulevard & Dubuque Road/Scooter's Access Point (Scott Boulevard & Dubuque Road hereafter) Study Intersection #3 — Scott Boulevard & 1st Avenue/ACT Place (Scott Boulevard & 1st Avenue hereafter) Study Intersection #4 — Scott Boulevard & Hickory Heights Lane Study Intersection #5 — Dodge Street & ACT Circle Study Intersection #6 — Dodge Street & 1-80 EB Off -Ramp Study Intersection #7 — Dodge Street & 1-80 WB Off -Ramp Study Intersection #8 — Dodge Street & Access Point Study Intersection #9 — 1st Avenue & Access Point The above list assigns each study intersection with a numberthat is used as reference. (e.g., study intersection #1 = Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard). The area immediately surrounding the study intersections incorporates retail, services, office, recreational, residential, and undeveloped land uses. Weekday turning movement volumes were collected at the study intersections in mid and late October 2024. The peak hours of the study intersections were determined based on the highest consecutive four 15-minute turning movement counts between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 AM and 3:00 and 6:00 PM at study intersection #6. Study intersection #6 governs the AM and PM peak hours because it is the study intersection with the highest volume of entering vehicles. The AM peak hour was determined to occur between 7:30 and 8:30. The PM peak hour was determined to occur between 4:15 and 5:15. The raw and refined volume data are provided in Appendix 1. Projected traffic analysis will typically apply an annual growth rate to study intersections' existing turning movement volumes to account for growth in background traffic over future analysis years. In coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County the following growth rates were identified for the study intersection approaches. 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A R C H I T E C T II R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G Page 4 of 53 Figure ES1 Annual Growth Rates These annual growth rates were applied to existing volumes to project future background traffic volume growth, which can be expected through a sustained constant area growth without the potential development. It should be noted over time growth rates generally do not exhibit straight-line growth, but rather tend to level off as the surrounding area continues to develop. Therefore, the use of a straight-line growth rate for the prediction of future events can be thought of as conservative and should be considered as such when reviewing the output of this analysis. The Iowa Crash Analysis Tool (ICAT) website administered by Iowa DOT was used to collect available crash data at the existing (study intersection #8 is not an existing intersection) study intersections for the ten-year period between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2024. Over this period a total of 224 crashes were reported at the existing study intersections. The Iowa DOT Potential for Crash Reduction (PCR) analysis was also reviewed at the existing study intersections. Study intersection #1 (Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard had a medium PCR level. Study intersection #5 did not have a PCR classification. All other study intersections (study intersection #2, #3, #4, #6, and #7) had a negligible PCR classification. Safety improvements are not recommended at the study intersections based on the crash analysis presented above. The development will increase traffic volumes at the study intersections. However, the potential for increased crash frequencies is not anticipated. 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A RL}EITEC I U R E + E N G I N E ER I NG Page 5 of 53 Iowa City Transit provides public transportation in the study area. Figure 10 identifies the North Dodge route (Route 7), which passes through the study area. The Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPOCJC) Future Forward 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan identifies "Wide Sidewalk/Pathways" within the study area that extend along Dodge Street, Scott Boulevard, and 1 st Avenue. Sidewalks extend along the study roadways, except Interstate 80. The analysis presented herein indicates the study intersection's LOS indices will operate at acceptable levels during the AM and PM peak hour conditions through the 2047 buildout design year scenario, except for study intersections #2 and #5. Additionally, it should also be noted there is an existing queueing issue on the northbound approach at study intersection #1. Based on the analysis presented herein, the northbound approach queue is an existing issue and is anticipated to get worse under all future scenarios at study intersection #1. However, the proposed lane configuration with an additional northbound right -turn bay (presented with Table 20) is anticipated to mitigate the queueing issue and should be considered. Based on the analysis presented herein, the existing lane configuration and stop control at the Scott Boulevard and Dubuque Road (study intersection #2) intersection will not provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. However, the LOS issue is anticipated to arise regardless if the development is built or not. Additionally, the unacceptable LOS is only anticipated to occur for approximately 30 to 45 minutes during the AM peak hour. Based on the analysis presented herein, the existing lane configuration and stop control at the Dodge Street and ACT Circle Lane (study intersection #5) intersection will not provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. Therefore, the proposed lane configuration and signalized control presented in the figure below is recommended. The figure below presents the recommended lane configuration and control at the study intersections, which is anticipated to provide an acceptable LOS through the 2047 buildout design year scenario. The changes/improvements to the study intersections are delineated with red ovals in the figure below. The 95th percentile queues at the study intersections were also analyzed. Based on these queue lengths no issues, such as a queue extending upstream to an adjacent intersection are anticipated, with the exception of the northbound approach at study intersection #1. Operational analysis worksheets are contained in Appendix 4. At Intersection #8, it should be reiterated from the assumptions listed in the report that for the purposes of the analysis presented herein, 0 inbound/outbound trips are assumed to use the proposed RIRO access point (study intersection #8). If this access point is not approved it the surrounding intersections would still operate at an acceptable LOS. If this access point is approved, it is anticipated to attract some trips away from study intersection #5 and thereby reduce the vehicle delay reported herein at study intersection #5. 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A R C H I T E C T II R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G Page 6 of 53 Figure ES2 Study Intersections — 2027 Recommended Buildout Lane Configuration & Control A `v ' O� Om cce" Point 2240009880 1 July 1, 2025 SHIVEHATTC-RY A R C H I T E C T II R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G MINUTES FINAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION J U LY 16, 2025 — 6:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: James Davies, Steve Miller, Scott Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade MEMBERS ABSENT: Kaleb Beining, Maggie Elliott STAFF PRESENT: Liz Craig, Anne Russett, Rachel Schaefer OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Long, Cady Gerlach, Ed O'Connor RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of CPA25-0001, a change to the future land use designation of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for approximately 57 acres of property located south of I-80 and east of North Dodge Street from Office Research Development Centers to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along North Dubuque Road east of North Scott Boulevard to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that North Dubuque Road between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Drive meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along North Dodge Street and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 2 of 22 Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either North Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along North Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the North Dodge Street right-of-way between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on North Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4th leg of the ACT Circle / North Dodge Street intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ25-0009, an application to rezone approximately 37.9 acres of land at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. By a vote of 5-0 the Commission recommends that Title 14 zoning be amended, as illustrated in attachment one with two revisions related to the map and the dedication cap language, to update the requirements related to Neighborhood Open Space dedication, to continue implementing the City's goal of providing adequate open space for the City's residents. CALL TO ORDER: Quellhorst called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS: CASE NO. CPA25-0001: Location: South of 1-80 and east of N. Dodge Street Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 3 of 22 A public hearing to consider an amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from Office Research Development Center to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space for approximately 57 acres of property. Russett began the staff report showing an aerial map the subject property and also a map that shows the zoning of the property which is a mix of Research Park, Single Family, and Rural Residential. She explained this is the former ACT property that was recently purchased by JNB Iowa City, LLC. and there are several items on the agenda that are all interrelated with this property. This item, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, needs to be considered before the subsequent rezoning applications are considered. The amendment is to the Future Land Use Map to change these 57 acres of property from Office Research Development Center to General Commercial, Mixed Use and a bit of open space. After the Amendment is approved then there are two rezoning requests. One is for land that is off North Dubuque Road, 22.5 acres, and that request is a rezoning to the Mixed Use zone to align with the requested Future Land Use Map Amendment to Mixed Use. The other rezoning is for 33 acres of land to the east of North Dodge Street, which is a request to change the zoning from Office Research Park to Community Commercial. Russett noted the applicant did hold a good neighbor meeting on June 10 on all three of these applications. She shared a map that shows the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Quellhorst asked why this is a Comprehensive Plan change and not just a rezoning. Russett explained because the direction in the Comprehensive Plan is that this area should be for Office Research and Office Parks but since they want to do something different they need to amend the Plan so that the rezonings would then align with the Comprehensive Plan. Without the amendment staff can't make a positive recommendation for the rezonings. Russett explained when they look at Comprehensive Plan Amendments there are two approval criteria. The first is that circumstances have changed, or additional information or factors have come to light such that the amendment is in the public interest. The second criteria is that the proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies or provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. In terms of the first criteria, circumstances have changed, the IC 2030 Plan was adopted in 2013 and at that time identified this area as appropriate for Office Research Park. At that time, the former ACT campus was in use and therefore the Comprehensive Plan aligned with the existing land use of Office Research Park. Since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted interest in offices locating within downtown became more popular and a lot of offices were leaving office research parks and relocating downtown. Additionally, there was the pandemic and that caused multiple vacancies in office buildings. ACT formerly employed around 1200 people on their campus and in their buildings (that was about 350,000 square feet). Currently they have 75 employees on site in those 54,000 acres square feet. Russett stated there has been a lot that has changed since the Comprehensive Plan was originally adopted as well such as the City has a real need for housing and this change in the Comprehensive Plan can help support that increase in supply of housing. The second criteria is that the amendment is compatible with other policies within the Comprehensive Plan. Russett reiterated when the Plan was adopted ACT was fully operational. Also, the Plan recognizes that the amount of Office Research Park identified may be unrealistic, Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 4 of 22 and since the adoption of the Plan the likelihood of more office research parks in this area has further declined. Not only has the ACT campus closed, but Pearson's has also closed. In addition, there are a variety of land use goals and strategies that this amendment would align with such as encouraging compact and efficient development, identifying areas that are appropriate for infill planning for commercial development, and then in terms of housing goals it is encouraging a diversity of housing options throughout the community, identifying and supporting infill development and concentrating new development in areas that's contiguous to existing neighborhoods. Therefore, staff does find that this proposal meets those two criteria. Staff recommends approval of CPA25-0001, a change to the future land use designation of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for approximately 57 acres of property located south of 1-80 and east of North Dodge Street from Office Research Development Centers to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space. In terms of next steps, staff will be asking City Council to set a public hearing after a recommendation from the Commission. Townsend noted on the letter from Shive Hattery, it mentioned it would also function as a neighborhood center, what does that mean, are they going to have something for children or parks or what. Russett explained at this point, there's no specific development proposed, they're just requesting for a change in the policy direction of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is likely to share more details on their vision. Townsend noted the section that encourage a reasonable level of housing diversity, what does that actually mean. Russett again noted the applicant can address that. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Steve Long (Salida Partners) is part of the ownership group and stated they are excited about the opportunity to reinvigorate the once full campus. He was before this Commission a few months ago when they rezoned the central part of the campus to Mixed Use and they've already started working with an architect to convert some of those buildings into 55 plus senior housing. Now they're excited to work on the east and south but the Commission will be seeing a lot of him over the next few years as there's 400 acres and right now they've only worked on about 100. Long noted they are waiting to work with the City and the City staff and the community as the City updates its Comprehensive Plan for the next 10 years. He stated their intention here today is to do what is allowed by the City Code and the market they are working with, which is Mixed Use. They've had some interested parties or entities that want to be compatible to what's in the immediate area and their focus is senior housing experiences and mixed use land uses, which is part of the land that was rezoned a few months ago. Since then, they've applied for a low income housing tax credit (LIHTC senior housing) and were approved. There will be 44 units on the corner of Scott Boulevard and 1 st Avenue and for the proposed mixed use they would like to have something similar. Long stated having the mixed use designation allows them to have a mix of uses and something that would be focused on is the immediate neighborhoods and the residents they anticipate having in the hundreds of residents living on the current campus in the next few years. For the commercial portion he stated they've had a lot of interest, he can't give specifics, but it would be community focused uses and because it's on the intersection of the highway and the interstate, focused on those uses. Long also noted they will follow the City's Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 5 of 22 Plan and plan to put a stop light on that corner of ACT Circle and Dodge Street as well. Davies asked about the small amount of public/private open space and how they envision that being tied to the existing infrastructure and natural setting in the area. Long stated they are envisioning trail connections or connecting to existing infrastructure. He added it's part of the buffer and when they sit down with the site plan and work with City staff they will have a better handle. He acknowledged they're going to be following the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as there's a tremendous amount of woodlands and ponds and wildlife corridors that they want to protect and keep. Long also stated he has already had their facilities crew mow the trails to encourage residents to use the trails. Townsend noted concerns about the traffic going around that circle, 1 st Avenue to Scott Boulevard, there is traffic all the time there right now and there's only two exits/entrances to the ACT campus. Long confirmed there are currently only two exits/entrances to the ACT campus and they're both off of that circle however there will be a new entrance off of North Dodge Street in the next year. Cady Gerlach (Vice President of Programs, Greater Iowa City, Inc, and Executive Director of Better Together 2030) is here tonight to voice support for the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the redevelopment of the former ACT campus and surrounding 57 acres. This proposal reflects the kind of forward thinking land use the region needs, it repurposes an underutilized employment center, it aligns with changing market realities around office space, post pandemic work patterns and community realities and growth. The blend of general, commercial, mixed use and public/private open space directly supports the community's need for more diverse housing options, accessible services and walkable neighborhoods. At Greater Iowa City, Inc, they advocate for efficient, connected development that strengthens the economic foundation and improves quality of life. This proposal checks those boxes by leveraging existing infrastructure and arterial roadways for future growth, creating space for a mix of commercial and residential development that serves both neighbors and regional commuters, preserves environmentally sensitive areas while enhancing pedestrian and bike access and supports compact sustainable development patterns that help reduce barriers to housing and retail access. As outlined in both the IC 2030 Comprehensive Plan and regional economic goals Gerlach stated this site is well positioned to evolve into a neighborhood scale hub that will blend commerce, housing and natural features while contributing meaningfully to the vitality of Iowa City's north side. They respectfully urge the Commission's recommendation of approval and thank them for their continued leadership in advancing a more connected, inclusive and resilient Iowa City. Gerlach also noted that rather than speaking multiple times this evening, her comments should be registered for CPA25-0001, REZ24-0013 and REZ25-0008. Quellhorst closed the public hearing. Townsend moved to recommend approval of CPA25-0001, a change to the future land use designation of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for approximately 57 acres of property located south of 1-80 and east of North Dodge Street from Office Research Development Centers to General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space. Miller seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 6 of 22 Townsend stated she was glad to that large area put to use. Wade is also glad to see the reuse and Comprehensive Plan update to match it and will look forward to this being added as well in a new Plan that's in progress next year. Davies stated he is fully in support of a more flexible use and thinks it's really encouraging to see. He will be watching very closely just to see how the natural setting is preserved and how connectivity of the bike trails and pedestrian access is maintained as that's an important feature of that area. Quellhorst agrees they're changing times as the demand for office spaces is down so it's important that they're flexible as a community and make productive use of the property that they have. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. REZONING ITEMS: CASE NO. REZ24-0013: Location: East of N. Scott Blvd on N. Dubuque Rd An application for a rezoning of approximately 22.5 acres of land from Rural Residential (RR- 1) zone, Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone, RS-5 with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park (RDP) zone, and Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone. Russett explained this is one of two rezonings that are connected to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment that just passed. This one is for 22.5 acres on North Dubuque Road, land colloquially known as Gatens Farm. The land just to the west is the Iowa City Community School District property, and the land to the north is vacant and heavily wooded, as is the area to the south. Russett shared the current zoning noting there are four or five different zoning designations currently, Rural Residential, Low Density Single Family, Low Density Single Family with a Planned Development Overlay, Research Development Park and Interim Development Single Family. Due to the five different zoning designations there's no consistency in terms of what could be developed in any type of development pattern for this land and the request is to zone it all Mixed Use, which would allow both residential and non-residential uses that would include things like assisted group living, multifamily, office, retail, restaurants and such. Russett stated the two criteria that staff looks at for rezoning is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with the neighborhood. Russett explained with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment that was just voted on, this rezoning would directly align with that request to amend the Future Land Use Map. The Comprehensive Plan also has a variety of goals and strategies that align with this request, encouraging compact efficient development, planning for commercial development, discouraging linear strip commercial development, and providing for appropriate transitions. Russett noted the buffer areas come into play in encouraging a diversity of housing options which this zone would do. In terms of compatibility with the neighborhood, similar to the hodgepodge of zoning Russett Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 7 of 22 noted there's a variety of different land uses, there is some single family to the north along North Dodge Street, there's the former ACT campus to the east and the School District office and to the southeast is multifamily with Oaknoll East. Staff is recommending a couple of conditions to ensure compatibility. One is that any commercial development that abuts residential zones incorporate a 30 foot landscaped buffer to provide additional separation between those residential uses and the commercial uses. Additionally required would be full cut off light fixtures for any commercial development. In terms of transportation, access and utilities, the City did request a traffic study to correspond with this proposed rezoning. The traffic study found that the North Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque Road intersection will not provide an acceptable level of service through 2047, really limited to accessing Scooters Coffee Shop, and this congestion is anticipated regardless of the proposed rezoning and that congestion is limited to a small period during the day (am peak hours). Russett stated the City Engineer has reviewed the traffic study and concurs with the findings. In regard to sanitary sewer, the City would like more information on the existing sanitary sewer in the area and its capacity and therefore have several conditions that they're recommending. One is approval of a preliminary and final plat, since this area has never been subdivided and the subdivision process will lay out the street network, lots and blocks. Staff also wants to ensure that North Dubuque Road meets City standards for a 28 foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. And lastly, a flow study in relationship to the sanitary sewer system will need to be completed. Specifically, for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. The applicant will work with the Public Works Department to study that area. Staff recommends approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along North Dubuque Road east of North Scott Boulevard to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that North Dubuque Road between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Drive meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 8 of 22 In terms of next steps, City Council will set a public hearing and consider the rezonings at future meetings. Quellhorst asked why staff doesn't believe that the existing zoning code is sufficient for separation between property types and why the added 30' buffer is necessary. Russett explained because of the existing single family to the north is Rural Residential which are large lot single family and typically they'd see a transition to higher density housing and then commercial development, but these large single family lots will be next to Mixed Use which could be multifamily, retail, or restaurants so this is adding a little bit of extra space to provide more of a transition. Townsend noted concern about the traffic and if they're going to have additional entrances onto North Scott Boulevard and Dubuque Road. Russett replied there will be no access to this property from North Dodge Street because this particular rezoning does not border North Dodge Street. In the next rezoning that is a consideration they will discuss. Townsend stated the circle there at Scott Boulevard and 1 st Avenue has a lot of traffic there and she just wants to make sure that they aren't making it worse for those that have to travel it every day. Wade asked about the traffic study level of service, at North Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque Road is the requirement to improve North Dubuque Road solving the level of service or is it more about that whole intersection with Scott Boulevard and Scooters and everything at that end. Russett stated the level of service issue is related to Scooters and regardless the improvements to North Dubuque Road will not address that, and that's going to be an issue even without this rezoning, so that becomes a City item. What staff is requesting here is that the street be upgraded so it has curb and gutter and sidewalk and meets the standards for a city street. Wade asked if there will be another pedestrian crossing at Hickory Heights or will it all funnel to Dubuque Road. Russett stated in terms of pedestrian crossings there's the controlled intersection at North Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard but there's no sidewalk on the southern portion, which will be discussed in the next rezoning. There's also a median on North Scott Boulevard that provides a pedestrian refuge for anyone crossing from the west side of North Scott to the east side but there isn't any pedestrian crossing down at Hickory Heights. Miller noted regarding the landscape buffer it makes sense to have it next to the single family, he is curious is it a standard to have it between CC-2 and Mixed Use. Russett stated there probably will not be a buffer there as they are both commercial zones. Wade asked if the core campus was rezoned to Mixed Use. Russett confirmed that was correct it was rezoned from Office Research Park to Mixed Use. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Seeing no public comments, Quellhorst closed the public hearing. Miller moved to recommend approval of REZ24-0013, a request to rezone approximately 22.5 acres of land along North Dubuque Road east of North Scott Boulevard to Mixed Use (MU) zone subject to the following conditions: Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 9 of 22 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings demonstrating that North Dubuque Road between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Drive meets City standards for a 28-foot wide street with curb and gutter and sidewalks. Drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. Prior to site plan approval, any commercial use that abuts residential zones must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. The landscaping plan shall meet the S3 standards and include a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that will be at least 30' tall upon maturity. 5. Commercial development shall require full cut off light fixtures (i.e. no light shall be emitted above 90 degrees). Wade seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CASE NO. REZ25-0008: Location: East of N. Dodge St. and South of 1-80 An application for a rezoning of approximately 33.64 acres of land from Office Research Park (ORP) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. Russett stated this is the last of the three related items for the former ACT campus. This is a request to rezone about 34 acres to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. She shared an aerial map of the proposed rezoning noting it includes some of the existing buildings on the former ACT campus and also includes some land that abuts 1-80 to the north. Russett next reviewed the existing intersection for the site, there's currently three legs but ACT Circle that does not extend into the site which she will discuss shortly. The current zoning designation is Office Research Park which is intended to allow large scale offices and research firms. The Community Commercial zone allows a variety of both residential and non-residential uses, it allows upper floor multifamily as a provisional use and allows restaurants, retail, office and even some more intensive commercial uses such as very low scale manufacturing would be allowed, and vehicle repair. Russett stated again there are the two criteria to be reviewed, first is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and again, with the request of changing the Future Land Use Map to General Commercial this rezoning request would directly align with the Comprehensive Plan's Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 10 of 22 Future Land Use Map and encourages compact and efficient development, diversity of housing options, planning for commercial development and providing for some appropriate transitions. In addition in terms of the economic development goals of the Comprehensive Plan this rezoning could help increase and diversify the property tax base, provide an environment that supports quality employment, encourage a healthy mix of both independent and national businesses, improving the environmental and economic health of the community. In terms of transportation, the City is looking at ways to encourage all modes of transportation, especially off of the arterial streets, and having sidewalks and bike connections is recommended. In terms of compatibility with the existing neighborhood Russett noted the property is just a portion of the former ACT campus, the remainder of the campus is to the east. Staff is recommending a couple of conditions to ensure compatibility, one, recommending that 30' landscape buffer between commercial uses along North Dodge Street and any commercial development on this site. The North Dodge Street strip should be landscaped with a mix of plantings that would be approved by the City Forester. Russett stated this is a gateway to the community which is why staff is recommending the landscaping here to ensure that it looks nice and welcomes people to the community. Second is a residential buffer, especially where a portion of the development abuts the existing single family homes. Russett reiterated a traffic study was done to look at this rezoning and it determined that the existing lane configuration and stop control at North Dodge Street and ACT Circle would not provide an acceptable level of service. The traffic study recommends a few things, first is a traffic signal so that it becomes a signalized intersection, second is the installation of a fourth leg off the traffic circle that would provide access to the subject property. The traffic study also recommends a dedicated northbound right turn lane so if one is heading out of town on North Dodge Street there would be a dedicated right turn lane into the subject property and if they are heading south on North Dodge Street there's a dedicated left bound turn lane to turn into the property. Russett confirmed the City Engineer does concur with the findings of this study. Russett also wanted to note the City will be the one installing the traffic signal and the pedestrian components, that's something was already planned. Other conditions will be the City would like the applicant to explore the existing sanitary sewer in the area, that the land be subdivided to help identify streets, lots, and block network, they're also requesting the installation of a 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern portion of North Dodge Street from North Scott Boulevard and the sidewalk will run from North Scott Boulevard to the proposed intersection at ACT Circle, and that 10' wide sidewalk could accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. Then related to that intersection, the applicant will be responsible for installing the southbound left turn lane and the northbound right turn lane at the future intersection at North Dodge Street and ACT Circle and installing that fourth leg to provide access to their property. Russett noted the applicant has also expressed an interest in having another access to the north of ACT Circle off of Dodge Street and that would need to be approved by both the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT so the condition that staff is recommending is that any request for an additional access up on North Dodge Street be limited to right in, right out only. The final condition is that flow study related to the sanitary sewer system. Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along North Dodge Street and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 11 of 22 subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either North Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along North Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the North Dodge Street right-of-way between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on North Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4th leg of the ACT Circle / North Dodge Street intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Russett stated this rezoning would be on the same timeline as the previous rezoning for next steps. Wade asked about the preliminary plat process and if that goes through Planning and Zoning or is just a City approval. Russett confirmed it does go through the Planning and Zoning Commission who would then make a recommendation to Council. Wade asked then if the final road design would be part of that preliminary plat. Russett stated presumably the preliminary plat will identify the proposed street network and then through the final platting process is when the actual design of the streets are finalized. Miller asked about the 30' buffer along Dodge Street and is the 10' sidewalk within that 30' buffer. Russett explained no, the 30' buffer is on the private property and the 10' sidewalk will be in the City's right of way and any development would start behind the 30' foot buffer. Davies asked with CC-2 zoning is it required to have the parking behind the buildings. Russett replied it does not require that and there could be parking between the street and the building. Miller noted further down on Dodge Street, across from Hy Vee, it was the City's preference on a past project to put the building closer to the road and conceal the parking, is that just a preference and is that dealt with on a case by case basis. Russett explained that's something Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 12 of 22 that the City did discuss with the applicant on this particular project, the Commission could make a recommendation to add a condition related to parking but the applicant can probably speak better to their concerns with that. She also noted the street network for this area is unknown, there could be lots that are fronted on three sides so trying to figure out the parking may end with some being behind the building and others not. If the goal is to ensure that there's no parking along North Dodge Street that's something that could be considered, but there probably will be a need for at least some parking located between the street and the building. Davies asked if there has been any discussion about the ACT road that proceeds to the north and then just dead ends, is the plan still to have that just remain as a dead end. Russett replied that is something to be figured out as part of the subdivision process. Miller stated regarding the building frontage question, is it in the subdivision process that there'd be more detail about the building. Russett explained likely not, because it would just be the lots and streets, and the preliminary plat will have no information on the buildings. Davies asked if it would be possible at that time for staff or the Commission to make a recommendation about that Russett stated they have never added conditions to a preliminary plat they've always been done at the rezoning stage. Miller stated with the buffer they're probably okay as it covers that walkability and entry corridor aesthetics. He assumes the type of businesses that would want to go here probably would encourage pedestrian oriented development, attractive, functional streetscapes to make it comfortable to walk and the sidewalks on both sides. Russett noted because of that language in the Comprehensive Plan staff is adding those conditions about the sidewalk along North Dodge Street so there's a way to accommodate other modes of transportation. This is a CC-2 zone and it does allow things like drive throughs, for example, through special exceptions, which are not necessarily pedestrian friendly so through that process the City tries to incorporate connections for pedestrians to the building. Miller noted the other language that stuck out at him in one of the conditions was the City's priorities to discourage strip retail. What language in CC-2 discourages that because he feels like that might be attractive to have a strip retail in this area. Russett explained the zone would allow the uses that are allowed in the zone, it's the subdivision process that is really important identifying street connections and actual blocks and lots. There could potentially be strip development here, there's nothing that would not allow that. Davies asked if the sidewalk on North Dodge Street is the applicant's responsibility or City's. Russett stated it is the applicants. Wade remembers back when ACT Circle used to go up to ACT and then it was abandoned and turned into grass, was that a DOT recommendation and will they have to review this now. Russett confirmed the DOT will have to be part of the approval for the intersection in addition to the City. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Steve Long (Salida Partners) stated there's also a significant grade change from Dodge Street to this site, it ranges from 8' to 20' and that's even after a regrade for whatever is going to be built Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 13 of 22 there. He also confirmed there was a road that connected there but ACT removed it in 2002, so they'll be following essentially the same path of that road that was taken out. He also stated the building seen there will be taken down, the original ACT building, the Lindquist Building, it was abandoned during COVID and heating and cooling was shut off so the police department has been using it for practice, and it's filled with mold. Long stated they are happy about the 10' sidewalk for connectivity, actually everything that's suggested they're fine with noting it's going to improve their development with the improvements to the traffic, the extra turn lanes, etc. He reiterated they've had a lot of interest for commercial development for this area, without even advertising. As far as the frontage, they also want to make the development pedestrian friendly from the inside of the development as there's going to be hundreds of units on the east side of the development, so the west side or along Dodge Street/Highway One there are something like 28,000 cars a day on Dodge Street and Interstate 80 is close to 40,000 so they were thinking if they keep the commercial closer to the east and make it more accommodating to the residents to the east, but they'll figure that out through the site planning process. Quellhorst closed the public hearing. Davies moved to recommend approval of REZ25-0008, a request to rezone approximately 33.64 acres of land along North Dodge Street and south of 1-80 to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the subject area shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. 2. Prior to final plat approval, a flow study shall be prepared for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the capacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, a flow study shall be prepared for the Highlander Lift Station. 3. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either North Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along North Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, installation of 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the North Dodge Street right-of-way between North Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 5. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for a southbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on North Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Prior to final plat approval, submission of construction drawings for the 4th leg of the ACT Circle / North Dodge Street intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 14 of 22 prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Wade seconded the motion. Davies stated he generally supports this item and will be very curious to see how the streets shake out as it seems tricky, but an important part of it. Wade stated he is glad to see it come together. Townsend agreed noting it's long overdue and that land has been sitting there for quite a while, so it'll be interesting to see what goes up there. Miller stated he is in support of it Quellhorst agrees and notes Commissioner Miller asked some good questions about tasteful development and doing what they can to prevent strip malls or any other kind of distasteful commercial development. A lot still has to be done, and it will come down to doing a good job of planning and plats and he has got confidence in the staff to do that appropriately. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CASE NO. REZ25-0009: Location: 2510 N. Dodge Street An application for a rezoning of approximately 37.9 acres of land from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Russett stated this is the former Pearson site at North Dodge Street with Interstate 80 to the south and Moss Ridge Road to the north. It's currently zoned Research Development Park, similar to that ACT property, where it envisions office parks or research firms, to the west is land that was rezoned to CI-1 a few years ago, and there is CH-1 Highway Commercial to the east. Russett stated this land was annexed into the City in the 1970s, it was initially developed for Westinghouse Educational Services and was later transferred to Pearson in 2014 and the City approved a rezoning of the property from Office Research Park to Research Development Park. The former Pearson site was recently purchased by GSD North Dodge LLC after it sat vacant for nearly five years and the new owners are looking to repurpose the existing buildings with a variety of land uses, including office, indoor commercial recreational uses, warehousing, retail, restaurants and many of those uses are not allowed in the current Research Development Park zone. The Research Development Park zone is pretty limited to large office and research firms. The Intensive Commercial zone allows a variety of different land uses but is a more intense zoning designation than the Community Commercial that was just discussed. The Intensive Commercial zone allows things like warehousing and freight movement, which the applicant is interested in continuing, it does not allow residential uses and it also allows indoor commercial recreation uses which the applicant can speak to as they've had some interest for some sporting Prepared by: Anne Russell, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; (REZ25-0008) Ordinance No. 25-4963 Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 33.6 acres of property located east of N. Dodge St, and south of 1-80 from Office Research Park (ORP) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. (REZ25-0008) Whereas, JNB Iowa City, LLC has requested the rezoning of property located north of N. Scott Blvd. and east of N. Dodge St. from Office Research Park (ORP) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject area is appropriate for uses consistent with General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space; and Whereas, the property has never been platted and the rezoning allows for increased development potential and creates a public need to subdivide the property to ensure an interconnected street and block network prior to the issuance of any building permit for the construction of new buildings or additions to existing buildings; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to verify that the existing sanitary sewer infrastructure can accommodate the full buildout of the area being rezoned, a flow study is required prior to final plat approval of the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch of the North Branch Dam Trunk sewer with potential upgrades made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits; and Whereas, due to the increased development potential the rezoning creates a public need to provide a transition from existing residential uses by ensuring that commercial areas that either abut either N. Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include a 30' wide landscaped buffer strips that are landscaped according to the plan approved by the City Forester, and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need for the installation of a 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the N. Dodge Street right-of-way between N. Scott Blvd and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer; and Whereas, the rezoning allows for increased development potential and creates a public need for intersection improvements at ACT Circle and N. Dodge Street. Specifically, a southbound left - turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on N. Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to ensure access to N. Dodge Street is appropriately limited and any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the N. Dodge St/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding the approval of a preliminary and final plat, ensuring that the existing sewer system has capacity to support the rezoned area, landscaped buffer strips, a 10' wide sidewalk along N. Dodge Street, and installation of turn lane improvements at the ACT Circle/N. Dodge Street intersection, as well as limiting access to the subject property from N. Dodge Street the rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Ordinance No. 25-4963 Page 2 Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the owner, JNB Iowa City, LLC has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the City. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby classified Community Commercial (CC-2) zone, as indicated: Auditor's Parcel #96022, recorded in Plat Book 37 - Page 4, and a portion of Auditor's Parcel #96016, recorded in Plat Book 36 - Page 348, and Auditor's Parcel #96015, recorded in Plat Book 36 - Page 347, and a portion of Auditor's Parcel #96021, recorded in Plat Book 37 - Page 3, and a portion of Auditor's Parcel 2005047, recorded in Plat Book 49- Page 123, and a portion of survey plat, recorded in Plat Book 17 - Page 27 and a portion of a survey plat, recorded in Plat Book 4 - Page 160, and a portion of the W1/2 NW 114, Section 1, Township 79 North, Range 6W of the Fifth P.M, and all located within the E1/2 NE 1/4, Section 2, Township 79 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and the SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 36, Township 80 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and the SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 36 Township 80 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and the W112 NW 1/4, Section 1, Township 79 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and all located within Warranty Deed as described in Book 6644 - Page 171 and Recorded in Johnson County Recorder's Office, described as follows: Beginning at a 5/8" iron rod with an IDOT cap located on the southern right of way of Interstate 180 and the SW comer of Auditor's Parcel 96022; Thence N73° 25' 54"E - 183.16 feet along said right of way, to the point of intersection of the east line of SW114 SW1/4 Section 36-80-06, which is also the NE comer of said Auditor's Parcel, Thence N73"50'43"E - 11.07 feet along said southern right of way, to the point of intersection of the extension line of the east line of the NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Section 01-79-06; Thence S01 °46'34"E - 584.70 feet along said east line; Thence S88°31'12"W - 402.09 feet; Thence S43°10'00" - 851.17 feet; Thence S01 50'00"E - 150.00 feet to the southern line of the NW 1/4 NW 114, Section 01-79-06; Thence S88°10'00"W - 255.23 feet along said southern line, the easterly right of way of Old Solon Rd., which is now ACT DR.; Thence S05°34'20"E - 140.77 feet along said easterly right of way; Thence S05°30'01 "W - 179.68 feel along a 473.80 foot radius curve concave westerly, with a central angle of 21'43'42", having a Chord length of 178.60 feet, along said easterly right of way; Thence SOO°00'00" - 229.52 feet; Thence S88°41'21 "W-129.33 feet; Thence S81 °04'58"W - 222.27 feet; Thence S81 `48'39"W - 73.31 feet; Thence S89°48'36"W-121.43 feet to the SE Comer of property survey recorded in Bk 4 - Pg 160, which is also on the northern right of way of Old Solon Rd; Thence N00`1817"W - 568.41 feet along the easterly line of said property survey; Thence N85°04'45"W - 315.20 feet; Thence N22°03'06"W-103.86 feel to the NW corner of said property survey to an iron rod with cap #15747, also located on the southern right of way of North Dodge Street and Highway 1; Thence along said southern Highway 1 right of way the following courses: N55°02'56"E - 1007.60 feet; N49°52'15"E - 228.74 feet; N60"18'11 "E - 213.93 feet; Thence N58°59'27"E - 235.92 feet to the NW corner of Auditor's Parcel 96016, which is also the southerly right of way of Interstate 180; Thence N58°01'55"E - 397.37 feet; Thence N73*52'08"E - 215.20 feet to the Point of Beginning. The described area contains 33.64 acres and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. Ordinance No.25-4963 Page 3 Section It. Zoning Mao. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Conditional Zoning Agreement. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. Section IV. Certification and Recording Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance and any agreements or other documentation authorized and required by the Conditional Zoning Agreement, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section V. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section VI. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VII. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication in accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 380. Passed and approved this 2nd day of September 2025 Mhyek ,-)Q Attest: t �0 I G B 1>1r1OACP City Clerk Approved by City Attorney' O ice - 08/14/2025 Ordinance No. 25-2963 Page No. 4 First Consideration: Aueust 19, 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS: None ABSENT: N Second Consideration: It was moved by moe , and seconded by Al ter , that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS: None ABSENT: Pass and Adopt: It was moved by Moe , and seconded by Salih ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: y Alter x Bergus x Harmsen x Moe x Salih x Teague x Weilein Date published: sentemher t t 2025 that the Prepareol by: Anne Russet, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (REZ25-0") Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and JNB tows City, LLC (hereinafter referred to as "Owner). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 33.6 acres of property located east of N. Dodge Street and south of 1-80, legally described below; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject area is appropriate for uses consistent with General Commercial, Mixed Use, and Public/Private Open Space; and Whereas, the property has never been platted and the rezoning allows for increased development potential and creates a public need to subdivide the property to ensure an interconnected street and block network prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Construction of new buildings or additions to existing buildings; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to verify that the existing sanitary infrastructure can accommodate the full buildout of the area being rezoned, a now study is required prior to final plat approval of the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch of the North Branch Dam Trunk sewer with potential upgrades made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits; and Whereas, due to the increased development potential the rezoning creates a public need to provide a transition from existing residential uses by ensuring that commercial areas that either abut either N. Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include a 30' wide landscaped buffer strips that are landscaped according to the plan approved by the City Forester, and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need for the installation of a 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the N. Dodge Street right-of-way between N. Scott Blvd and ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer; and Whereas, the rezoning allows for increased development potential and creates a public need for intersection improvements at ACT Circle and N. Dodge Street. Specifically, a sorthbound left-tum lane and northbound right -turn lane on N. Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Installation of improvements shall be required prior to issuance of building permits; and Whereas, the rezoning creates a public need to ensure access to N. Dodge Street is appropriately limited and any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the N. Dodge SUACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding the approval of a preliminary and final plat, ensuring that the existing sewer system has capacity to support the rezoned area, landscaped buffer strips, a 10' wide sidewalk along N. Dodge Street, and installation of turn lane improvements at the ACT Circle/N. Dodge Street intersection, as well as limiting access to the subject property from N. Dodge Street the rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Owner is the legal title holder of the property legally described as: Auditor's Parcel #96022, recorded in Plat Book 37 — Page 4, and a portion of Auditors Parcel #96016, recorded in Plat Book 36 — Page 348, and Auditors Parcel #96015, recorded in Plat Book 36 — Page 347, and a portion of Auditors Parcel #96021, recorded in Plat Book 37 — Page 3, and a portion of Auditors Parcel 2005047, recorded in Plat Book 49 — Page 123, and a portion of survey plat, recorded in Plat Book 17 — Page 27 and a portion of a survey plat, recorded in Plat Book 4 — Page 160, and a portion of the W12 NW 114, Section 1, Township 79 North, Range Mot the Fifth P.M, and all located within the E12 NE 1/4, Section 2, Township 79 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and the SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 36, Township 80 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and the SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 36 Township 80 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and the W12 NW 1/4, Section 1, Township 79 North Range 6 West, of the Fifth P.M, and all located within Warranty Deed as described in Book 6644 — Page 171 and Recorded in Johnson County Recorder's Office, described as follows: Beginning at a 5/8" iron rod with an IDOT cap located on the southern right of way of Interstate 180 and the SW comer of Auditors Parcel 96022; Thence N73" 25' 54"E—183.16 feet along said right of way, to the point of intersection of the east line of SW1/4 SW1/4 Section 36-80-06, which is also the NE corner of said Auditors Parcel, Thence N73°50'43"E —11.07 feet along saki southern right of way, to the point of intersection of the extension line of the east line of the NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Section 01-79-06; Thence S01 "46'34"E - 584.70 feet along said east line; Thence S88"31'12"W - 402.09 feet; Thence S43"10'00" — 851.17 feet; Thence S01 50'00"E - 150.00 feet to the southern line of the NW 1/4 NW 114, Section 01-79-06; Thence Sa8`10'00"W - 255.23 feet along said southern line, the easterly right of way of Oki Solon Rd., which is now ACT DR.; Thence SO5°34'20"E-140.77 feet along said easterly right of way; Thence SOS"30'01"W - 179.68 feet along a 473.80 foot radius curve concave westerly, with a central angle of 21"43'42", having a Chord length of 178.60 feet, along said easterly right of way; Thence S00`00'00" — 229.52 feet; Thence S88"41'21 "W—129.33 feet; Thence S81 "04'58"W — 222.27 feet; Thence S81 "48'39"W — 73.31 feet; Thence S89"48'36"W —121.43 feet to the SE Comer of property survey recorded in Bk 4 — Pg 160, which is also on the northern right of way of Old Solon Rd; Thence N00°18'17"W — 568.41 feet along the easterly line of saki property survey; Thence N85°04'45"W — 315.20 feet; Thence N22"03'06"W—103.86 feet to the NW comer of said property survey to an iron rod with cap #15747, also located on the southern right of way of North Dodge Street and Highway 1; Thence along saki southem Highway 1 right of way the following courses: N55"02'56"E — 1007.60 feet; N49"52'15"E — 228.74 feet; N60"18"1 "E —213.93 feet; Thence N58°59'27"E—236.92 feet to the NW comer of Auditors Parcel 96016, which is also the southerly right of way of Interstate I80; Thence N58°01'55"E — 397.37 feet; Thence N73°52'08"E — 215.20 feet to the Point of Beginning The described area contains 33.64 acres and is subject to easements and restrictions of record 2. Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2025) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all requirements of the Zoning Code, as well as the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of building permits for the construction of new buildings or additions to existing buildings, the subject property shall go through the subdivision process and obtain approval of a preliminary and final plat. b. Prior to final plat approval, Owner shall prepare a flow study for the full length of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer to its point of connection with the North Branch Dam Trunk Sewer. If any of the existing sections of the North Branch of the Northeast Trunk sewer do not have the rapacity to support the full buildout of the area being rezoned, upgrades will need to be made and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permits. If sewage from the area being rezoned will be conveyed to the Highlander Lift Station, Owner shall prepare a flow study for the Highlander Lift Station. c. Prior to site plan approval, commercial areas along N. Dodge St that abut either N. Dodge Street or land that is zoned residential must include landscaped buffer strips that do not allow any development. These strips shall be located on the commercial property, shall be 30' wide, shall be located along N. Dodge Street, which is an important gateway to the City, as well as in areas that abut residential zones, and shall be landscaped according to the plan that is approved by the City Forester. d. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall install a 10' wide sidewalk on the eastern/southern portion of the N. Dodge Street right-of-way between N. Scott Blvd and ACT Circle, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. e. Prior to final plat approval, Owner shall submit construction drawings for a southbound left turn lane and northbound right -turn lane on N. Dodge Street at ACT Circle subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Improvements shall be installed by the Owner prior to issuance of building permits. f. Prior to final plat approval, Owner shall submit construction drawings for the 4u leg of the ACT Circe / N. Dodge St intersection subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Improvements shall be installed by the Owner prior to issuance of building permits. g. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the N. Dodge SVACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. 4. The conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2025), and said conditions satisfy the public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties, and shall remain in full force and effect unless and until released of record by the City for the above -described property, upon which occurrence these conditions shall be deemed satisfied and this agreement of no further force and effect. Nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 6. This Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Owner's expense. Dated this 2nd day of September , 2025. C' Iowa City Teague, Mayor U Attest. '�Aki 0 KelliK a Grace, City Clerk Z 's Office City of Iowa City Acknowledgement: State of Iowa ) as: Johnson County ) JNB lolklity, LLC By: This instrument was acknowledged before me on loer a 2025 by BruceTeague and Kellie q ftir(.'z as Mayor and City Clerk, respectWely, of the City of Iowa City. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) YULI NU ' 8 i ,pytm i1 �^ Commisslon Num�E 0'-- FREiL�T My Commission Er My commission expires:.__ ^a- 1�-- JNB Iowa City, LLC Acknowledgement State of %� County of This record was acknowledged before me on A..a. st $;5 2025 by (name) as (title) of JNB Iowa City, LLC ldl p l�r.� luw Sto A� Notary Publ in and Tor the ate of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) con.wErroY Mune. t7ws. . 2 wum 7e My commission expires: e Kellie Grace From: Michael Welch <mwelch@shoemaker-haaland.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 12:15 PM To: Kellie Grace Cc: Madison Conley; Anne Russett; Steve Long (steve@salidapartners.com) Subject: Expedited Action - Rezoning Dodge St Commercial (REZ25-0008) A RISK ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** This message is from an external sender. Good morning, On behalf of JNB Iowa City, LLC, I would like to request that the council take expedited action on the rezoning item, Dodge St Commercial (REZ25-0008), at the September 2nd council meeting. Thankyou Michael Welch, PE Civil Department Lead Shoemaker & Haaland Engineering 1 31) Scanning I Land Surveying D: 319.383.7813 1 0: 319.351.7150 www.shoemaker-haaland.com Item Number: 8.f. I, CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance rezoning approximately 37.9 acres of land located at 2510 N. Dodge St. from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. (REZ25-0009) (Second Consideration) Attachments: REZ25-0009 Staff Report-w-attachments PZ 7.16.25 minutes-2510 N Dodge St Ordinance Correspondence from Nate Hatz (REZ25-0009) STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Olivia Ziegler, Planning Intern Item: REZ25-0009 2510 N. Dodge Street Date: July 16, 2025 GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner/Applicant: GSD North Dodge, LLC Steve Geifman 563-323-2626 steveCa)_geifmangroup.com 2172 56t" Ave West Bettendorf, IA 52722 Contact Person: Nick Hatz 319-364-0227 nhatz(o)shive-hattery.com 222 Third Ave SW Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 Requested Action: Rezone approximately 37.9 acres of land from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Purpose: Allow for reuse of existing building to uses that are not allowed in the current zoning designation. New owners may also be planning additions and new buildings. Location: Location Map: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning Surrounding Land Use and Zoning 2510 N. Dodge Street y 'Nc 37.9 acres Former Pearson's site, Research Development Park (RDP) North: Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) South: Office Research Park (ORP) East: Highway Commercial (CH1), K Comprehensive Plan: District Plan: Public Meeting Notification: File Date: 45 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Commercial Office (CO1) West: Intensive Commercial (CI-1) Office Research Park Development Centers Property owners and occupants within 500' of the property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. Rezoning signs were posted along N. Dubuque Street on July 7tn 2025. June 26, 2025 August 11, 2025 The owner, GSD North Dodge, LLC, has requested a rezoning from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone for approximately 37.9 acres of land located at 2510 N. Dodge Street. The property was annexed into the City in approximately 1970 and zoned Office Research Park (ORP) zone at that time. It was initially developed for Westinghouse Education Services and was later transferred to the former owner, NCS Pearson, Inc. On March 25, 2014, the City Council approved a rezoning (REZ14-0001, Ord. No. 14-4577) for approximately 49.5 acres of property from ORP to RDP. This rezoning was adopted to keep the building conforming to the zoning code after Moss Ridge Road was constructed. The RDP and ORP zones are similar in uses permitted but differ in dimensional requirements. The ORP zone requires front setbacks of 150 feet, side and rear setbacks of 100 feet, and a minimum lot area of 7 acres. The RDP zone requires a minimum lot area of 1-acre, front setback of 20 feet, and does not require side or rear setbacks. In adopting the ordinance, the structure was allowed to remain conforming as it adhered to the zoning code and is more than 20 feet from the property line. Table 1 below outlines the differences in dimensional requirements between the zones. Table 1: Dimensional Requirements For Industrial and Research Zones Minimum Lot Requirements Minimum Setbacks Maximum Height (ft.) Maximum Lot Coverage (percent) Zone Total Area (s.f.) Width (ft.) Minimum Frontage (ft.) Front (ft.) Side (ft.) Rear (ft.) RDP 1 acre none none 20' 0' 0' 45 50 ORP 7 acres I none none 150 100 1 100 none none The subject property is the former Pearson site that has been vacant for nearly five years. The Geifman Group recently purchased the property and are looking to repurpose the existing building with a variety of land uses. Some of the uses that seek to occupy the space (e.g. indoor commercial recreation) are not allowed within the current zoning designation but would be allowed with the proposed zoning. Attachment 3 includes the applicant submittal which illustrates the proposed changes to the zoning map and includes the applicant statement describing the rationale behind the request. 3 The applicant has indicated that they have chosen not to use the "Good Neighbor Policy". ANALYSIS: Current Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned Research Development Park (RDP). Properties zoned RDP provide areas for the development of office, research, production, or assembly firms and other complementary uses. Office and research use should predominate the zone. The requirements of this zone protect uses in this zone from adverse impacts of uses on adjacent land. Hotels, motels, and similar uses should be located along the periphery of the zone in locations that do not adversely affect the setting and quality of other development for the uses permitted in the zone. Proposed Zoning: The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. The purpose of the CI-1 zone is to provide areas for those sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display and storage of merchandise, by repair and sales of large equipment or motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities or by activities or operations conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. The types of retail trade in this zone are limited in order to provide opportunities for more land intensive commercial operations and also to prevent conflicts between retail and industrial truck traffic. Special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of allowed uses from adjacent residential zones. Table 2 below outlines the uses allowed in the CI-1 zone. There are a variety of uses that are allowed in the CI-1 zone, including retail, office, manufacturing, and warehousing. The zone does not allow residential uses. Table 2: Uses allowed in the CI-1 Zone Uses Categories Intensive Commercial Residential —Assisted Group Living - Residential — Group Household - Residential — Multi -Family - Adult Business PR Animal Related Commercial — General PR Animal Related Commercial— Intensive PR Building Trade Uses P Commercial Parking Uses - Commercial Recreation — Indoor P Commercial Recreation — Outdoor P Drinking Establishments PR Eating Establishments P Office - General P Office — Medical/Dental P Quick Vehicle Servicing PR/S Redemption Center P Retail — Alcohol Sales P Retail — Delayed Deposit - Retail — Hospitality P Outdoor Storage and Display P Retail — Personal Service P CI Retail — Repair P Retail — Sales P Retail — Tobacco Sales PR Surface Passenger Service P Vehicle Repair PR Industrial Service - General Manufacturing PR Heavy Manufacturing S Technical/Light Manufacturing PR Salvage Operations - Self Service Storage P Warehouse & Freight Movement P Waste Related - Wholesale Sales P Basic Utility PR/S Community Service — Shelter S General Community Service P Daycare PR Detention Facilities S General Education Specialized Education S Parks and Open Space Hospitals - Religious/Private Group Assembly P Utility Scale Ground Mounted Solar S Communication Transmission Facility PR/S *P = Permitted; PR = Provisional (subject to additional use specific standards); S = Special Exception (requires review and approval by the Board of Adjustment) Rezoning Review Criteria: Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan; 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The proposed development is reviewed using the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Map of the IC2030 Plan identifies the subject property as appropriate for Office Research Development Center. There is currently no District Plan for this area. The IC2030 Plan also states the following: "For firms that require close access to Interstate 80, lots will soon be available in the recently platted Moss Ridge Campus, an approximately 172- acre office park located at the Highway 1 (North Dodge St) interchange with Interstate 80. The growing employment center that surrounds this interstate interchange is already home to a number of the City's major employers, including numerous medical and professional firms located in Northgate Corporate Park as well as ACT and NCS Pearson — education -based research and service firms that employ thoughts of people" (pg. 13). The need for office spaces has significantly diminished since the IC2030 Plan was adopted in 2013 and the subject property was rezoned in from Office Research Park zone (ORP) to Research Development Park zone (RDP) in 2014. The subject property was home to the former 9 Pearson Inc site, which closed its office in 2022. This closure and general lack of demand for office space emphasizes the importance of rezoning the existing buildings to CI-1 in allowing the empty campus to once again make a valuable contribution to Iowa City's economy in allowing multiple uses for several types of tenants while benefitting the surrounding properties. Additionally, the Northeast District Plan acknowledges that a surplus of office use designation may occur, and provides flexibility of land uses within the area: "Office uses could serve as a buffer between the interstate and residential areas... Given the past rate of development of such uses, this amount of land devoted to office park uses may be unrealistic. Alternative uses, such as residential or the buffer area uses mentioned above, should be considered in this area." (p.18) The other buffer uses mentioned in the plan include recreational uses, storage, and warehousing uses. These are all uses that the new owners are interested in. Furthermore, there are numerous goals and strategies specified in the IC2030 Plan that align with the proposed rezoning: Land Use Goals and Strategies: • Plan for commercial development in defined commercial nodes, including small-scale neighborhood commercial centers. o Provide appropriate transitions between high and low -density development and between commercial areas and residential zones. • Focus industrial development on land suitable for industrial use with good access to rail and highways but buffered from residential neighborhoods. o Provide adequate butter areas between residential areas and intensive industrial activity to mitigate any negative externalities, such as noise, odors, dust, and vibrations. Economic Development Goals & Strategies: • Increase and diversify the property tax base by encouraging the retention and expansion of existing businesses and attracting businesses that have growth potential and are compatible with Iowa City's economy. o Target industrial and business sectors that align with Iowa City's economic strengths, including biotechnology, healthcare, advanced manufacturing, information technology, education services, and renewable energy. o Provide an attractive economic environment with a streamlined, business -friendly culture by making regulatory and permitting processes, clear, predictable, and coordinated. Improve the environmental and economic health of the community through efficient use of resources. o Support the development of the Iowa City Industrial Park as a hub for renewable energy companies and other industrial operations and promote appropriate development in the City's other designated urban renewal areas including: City - Highway Project I, Northgate Corporate Park, Sycamore & First Avenue, Lower Muscatine Road & Highway 6, Industrial Park Road, Highway 6, Moss Green, Towncrest, and Riverfront Crossings. Staff finds that since the proposed rezoning is consistent with the land use policy direction of the comprehensive plan. Although the future land use map envisions the site to be developed as an office research park, the plan also recognizes the need to be flexible. It notes that this vision may be unrealistic, and flexibility should be considered in order to allow uses such as recreational uses, warehousing, storage, and others. Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character: The subject property is bordered by Interim -Development Research Park zone (ID -RP) to the north, Intensive Commercial zone (CI- 1) to the west, Highway Commercial zone (CH-1) to the east, and is separated by 1-80 from the C01 Interim -Development Research Park designation to the south. The proposed rezoning would not have major impact on the existing neighborhood character due to the surrounding land allowing commercial uses, as well as office, research, and production firms, all complimenting the uses of the CI-1 designation. The proposed rezoning would facilitate a seamless transition between North Dodge Street/Highway 1 and the parcels to the west that are also zoned CI-1. Transportation and Utilities: In terms of access, the subject property can be accessed from N. Dodge St at Highlander Place, which is a signalized intersection. Additionally, the subject property is accessible from the north via Moss Ridge Rd. Moss Ridge Rd and N. Dodge St are also signalized. The subject property also has access to existing City water and sewer. NEXT STEPS: Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, a public hearing will be scheduled for consideration by City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0009, an application to rezone approximately 37.9 acres of land at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Applicant's Submittal Approved by: Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map ATTACHMENT 3 Applicant's Submittal SHIVEHATTERY ARC H I T E C T U R E+ E N G I N E E R I N G June 19, 2025 City of Iowa City Neighborhood & Development Services Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission RE: Rezoning Applicant Statement To Whom It May Concern, On behalf of the current Ownership GSD North Dodge, LLC a rezoning request is respectfully submitted as shown in the provided Rezoning Exhibit. The 37.9 acres highlighted for the rezoning make up the former Pearson campus which was once home to multiple office buildings and warehouse space which is currently vacant. The existing zoning is Research Development Park (RDP) as this zoning matched the uses Pearson had for the site. The applicant is proposing an Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zoning designation for the parcel. The CI-1 designation will match the intended mix of uses including potential office, data center, warehousing, indoor recreation, hospitality, restaurant or retail options. The CI-1 uses provide critical flexibility to attract multiple complimentary users to bring prosperity and life back to the campus. The uses allowed inside the CI-1 zoning designation will blend seamlessly with the surrounding uses, such as the Highway Commercial and Commercial Office buildings to the east and across North Dodge Street, as well as to the west where the parcel was recently rezoned to CI-1. The CI-1 zoning designation also facilitates a good transition between North Dodge Street/Highway 1 and the parcels North and Northwest of the property that are designated with Interim Development Research Park. Given the parcels' prominent location, adjacent to North Dodge Street, Moss Ridge Road, and near Interstate 80, the CI-1 zoning designation allows a beautiful blend of office and commercial up front while maintaining the functionality of the warehouse in the back of the parcel. Passing this zoning allows for a much -needed rejuvenation of a once thriving area of Iowa City by allowing multiple uses for several types of tenants while benefiting surrounding properties. Public infrastructure appears adequate or can be reasonably upgraded in the area based on existing uses, development and utility mapping. SHIVE-HATTERY, INC. Charles "Nick" Hatz II, PE Principal, Civil Engineer Project 2250011230 800.798.0313 1 shive-hattery.com REZONING EXHIBIT FROM RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT z' / NORTH PARK (RDP) ZONE TO INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) ZONE CH1 ZONING IOWA CITY, IOWA 0736302005 /� / 0 50 100 200 J � SCALE IN FEET � J � ' J , RDP ZONING �' —~� J 0 o PROPOSED REZONING TO 2510 N DODGE ST J ! a o° INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) J J ry LOCATION MAP CH1 ZONING J _ NORTH 2790 N DODGE ST 1 \ 11 11 I MOSS RIDGE RD�,T I 1 1 .,Z•��11 C01 ZONING v 2610 NORTHGATE DR 1 1 � N, M 1 JJ \ \ PROJECT LOCATION Cv i 1 C01 ZONING \ _ INTERSTATE 80 J 1 2615 NORTHGATE DR PARCEL 1- 37.9 ACRES EXISTING ZONING - RDP CI-1 ZONING 0735401001 1 �1 00 l T M SCOTT BLVD = 1 Lz 1 y=j ` CHI ZONING NOT TO SCALE 1 �^ 2545 -2569 N DODGE 5T OWNER/DEVELOPER/APPLICANT: (A GSD NORTH DODGE, LLC 1 r� STEVE GEIFMAN ' STEVE@GEIFMANGROUP.COM 1 2510 NORTH DODGE STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1 ENGINEER: 1 CH1 ZONING SHIVE-HATTERY, INC. 1 2501 N DODGE ST [ CHARLES "NICK" HATZ II, PE NHATZ@SHIVE-HATTERY.COM 222 3RD AVENUE SE, SUITE 300 1 l CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52401 �—`—�—�--------� 319-364-0227 ' SURVEYOR: M SHIVE-HATTERY, INC. WADE D. WAMRE, PLS I WWAMRE@SHIVE-HATTERY,COM 1l 222 3RD AVENUE SE, SUITE 300 2507 HIGHLANDER DER PIL CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52401 j 1 y 1 319-364-0227 1 SITE INFORMATION TOTAL AREA = 37.9 ACRES CI-1 ZONING 0735476001 � PARCEL DESCRIPTIONS: M THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 80 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M. AND COMMENCING AT THE NW CORNER OF THE NE114 OF THE SW114 OF SECTION 36, TWP, 80 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M.; THENCE S 0'08' W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NE114 SW1l4 I OF SECTION 36, 281 FEET; THENCE EAST 412.0 FEET TO THE CENTER LINE OF IOWA HIGHWAY NO. 1 j (FORMERLY DESIGNATED AS IOWA HIGHWAY #261); THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF CH1 ZONING CH1 ZONING SAID HIGHWAY, ALONG A 2865 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY WITH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 150 2513 HIGHLANDER PL 2525 HIGHLANDER PL TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NE114 SW114 OF SECTION 36; THENCE N 89'18' W 566.0 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NE114 OF THE SW114 OF SECTION 36, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THAT PART THEREOF CONDEMNED BY THE IOWA STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE STATE OF IOWA AS SHOWN BY THE CONDEMNATION PROCEEDING RECORDED IN f BOOK 254, PAGE 155, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, AND — — FURTHER EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PARCELS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, — — — PURSUANT TO DEEDS RECORDED IN BOOK 1075, PAGE 408 AND BOOK 5265, PAGE 30 OF THE JOHNSON 0 — — — COUNTY, IOWA RECORDER'S OFFICE. - -- (9p Coe w W z 0 � U Lu + Lu Lu w Q me = u> > U coil w co 2- m z c� 00 u m in 0 co CD W O _I W W W LLI (D ❑ Lo IT O N Q _ 0 0 w D O 0 Z ❑ w ❑ a a U3 ❑ z Q U 0 Z O O ZL.L� C J 00 W Z VJ 0� I Z L.L rO -J z w w u) C o a Q N N Ir w m Z m 0 w ca Q� ul 0 ❑ z m a ¢ cr IL z 0 w D Q o w a Q L u7 I U EX1 Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 14 of 22 prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Any request for an additional driveway access to the subject property north of the North Dodge Street/ACT Circle intersection shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access only. This access requires review and approval by the City Engineer and the Iowa DOT. Wade seconded the motion. Davies stated he generally supports this item and will be very curious to see how the streets shake out as it seems tricky, but an important part of it. Wade stated he is glad to see it come together. Townsend agreed noting it's long overdue and that land has been sitting there for quite a while, so it'll be interesting to see what goes up there. Miller stated he is in support of it Quellhorst agrees and notes Commissioner Miller asked some good questions about tasteful development and doing what they can to prevent strip malls or any other kind of distasteful commercial development. A lot still has to be done, and it will come down to doing a good job of planning and plats and he has got confidence in the staff to do that appropriately. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CASE NO. REZ25-0009: Location: 2510 N. Dodge Street An application for a rezoning of approximately 37.9 acres of land from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Russett stated this is the former Pearson site at North Dodge Street with Interstate 80 to the south and Moss Ridge Road to the north. It's currently zoned Research Development Park, similar to that ACT property, where it envisions office parks or research firms, to the west is land that was rezoned to CI-1 a few years ago, and there is CH-1 Highway Commercial to the east. Russett stated this land was annexed into the City in the 1970s, it was initially developed for Westinghouse Educational Services and was later transferred to Pearson in 2014 and the City approved a rezoning of the property from Office Research Park to Research Development Park. The former Pearson site was recently purchased by GSD North Dodge LLC after it sat vacant for nearly five years and the new owners are looking to repurpose the existing buildings with a variety of land uses, including office, indoor commercial recreational uses, warehousing, retail, restaurants and many of those uses are not allowed in the current Research Development Park zone. The Research Development Park zone is pretty limited to large office and research firms. The Intensive Commercial zone allows a variety of different land uses but is a more intense zoning designation than the Community Commercial that was just discussed. The Intensive Commercial zone allows things like warehousing and freight movement, which the applicant is interested in continuing, it does not allow residential uses and it also allows indoor commercial recreation uses which the applicant can speak to as they've had some interest for some sporting Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 15 of 22 facilities. The CI-1 zone does provide more flexibility for a variety of commercial uses Again, the approval criteria is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Russett stated the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Office Research Development Center ad the Plan has lots of text in it related to how this is a major employment center. Obviously, all of that was written prior to those businesses vacating these sites and the need for office space has significantly diminished since this Plan was adopted. The former Pearson site has been vacant for five years, there's a lack of demand for office space so a rezoning really is needed to reuse this area. The Northeast District Plan recognizes that there needs to be some flexibility in the uses that are envisioned for this area, even though the Future Land Use Map shows that it's appropriate for Office Research Development. The Plan recognizes that it might be identifying more land than could be accommodated for Office Research, it notes that it may be unrealistic and that there are alternative uses that could be appropriate in these locations, two of which the applicant is particularly interested in continuing, the recreational uses for the sporting facility and the warehousing uses. In terms of compatibility with existing neighborhoods the surrounding land allows similar uses, all of the land to the west is also zoned CI-1. There's I-80 to the south, North Dodge Street to the east, and also Highway Commercial to the east. Staff recommends approval of REZ25-0009, an application to rezone approximately 37.9 acres of land at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. In terms of our timeline, after a recommendation from the Commission this will be moved forward to the City Council. Quellhorst opened the public hearing. Ed O'Connor (Geifman Group) stated they are extremely excited about this property, they've owned the property for just a few months, and it's honestly been thrilling and exciting. The buzz, the energy to revitalize this property has been immense. They have three current tenants lined up, an office user on the front portion, a data center user with a large office use and then sports facility, why they're here today for the rezoning, League One Volleyball Iowa United has high aspirations for this corner to not only use it immediately, but long term expansions on the property that will require additions and renovations. O'Conner stated their commitment is to revitalize this corner and really just bring it back and this rezoning is required for the usages that they have lined up. He noted this corner has quite obviously been in need of some attention for some time and they have some major exterior facade enhancements as the tongue and groove wood siding is not exactly appealing anymore. They've already cleared out a lot of dead trees that were there for far too long and they haven't even owned the property for two months. Miller asked with the three uses he described it feels like it might be a little hard to mesh together, like a more public oriented sports thing with data center and offices. O'Conner agreed the data center with a large indoor sports facility is odd, the unique part about the data center is they actually want their customers and clients to come in and view the data center. It will be a high security center with a vast office area north of 40,000 square feet, plus the data center, which is 20,000 square feet. O'Conner stated their major concern with the property was that center building that was rehabbed by Pearson but in actually less than two months they've Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 16 of 22 already found a usage for all three facilities and that's why there is significant energy behind this. They believe the mixed uses actually is a testament to what the campus can be and should be in the future. They've hired the best with Shive to delineate and make sure that they are meeting all requirements with those usages. He noted as a matter of fact, the unique part is they really are three independent buildings and are separated in every sense but they have links of walkways to connect them. But they are all separate and delineated, even from a fire standpoint and a life safety standpoint. Miller asked so the plan is basically a small office on the left, data center with office in the middle and the volleyball thing on the right. O'Conner replied actually what they reference as the plaza, which was renovated by Pearson from 2016 to 2019, and then obviously COVID hit their plan is to modify the exterior to make it look like the interior (the inside has some brand new office space) and they have a user for that plaza right portion, about 145,000 square feet. He noted the exterior facade enhancements are going to be extensive. Then to the southwest there's a 200' link that they have aspirations to remove, so it is more of a separation, and then they can bring more trails and more outside, inside. He stated right now it actually looks like there's more building, because that 200' link but it is two and because the future is not one big campus, it's multiple uses they will remove that. The property closer to I-80 is the center building that will be a large office use adjacent to the data center, which is the piece that's built into the hill like a concrete bunker. Then to the north is where the volleyball user is planning to go, which had been a warehouse, it's 55,000 square feet with 22' ceiling height. They're going to use that temporarily this late fall and then they will add an addition to the north to get the full breadth of the 32' ceiling height required for volleyball. Davies asked if the parking sufficient for all the uses and do they have any changes envisioned there. O'Conner confirmed there will have to be some modifications because the volleyball user to the north would likely encompass some of that parking lot. Currently, he believes they have plenty of parking for the proposed usages. Quellhorst closed the public hearing Miller moved to recommend approval of REZ25-0009, an application to rezone approximately 37.9 acres of land at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Townsend seconded the motion. Davies stated he is very supportive and loves the creative adaptive reuse. He thought that property was going to be sitting vacant for a very long time as he didn't see another large office user taking it over. His only concerns are just it has very large parking lots and he would love to see less parking or maybe it broken up in a little bit different way but overall is generally supportive of the whole concept. Townsend agreed it's nice to see that whole area being used and repurposed as opposed to tearing down an amazing building. Miller agrees about just the exciting mix of uses and adaptive reuse, it's exciting to see this area of town start to be reused. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 17 of 22 A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT ITEMS: CASE NO. REZ25-0012: Consideration of an amendment to 14-51K Neighborhood Open Space Requirements Schaefer explained the proposed ordinance is an amendment to the City's Neighborhood Open Space requirements that were initially adopted in 1994. The Neighborhood Open Space dedication requirement is for developers to set aside land for parks or pay a fee in lieu of land dedication to be used by the City's Parks and Recreation Department to acquire and develop park facilities for the community. This requirement ensures that those responsible for creating the need for new parks cover the cost rather than existing residents in the community. Schaefer reviewed the current formula used to decide how much required open space dedication is needed for development. The current formula used to calculate that requirement is acres of undeveloped property multiplied by the maximum dwelling units allowed per undeveloped acre of the property being developed and that is multiplied by 65% which is a rough estimate of the average development density of Iowa City. That then is further multiplied by persons per dwelling unit based on the most recent census and then multiplied by 3/1000 which is the community standard of the goal of requiring three acres of neighborhood park space per 1000 people. Schaefer stated the reason the City is needing to update the code is because there's been several zoning code updates since 1994 when this was originally approved. The main issue with the existing formula is it is based on the requirement to utilize maximum density, which causes several problems. One of those problems is in residential zones. Since 1994 the City has allowed more housing types (duplexes, attached single family housing types) and all of those things contribute to an increased maximum density than what was originally envisioned in 1994. The formula is also not calculable for projects in Riverfront Crossing and the Central Business District because there is no maximum density for those districts. Also, the form based zones again allow an even wider range of housing types and that creates a very high maximum density for those properties if they were to be rezoned to form based code districts. Schaefer noted even though the City allows that maximum density, they don't foresee any developer building to maximum for those sites so the requirements end up being a little overbearing for those properties. The current requirements also create a burden for small infill projects such as having one lot that a single homeowner is simply trying to divide into two, the fees tend to be a barrier to get that done. The goal of the update is to remove density as the main part of the calculation and adopt a formula that works for all zoning districts and works within the City's goals and budget that is reasonable and approachable for developers and subdividers. Schaefer stated for proposed amendments there's four main sections, applicability and the procedures of the code, the formula itself, the addition of a dedication cap, or maximum amount of land to be dedicated, and then the neighborhood Open Space District Boundary Map. The first change is related to the applicability of the code, the current ordinance applies the Neighborhood Open Space requirements to residential subdivisions, commercial subdivisions containing residential uses, and planned developments. The proposed amendment simplifies the process by simply stating that the requirement is required at preliminary plat stage which recognizes that the major developments, including most planned developments, already go Prepareal by: Olivia Ziegler, Planning Intern,110 E. Washington street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319J565230 (REZ25-000)) Ordinance No. 25-4964 Ordinance rezoning approximately 37.9 acres of land located at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. (REZ25-0009) Whereas, the Owner, GSD North Dodge, LLC, has requested the rezoning of 37.9 acres of land located at 2510 N. Dodge Street from Research Development Park (RDP) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone; and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject area is appropriate for Office Research Park Development Centers, and the North District Plan acknowledges the surplus of office use designation within the area, and suggests alternative uses should be considered in this area; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed rezoning and has recommended approval. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Property described below is hereby reclassified Intensive Commercial (CI- 1) zone, as indicated; The West one-half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 80 North, Range 6 West of the 5`h P.M. and Commencing at the NW Comer of the NE1/4 of the SWt/4 of Section 36, Twp. 80 North, Range 6 West of the 51b P.M.; Thence S 0*08' W along the West line of said NE1/4 SW1/4 of Section 36, 281 feet; thence East 412.0 feet to the center line of Iowa Highway No. 1 (formerly designated as Iowa Highway # 261); thence Northeasterly along the center line of said Highway, along a 2865 foot radius curve, concave Easterly with a central angle of 15' to its intersection with the North line of said NE1/4 SW1/4 of Section 36; thence N 89"18' W 566.0 feet along the North line of said NE114 of the SW1/4 of Section 36, to the point of beginning. Excepting that part thereof condemned by the Iowa State Highway Commission for the use and benefit of the State of Iowa as shown by the condemnation proceeding recorded in Book 254, Page 155, in the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, and further excepting therefrom those parcels conveyed to the City of Iowa City, Iowa, pursuant to Deeds recorded in Book 1075, Page 408 and Book 5265, Page 30 of the Johnson County, Iowa Recorder's Office. Section It. Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Certification And Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section IV. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Ordinance No. 25-4964 Page 2 Section V. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VI. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. P:gqed and approved this 2nd day of Sept"b" 2025. 1 Melyo(-CO r Attest: C 2� City Clerk Approved by City Attorney' ice- 8/14/2025 Ordinance No. 25-4964 Page No. 3 First Consideration: _ August 19, 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS: None ABSENT: Second Consideration: It was moved by Moe , and seconded by Alter that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe Salih Teague Weilein NAYS: None ABSENT: None Pass and Adopt: It was moved by Alter - , and seconded by Harmsen ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Alter X Bergus X Harmsen X Moe �— Salih Teague X Weilein Datepublished: September 11, 2025 thatthe Kellie Grace From: Danielle Sitzman Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 10:04 AM To: Kellie Grace Cc: Anne Russett Subject: FW: GSD Redevelopment - CI-1 Rezoning Reading Collapse Request Danielle L. Sitzman, AICP Deputy Director Development Services City of Iowa City, IA (319)356-5252 From: Nick Hatz <nhatz@shive-hattery.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 9:57 AM To: Anne Russett <ARussett@iowa-city.org>; Danielle Sitzman <dsitzman@iowa-city.org> Cc: Mark T. Seabold <mseabold@shive-hattery.com>; Steve Geifman <steve@geifmangroup.com>; Ed O'Connor <ed@geifmangroup.com>; Chris E. Sachse <CSachse@shive-hattery.com> Subject: GSD Redevelopment - CI-1 Rezoning Reading Collapse Request A RISK ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** This message is from an external sender. Hello Anne and Danielle, On behalf of the developer we'd like to request that further readings of the GSD redevelopment of the Pearson property CI-1 Rezoning be collapsed given the unanimous support received thus far from P&Z and Council. Let us know if that is acceptable. Great job presenting to Council last night Danielle! Thanks, Nick Nick Hatz, P.E. HelHimlHis Managing Director —Cedar Rapids, Civil Engineer Shive-Hattery 222 Third Avenue SE I Suite 300 1 P.O. Box 1803 1 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (o) 319.364.0227 1 (d) 319.892.3618 1 (c) 319.560.8880 SHIVEHA7T-CRY Item Number: 8.g. I, CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning Code and Title 15, Land Subdivision, to update the Neighborhood Open Space Requirements (REZ25-0012) (Second Consideration) Attachments: REZ25-0012 Packet PZ 7.16.25 minutes -NOS Ordinance CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: July 16, 2025 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Rachael Schaefer, Associate Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services Re: Zoning Code Amendment (REZ25-0012) related to 14-5K Neighborhood Open Space Requirements Introduction The Iowa City Zoning Code (Title 14) and Subdivision Code (Title 15) are subject to alteration and clarification as situations and circumstances change throughout the city. The proposed ordinance (Attachment 1) is an amendment to the City's Neighborhood Open Space Requirements, which were initially adopted in 1994. Since its adoption, the City has adopted other zoning tools that have complicated the implementation of the neighborhood open space requirements. The purpose of these amendments is to adopt an ordinance that works with a variety of zoning tools while maintaining the main purpose of the regulation, which is to ensure all residents have adequate access to parks and open space areas. Background The neighborhood open space dedication is a requirement that developers set aside land for parks or pay a fee in lieu of land dedication to be used by the City to acquire and develop park facilities. This requirement ensures that those responsible for creating the need for new parks cover the costs, rather than existing residents. The current formula used to calculate the required neighborhood open space dedication is as follows: A x 0.65DU x PDU x 3/1000, where A = Acres of undeveloped property; DU = Maximum dwelling units per undeveloped acre (43,560 divided by the minimum lot area requirement for the highest density residential use allowed in the subject base zone); 0.65 = This percentage figure reflects the average development density occurring in Iowa City; PDU = Persons per dwelling unit based on the most recent census; and 3/1,000 = The community standard of acres for active neighborhood open space required per 1,000 persons, as determined by the formulas set out in the neighborhood open space plan, as amended. Several zoning code updates have occurred since the adoption of the current ordinance in 1994. The main issue is that the current formula is based on maximum density, which causes several problems: 1. Residential zones now allow duplex and attached single-family housing types, increasing the maximum density. 2. The Form -Based Zones applicable in the South and Southwest Districts allow a wide range of housing types in each zone and therefore have a very high maximum density compared to what will likely be constructed. 3. The formula is not calculable for projects in the Riverfront Crossing and Central Business Districts since there is no maximum density. 4. The current formula's open space requirements create a burden for small infill projects. In addition to updating the formula, this update also addresses the following: 1. Aligning the purpose statements in 14-5K-1 and 15-3-5 with current City practices. 2. Clarifying the references to the "neighborhood open space plan, as amended" in 14-5K and 15-3-5. 3. Aligning the applicability provisions in 14-5K-2 and 15-3-5B. 4. Refining the procedure for dedication in 14-5K-3 language to align with current practices. The goal of this update is to remove density from the calculation, adopt a formula that works for all zoning districts, and adopt a formula that balances the City's current budget and goals with a more reasonable approach for developers and subdividers. The proposed code amendment (Attachment 1) includes changes to Article K, Neighborhood Open Space Requirements, of Chapter 5, Site Development Standards, of the Zoning Code (Title 14). Staff also proposes amending Title 15 (Land Subdivisions) to ensure alignment with the updates in Title 14. While the Planning and Zoning Commission does not review changes to the City Code outside of Title 14, proposed amendments to Title 15 are also included in the attachment. Proposed Amendments 1. Applicability and Procedures The current ordinance applies neighborhood open space requirements to residential subdivisions, commercial subdivisions containing residential uses, and planned developments. The proposed amendment simplifies the process by applying the requirement only at the preliminary plat stage. This change recognizes that major developments, including most planned developments, already go through preliminary platting where infrastructure and unit layout are determined, making it the appropriate point to assess open space needs. It also exempts smaller projects that only require a final plat, as these are typically follow-ups to an earlier subdivision that already accounted for open space. This update improves clarity, avoids duplication, and ensures the requirement aligns with the scale and timing of development. 2. Formula The following formula was selected based on its alignment with the update's goals, conformance with best practices informed by the research conducted, and ease of use. # of units x PDU x 3/1000, where # of units = Number of new units is determined as noted in the table below; PDU = Persons per dwelling unit based on the most recent census (Persons per household, 2019-2023: 2.23). 3/1000 = Acres of active neighborhood open space required per 1,000 persons. Determining Unit Number Zone Unit Number Determined by Single -Family Residential Allowable units based on the following dimensional requirements: Lot size, Lot frontage, and Lot width Multi -Family Residential and For every platted lot: Maximum dwelling units per undeveloped Commercial Zones (with acre (43,560 divided by the minimum lot area requirement for residential uses) the highest density residential use allowed in the subject base zone) x 0.65 Riverfront Crossings and Unit number to be provided by developer at submittal of Eastside Mixed Use Districts preliminary plat application Form -Based Zones Total unit number on Neighborhood Plan Planned Development Total unit number on Preliminary OPD Plan Overlays (OPDs) The updated formula includes key adjustments to improve clarity, consistency, and alignment with how development occurs in Iowa City. The variables were revised as follows: Removed • A (acres of undeveloped land): The current formula uses total site acreage, which did not accurately reflect how much housing would be built. Removing acreage simplifies the calculation and avoids disproportionate requirements for low -density, oddly shaped sites, and sites with sensitive features. • DU (dwelling units per acre): This variable was based on the maximum allowable density, which often exceeded what was actually built. Removing dwelling units per acre eliminates inflated results. Retained • 0.65 (estimated development density): Retained in how unit counts are estimated for some zones. While no longer part of the formula itself, the 0.65 multiplier is still used to estimate realistic unit counts in zones where actual units are unknown at the time of preliminary plat. This preserves consistency with past development patterns while improving applicability. • PDU (persons per dwelling unit): PDU remains in the formula to ensure that open space requirements are based on the estimated population served, maintaining alignment with the community standard of open space per 1,000 people. • 311000 (acres per 1,000 persons): This value remains unchanged and continues to represent the City's adopted standard for neighborhood open space need based on population. Added • Number of Units: Replaces A x DU x 0.65 in the new formula. Unit count now drives the calculation and is determined based on zone -specific methods that reflect how development is reviewed. This approach ties open space requirements directly to development intensity. The formula was simplified by removing acreage and maximum densities and instead focusing on actual or reasonably estimated unit counts. This supports the City's goal of providing adequate park space. 3. Dedication Cap The updated ordinance includes a new provision that caps required land dedication for neighborhood open space at 10% of the total developable site area. The cap works with the updated formula. After calculating the required open space using the proposed new formula (# of units x PDU x 3/1000), Staff compares the result to 10% of the total developable site area. If the formula yields a number that exceeds 10%, the requirement is limited to that maximum. This maximum applies whether the developer is dedicating land or paying a fee in lieu of land. This cap is needed to ensure the requirement remains proportional and reasonable, particularly for high -density or mixed -use developments where the formula could otherwise generate an open space requirement that consumes an excessive portion of the site. Without a cap, projects in areas like Riverfront Crossings or Form -Based Zones, where unit counts are high but land is limited, could face unrealistic dedication expectations that hinder development feasibility. The 10% limit provides a safeguard against disproportionate outcomes, offering predictability to developers while still securing meaningful open space contributions for the community. 4. Neighborhood Open Space District Boundary Map As part of this ordinance update, Staff is proposing to relocate the neighborhood open space boundary map from the parks master plan to the zoning ordinance. The map was originally adopted in 1993 in the Neighborhood Open Space Plan, which was adopted as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The most recent update of the map is included in the 2017 Parks Master Plan (see Attachment 2). Including the map directly in the zoning ordinance improves accessibility and provides clearer guidance to staff, developers, and the public by placing the map in the same location as the standards that describe its use. In addition to adding the map to the zoning ordinance, Staff is also proposing to revise the neighborhood open space boundaries by consolidating several subareas into districts (See Attachment 3). When discussing the implementation of this ordinance with Park and Recreation staff, it was noted that the current boundaries are too segmented, which can make land acquisition and the use of fee -in -lieu funds restrictive. Expanding and consolidating these boundaries will provide greater flexibility to develop park spaces where they are most efficient, rather than being limited to areas that may not align with where land is available or where park development is feasible. This is especially important as all payments in lieu of dedication funds must be used by the City within five years of them being received. The update to the district boundaries also includes expanding them to include the growth boundary areas outside of city limits. Adding the growth areas to the boundaries ensures that as annexation and development occur, neighborhood open space can be developed in the area using these dedicated funds. Analysis Iowa City's ordinance was compared to 18 other jurisdictions that require neighborhood open space dedication (see Attachment 4). Four of the researched jurisdictions were in Iowa, while the others were located in Minnesota, Texas, Wisconsin, California, and Arkansas. Six difference development scenarios were used to analyze how each formula would impact that development's dedication requirements. The scenarios included a single-family only, a mixed unit type, an infill development in a single-family zone, a mixed unit type development in the Form Based District, and two multi -family developments in the Riverfront Crossing District. The following formula was selected based on its alignment with the update's goals, conformance with best practices informed by the research conducted, and ease of use. The updated formula replaces the current acreage -based calculation with a simpler, unit -based approach: # of units x PDU x 3/1000 with a 10% cap, instead of A x 0.65DU x PDU x 3/1000. This change removes the reliance on density, making the calculation clearer, more consistent across zoning districts, and better aligned with actual population impacts. The current formula relies on a fixed density assumption that no longer reflects the range of housing types allowed across zoning districts, making it less adaptable and difficult to implement. In contrast, the proposed formula is simpler, more transparent, and scalable across all development types and zones. Tying open space requirements directly to the number of units and expected population better aligns with actual demand for parks. At the same time, the cap ensures that requirements remain reasonable for both infill and large-scale projects. This change improves clarity, fairness, and consistency in implementation without compromising the City's open space goals. Because the City's zoning districts vary significantly in how and when unit counts are established, the new neighborhood open space formula requires flexible methods for estimating unit numbers at the time of preliminary plat. In single-family residential zones, lot size provides a reliable proxy for unit count since lots are typically platted individually for units. In multi -family residential and commercial zones, unit counts are not known until later in the development process, so a standardized calculation based on maximum allowable density, adjusted by maintaining the 0.65 factor, offers a consistent and fair estimate for these specific lots. In Riverfront Crossings and Eastside Mixed Use Districts, where flexibility and mixed -use configurations are common, applicants will provide an estimated unit count at the preliminary plat, with final numbers verified at the final plat. Unit numbers from the adopted Neighborhood Plan will be used for form -based zones. This tailored approach ensures accurate open space requirements across all zoning districts, aligning with each district's specific development review process. Anticipated Impact The example scenarios below illustrate how the updated formula may impact neighborhood open space requirements across a range of development types and zones. While these are a mix of real and conceptual projects that require dedicated open space, they reflect common development patterns and help demonstrate how the new formula functions in different zoning contexts. Two key issues justify the shift to the new formula. First, under the current formula, open space fees for high -density projects, particularly in areas like Riverfront Crossings or the Form -Based Zones, can exceed $1 million. This is difficult to justify from a planning and policy standpoint and does not encourage the dense development that the City wishes to see in these zones. These amounts can create a significant barrier to the kind of infill, compact, walkable developments that align with City goals. The new formula, combined with the 10% cap, ensures that open space requirements remain meaningful yet not excessive, thereby preserving project feasibility in areas where land is limited and housing demand is high. Second, while the open space dedication for more traditional residential subdivisions may decrease under the new formula, the change reflects a correction of an assumption in the current code. The existing formula uses a maximum density, not the density proposed or built. The updated formula ties open space requirements directly to unit count and the most recent household size data. This creates a more accurate standard across all zoning districts, ensuring that each development contributes neighborhood open space based on the estimated number of people who will reside there, without being overburdened. Together, these changes align requirements with actual development patterns while maintaining the City's goal of acquiring high -quality open space as new housing is built. The examples below highlight the updated formula's improved predictability, fairness, and scalability across zoning districts without compromising the City's open space objectives. Single -Family Residential Single -Family Residential - Multi -Family Residential — Tamarack Ridge Lexington Ave Cardinal Heights Pt 1 Formula for Land to Acres to be Acres to be Acres to be be Dedicated Fee in Lieu Dedicated Fee in Lieu Dedicated Fee in Lieu Dedicated Current 0.79 $25,915.95 0.010 $6,278.91 0.64 $46,439.79 Updated 0.40 $13,167.93 0.007' $4,014.00' 0.28 $20,505.04 Difference - 0.39 - $12,748.02 - 0.003 - $2,264.91 -0.36 - $25,934.75 Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Planned Development 700 S Dubuque (Conceptual) South Village Concept Overlay -Western Homes (Conceptual) (Conceptual) Formula for Land to Acres to Acres to Acres to be be be Fee in Lieu be Fee in Lieu Dedicated Fee in Lieu Dedicated Dedicated Dedicated Current 1.09 $1,462,818.23 11.28 $1,848,310.26 1.09 $141,100.13 Updated 0.192 $255,661.002 2.35 $385,713.10 0.73 $94,797.30 Difference - 0.90 - $1,207,157.23 - 8.93 - $1,462,597.16 - 0.36 -$46,302.83 Notes: 1) With the newly proposed ordinance, the neighborhood open space dedication requirements would likely not be triggered for infill sites as they typically only require a final plat and not a preliminary plat. 2) The calculated dedication was greater than 10% of the total developable land (dedication cap), so a 10% land dedication is required for this development. Next Steps Pending a Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation, the City Council must hold a public hearing to consider the proposed text amendments. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Title 14 Zoning be amended, as illustrated in Attachment 1, to update requirements related to neighborhood open space dedication to continue implementing the City's goal of providing adequate open space to residents. Attachments 1. Draft Zoning and Land Subdivision Code Text Amendments 2. 2017 Neighborhood Open Space Boundary Map 3. Neighborhood Open Space Boundary Map Proposed Update 4. Summary Review of Other Jurisdictions Approved by: Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services ATTACHMENT 1 Draft Zoning and Land Subdivision Code Text Amendments DRAFT ZONING CODE TEXT A. Amend 14-5K-1, Purpose, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: The neighborhood open space requirements ensure that adequate usable neighborhood open space, parks and recreation facilities are provided in a manner that is consistent with the Re,ehherheel•! eeeR cease parks master plan, as amended, by using a calculable method to equitably apportion the costs of acquiring and developing land for those purposes. The provisions of this article require development, which creates increased needs for neighborhood open space ("open space impact"), to pay a proportionate share of the city's capital improvements to fulfill said open space impact. Usable neighborhood open space includes pedestrian/bicycle trails, preferably located within natural greenway systems, private open space that is publicly accessible, and neighborhood parks that serve nearby residents. Der+ieps of larger eemm, Rity parks may he adapted fer narks er large playing fields for ergaRized sports This article is also intended to encourage, wherever reasonably feasible, the dedication of sensitive areas in conjunction with usable open space. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) B. Amend 14-5K-2, Applicability, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: As a condition of approval for preliminary plats containing residential uses residential de„eleeme the applicant shall dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu of land, or a combination thereof, for park, greenway, recreational and open space purposes, as determined by the city and in accordance with the provisions of this article. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) C. Amend 14-5K-3, Dedication of Land, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. Amount Of Land To Be Dedicated: The amount of land dedication shall be determined by the following formula. This formula is deemed a reasonable calculation of the additional need for neighborhood open space created by the subject subdivision er elaRRed rde„eleemeRt n .,�D I I x PD I x 3/1000 .,ham base zene); T+ lewaJ , # of units x PDU x 3/1000, where # of units = Number of new units is determined as noted in the Table 5K-1: PDU = Persons per dwelling unit based on the most recent census; and 3/1,000 = The nemm„eity stand,rdl of Acres fer of active neighborhood open space required per 1,000 persons, as determined by the fermi I -as ce+ e, i+ it +he Reighherheed eeeR cease Plan, r�r ec emeRd Table 5K-1: Determining Unit Number Zone Unit Number Determined by Single -Family Residential Allowable units based on the followinq dimensional requirements: Lot size, Lot frontage, and Lot width Multi -Family Residential and For every platted lot: Maximum dwelling units per undeveloped Commercial Zones (with residential uses) acre (43,560 divided by the minimum lot area requirement for the highest density residential use allowed in the subject base zone) x 0.65 River Front Crossings and Unit number to be provided by developer at submittal of Eastside Mixed Use Districts preliminary plat application Form -Based Total unit number on Neighborhood Plan Planned Development Overlays (OPDs) Total unit number on Preliminary OPD Plan B. Dedication Cap: The maximum amount of land to be dedicated is 10% of the total acres of land being developed. C. Nature Of Land To Be Dedicated: Except as otherwise required by the city, all dedications of land shall meet the following criteria: Usability: At least ninety percent (90%) of the land required to be dedicated shall be located outside of floodways, lakes or other water bodies, areas with slopes greater than fifteen percent (15%), wetlands subject to federal or state regulatory jurisdiction and other areas the city reasonably deems unsuitable for neighborhood open space due to topography, flooding or other appropriate considerations. Dry bottom storm water detention facilities and dry creek areas may be credited toward reaching a portion of the required land dedication when the city determines that such areas are suitable for use as neighborhood open space. Pedestrian/bicycle trails and private open space that is publicly accessible may be credited toward reaching the required land dedication when the city determines that such areas are suitable for use as neiahborhood oxen space. The city encourages the dedication of lakes, ponds, creeks, other water bodies, wetlands falling under the jurisdiction of state or federal agencies and other sensitive areas including woodland areas, both as ten percent (10%) of and in addition to the dedicated land required by this article, if sufficient abutting land is dedicated as a usable, public recreation area or park. 2. Unity: The dedicated land shall form a single parcel of land, except where the city determines that two (2) or more parcels or greenways/trails would best serve the public interest, given the type and distribution of neighborhood open space needed to adequately serve the proposed development. If the city determines that two (2) or more parcels would best serve the public interest, the city may require that such parcels be connected by a dedicated strip of land at least twenty feet (20') wide in order to provide access and continuity between said parcels. 3. Location: The dedicated land shall be located so as to reasonably serve the recreation and open space needs of the residents of the subdivision GF plaRRed deVelOpMeR4 4. Shape: If a sufficient amount of land is dedicated to accommodate recreational facilities and activities, such as fields, courts or playground equipment, the shape of the dedicated land shall be suitable for such facilities and activities. Linear open space should be of sufficient width to accommodate trails and adjacent greenways. 5. Access: a. Greenways/Trails: Public access to greenways/trails shall be provided by a public access easement at least twenty feet (20') in width. In addition, greenways/trails shall be connected to existing or proposed greenways/trails on adjacent property. b. Parks: Public access to the dedicated land to be used for parks shall be provided either by adjoining public street frontage or by a dedicated public access easement at least fifty feet (50') in width, which connects the dedicated land to a public street or right of way. The grades adjacent to existing and proposed streets shall permit reasonable access to the dedicated land. The parcel shall be safely accessible to pedestrian traffic. 6. Responsibility For Site Preparation: a. The city may require the subdivider or developer to grade and seed those portions of the dedicated land to be improved prior to dedication of the property and prior to the city's acceptance of the dedication. b. Where the dedicated land is located adjacent to a street, the subdivider or developer shall remain responsible for the installation of utilities, sidewalks and other improvements required along that street segment. c. Prior to dedication, the subdivider or developer shall be responsible for restoring satisfactory ground cover and controlling erosion on land to be dedicated that has been disrupted as a result of development activities by the subdivider or developer. D. 4;-. Procedure For Dedication Of Land: The dedication of land shall be reviewed as part of the preliminary subdivision plat or Preliminary PlaRRe I i-eVeInPmont Plan Whv+heVeF is applil+ The subdivider or developer shall designate the area or areas of land to be dedicated pursuant to this article on the preliminary subdivision plat GF PlaRRed rdeVeIGPR;eRt plan. Where wetlands have been delineated on the property, the preliminary subdivision plat or Planned rdeVeIGPR;eRt r,43n shall also identify the boundaries of such wetlands. 2. Upon receipt of the preliminary subdivision plat, the rommi initY deVeIor,mont (PGD director of neighborhood & development services (NDS) shall submit a copy to the director of parks and recreation rdiror++or of the depaFtMeRt of narks ;ni-1 ror+roa+inn for review by the i4arks and fecreation commission. The -parks and fecreation commission shall submit recommendations concerning the land to be dedicated to the planning and zoning commission within twenty-one (21) business days of the receipt of a complete application for preliminary subdivision plat er preliminary plaRRed rdeVeIGPH;eRt 3. Once the final subdivision plat OF final plaRRed devel pmep+ is approved, and any public improvements required to be installed by the subdivider or developer within the land to be dedicated have been installed, approved, and accepted by the city, and the subdivider or developer has completed site preparation pursuant to subsection B6 of this section, the subdivider or developer shall provide a properly executed warranty deed conveying the dedicated land to the city within two (2) years of final plat approval (^r final plaRRed rdeVeIGr,mon4 a eva4-�or by the time the city issues fifty percent (50%) of the certificates of occupancy for the subdivision, at the discretion of the city, or as otherwise specified in the subdivider's or developer agreement. 4. The city shall formally accept the dedication of land for open space, parkland or greenways/trails by resolution. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) D. Amend 14-5K-4, Payment of Fees in Lieu, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. General: The payment of fees in lieu of dedication of land may occur at the request of the subdivider or developer with approval by the city, or may be required by the city. The payment of fees in lieu of land dedication shall be reviewed and approved as part of the preliminary subdivision plat nr r'rolimiRaFy PIGIRRe d r eVelOpMeR4 B. Request By Subdivider Or Developer: 1. If a payment in lieu of open space is requested, the subdivider or developer must include such request in a letter submitted with the application for a preliminary subdivision ^r preliminary plaRRed r eVelOpMeR+ whichever is applicable. 2. The director of neighborhood & development services (NDS) will forward a copy of the preliminary subdivision plat nr preliminary plaRRed deVeIGPRIen+ along with a copy of the letter requesting payment of fees in lieu of land dedication to the director ^f the i-epaF+. eRt of parks and recreation for review by the parks and recreation commission. The commission shall submit any and all recommendations concerning the payment of fees in lieu of dedication to the planning and zoning commission within twenty one (21) business days of the date a complete application for preliminary subdivision plat ^r plaRRed deVeI^r,.,,eRt is submitted. 3. The planning and zoning commission will consider the request for payment of fees in lieu of land dedication during the subdivision ^r plaRRed deVeIGPH;eRt review process and forward its recommendations to the city council. C. Determination Of Fees In Lieu Of Dedication Criteria: The city may, at its discretion, require the payment of fees in lieu of the subdivider dedicating land, if the city finds that all or part of the land required for dedication is not suitable for public recreation and open space purposes, or upon a finding that the recreational needs of the proposed subdivision can be met by other park, greenway, or recreational facilities planned or constructed by the city within reasonable proximity to the subdivision. The city shall consider the following factors in making its determination: 1. Recreational and open space elements of the city comprehensive plan, as amended, and the relation of the subdivision to the proposed open space and recreational areas; 2. Topographic and geologic conditions of the land available for dedication; 3. Size, shape, location of and access to the land available for dedication; 4. The character and recreational needs of the neighborhood where the subdivision is located; 5. The costs of developing open space and recreational areas in the subdivision; 6. The actual or potential development of open space and recreational areas on land adjacent to the subdivision which will serve the needs of the subdivision; 7. Recommendations of staff, the parks and recreation commission and the planning and zoning commission; and 8. Any other relevant information. D. Time Of Payment: Fees in lieu of dedication must be paid in full by the subdivider/developer prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a lot in the subdivision ^r plaRRed deyelopme„+ E. Amount Of Payment: The fee shall be equal to the fair market value of the land that ftabotherwise would have been required for dedication. The fair market value of the undeveloped land shall be determined by a qualified real estate appraiser or by other means whe+s-acceptable to both the city and the subdivider or developer. The city and subdivider/developer will equally share the appraisal costs. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15- 2005) E. Amend 14-5K-5, Requiring Both Dedication of Land and Payment of Fee, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: The city may, at its discretion, require a subdivider devel^rmon+ to dedicate a portion of the land required under the formula set forth in this article, and also to pay a fee in lieu of dedication for the remaining portion of the land by said formula. The fee for the remaining portion shall be determined by a qualified real estate appraiser or by other means whe isacceptableto both the city and subdivider or developer. The city and subdivider/developer will equally share the appraisal costs. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) F. Amend 14-5K-6, Use of Funds, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. The neighborhood open space district boundary map (see figure 5K-1 of this section), divides the city into neighborhood open space districts. All payments in lieu of dedication shall be deposited in a special neighborhood open space account designated by the name of the contributing development. All payments will be used to acquire or develop open spaces, parks, recreation facilities and greenways/trails that are located within the neighborhood open space district containing the subject subdivision er planned deVe'GPR;eR, and will benefit the residents of the subdivision planned deVelGPRgeRt for which payment has been made. FIGURE 5K-1 Neighborhood Open Space District Boundary Map Legend 0 Iowa City Boundary b�eira�b s Z Iowa City Growth Area '13th Snte��te 8p 340th St NE Clear Creek Greenbelt 2 U )th Sr or ; ville wwerH, {3• a,,, 4 -1��®� 61anchRd Lo' rW. Rd SEBranch 1f1f � =t Melrose' a re;. > Ave 4 m r yhts' y 1 ap v y het P! EE N 4201h St bE,„ tP9��y1 — ��d4? ��f ♦ I ee East j/• [zaak 6�� ! Osage St SE 8 St SW ; Walmn Rd L��• N N waa Breckenrio, e tes Suurcis: Esn, oni um,6 n in,FAO,NOAA, US6S, ©`�pen5treethAap coEsta n to bu U) and the 6lS User Miles commuory 0 0.250.5 1.5 2 n B. The city must use the payment in lieu of dedication within five (5) years from the date received. This period will be automatically extended an additional five (5) years if the subdivider/developer has not constructed at least fifty percent (50%) of the units within the subdivision ^F plaRRed deVel PMeRt for which payment in lieu of dedication has been made. C. If the city has not spent the funds by the last day of the five (5) year period or, if extended, by the last day of an additional five (5) years, the city shall, within ninety (90) days thereafter, mail to the property owner, at the address on file with the Johnson County treasurer's office, a proportional refund based on the percentage of the platted lots they own of the total platted lots in the subdivision ^r plaRRed deVeIGPMeR+. The subdivider's agreement/development agreement for each subdivision�plaRRed deyelepn;er# for which the subdivider/developer has made payments in lieu of dedication shall inform all property owners and successors in interest to properties in the subdivision 'hared deVeIGPMeRt of the right to a refund as provided for herein. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) I DRAFT LAND SUBDIVISION CODE TEXT G. Amend 15-3-5, Neighborhood Open Space Requirements, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. Intent And Purpose: The neighborhood open space requirements are intended to ensure provision of adequate usable neighborhood open space, parks and recreation facilities in a manner that is consistent with the ReighbGFhGGGI GpeR GpaG(, parks master plan, as amended, by using a fair and reasonably calculable method to equitably apportion the costs of acquiring and/or developing land for those purposes. Active, usable neighborhood open space includes pedestrian/bicycle trails preferably located within natural greenway systems, private open space that is publicly accessible, and also ORGIUde neighborhood parks that serve nearby residents. ergaRiZed cnnr+c B. Dedication Of Land Or Payment Of Fees In Lieu Of Land Required: The dedication of land shall be reviewed as part of the preliminary subdivision plat. As a condition of approval for preliminary plats containing residential uses resid-a—ptial s h-d-i„isinnc -;;P rnmmorni�l ci ihrJi1iicinnc nnn+ainiRg rocirJori+i�i , ��o�, the applicant shall dedicate land or pay a fee in lieu of land, or a combination thereof, for park, greenway, recreational and open space purposes, as determined by the city and in accordance with the provisions of title 14, chapter 5, article K, "Neighborhood Open Space Requirements", of this code. (Ord. 08-4313, 8-26-2008) ATTACHMENT 2 2017 Neighborhood Open Space Boundary Map Neighborhood Open Space F = District Map 1 7 - - } 1 l ., m N ,. E1 NW2 CS NE3 N1 l swi C2 NEB 1 �E7 7 - C SW2 SE3 -. E - i U it 1� AAilq� ATTACHMENT 3 Neighborhood Open Space Boundary Map Proposed Update Legend Brown Deei 0 Iowa City Boundary Golf Club ' Iowa City Growth Area tIr__J.44 Clear Creek Greenbelt I 6� m m U`0 r a 09 nr'sra 13th S� _ to 80 i rc,lviIIe North, Melrose \ Ave • t�Oi—J"'o." • 15 I I T Sw ■ Ak Miles 0 0.25 0.5 11.5 2 a' rA rs' =r eights] 1%, c a z z Lower Bran gall � no 1�� s F . Q° 5 ay a East t� Z _ Izaak r 'a'-- � Walton Rd Lo m 3 + 11h,� W66 N rces: B71 07 o if X,i a AW 340th St NE �_Z�4 ter�`d to 80 JL�w�eLWetr Branch RdSE 420th St SE1aL. ca cC 6 �dy Osage St SE .6 ♦sp Breckenricarye Estates FAO, NOAA, USGS, ©-S)penStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User X � Community ca cC ATTACHMENT 4 Summary Review of Other Jurisdictions State 2022 Population Ordinance Link DedicatedCity Formula for Land to be Category Iowa City IA 75,233 14-5K Acres of undeveloped property (0.65 x max DU) x Persons/DU x 3/1000 1 Santa Cruz County CA 136,086 Chapter 15.01 # of units x Persons/DU x 5/1000 2 Pleasant Hill IA 11,186 Chapter 172 # of units x Persons/DU x 5/1000 2 Dallas Center IA 1,955 170.13 # of units x Persons/DU x 10/1000 2 Waukee IA 29,167 Chapter 179 # of units x Persons/DU x 6.5/1000 2 Fort Worth TX 956,709 G-16592 # of units x Persons/DU x 3.25/1000 2 Single -Family: # of units x Persons/DU x 9.4/1000 [Persons/DU based on Density] Austin TX 974,447 Article 14 2 Multi -Family: [# of units x 5/1000] + [# of hotel/motel rooms x 4/1000] Fayetteville AR 99,285 166.04-B-4-1 Single -Family: .023 acres x # of units 3 Multi-Family:.02 acres x # of units Single -Family Detached: 1110 sq.ft. x # of units Norwalk IA 14,177 176.06 Single -Family Attached: 740 sq.ft. x # of units 3 Multi-Family:592 sq.ft. x#of units Mobile Home: 1,044 sq.ft. x # of units Minneapolis MN 425,096 Chapter 22, Article V Downtown: (.0066 acres x # units) + (100 sq.ft. x # of employees) 3 Other Areas: (.01 acres x # units) + (100 sq.ft. x # of employees) Residential: 150 sq.ft. x #units Commercial: 28 sq.ft. x new floor area/1000 Saint Paul MN 303,176 63.7 3 Industrial: 11 sq.ft. x new floor area/1000 Wholesale, warehouse, & storage: 6 sq.ft. x new floor area/1000 Single -Family: 1 acre per48 DU College Station TX 124,319 Sec. 8.8 Multi -Family: 1 acre per 83 DU 3 [see code for calculation details] Madison WI 272,903 16.23.6.f # of units x Square Feet 3 [sq.ft. is prescribed in the code for each unit type] Brooklyn Park MN 83,324 151.061 .1 x acreage of buildable land 4 [10%of land is required] West Saint Paul MN 21,794 Title XV: Chapter 152 .08 x acreage of buildable land 4 [8%of land is required] Residential: [DU/acre = % of buildable area] Blaine MN 71,739 Article V: 75-130 0-1= 591., 2-3 =10%, 4-5 = 12 %, 6-7 =14%, 8-12 = 1691., 13-16 =18%, For each unit over 16/acre, add 0.5%. 4 Commercial & Industrial: 3% .1 x acreage of buildable land Stearns County MN 158,292 625 4 [10%of land is required] Altoona WI 9,139 18_08 Acres of Undeveloped Propertyx.05 4 [5%of land is required] Residential: (95% of the current fair market value of the city -owned parkland and park improvements/the current number of city residents) x (# units x persons/DU) Bloomington MN 79,107 22.1 5 Commercial: (10% of the current fair market value of the city -owned parkland and park improvements/the current number ofjobs) x (sq.ft. newfloor area x employees/1000 sq.ft.) City Iowa City Acres of Undeveloped Property/Buildable Land X Average Development Density Occurring in City X Data Points Undeveloped Acre X Used in Land Dedication (#listed in each code) X parkland/1000 residents) X Santa Cruz County X X X Pleasant Hill X X X Dallas Center X X X Waukee X X X Fort Worth X X X Austin X X X Fayetteville X X Norwalk X X Minneapolis X X Saint Paul X X College Station X X Madison X X Brooklyn Park X X West Saint Paul X X Blaine X X Stearns County X X Altoona X X Bloomington X X I Other Elements of the Code City Iowa City Applicability Park Dedication Residential Subdivisions None None None Previous park dedication orfees Santa Cruz County Residential Subdivisions None None None 25%of acreage in the 100-year flood plain that is dedicate Pleasant Hill Subdivision of Land, Plat of Subdivision, PUD, Site Plan %of total acres being developed (varries None Minor subdivisions (no definition) trail easement area, 1 acre of stream buffer =.1 acre of for Residential Development based on unit type: 5-15%) open space, value of park improvements installed Dallas Center Subdivisions, Site Plan, PUD, Conditional Use Plan, Area None None None None Development Plan. Waukee Residential Subdivisions None None None Value of park improvements installed, private parkland Park Development Fee: $115,000.00/acre of Value of park improvements installed, private open space Fort Worth Residential Subdivisions None None [credit up to 50%, 50-75% Director Approval, > 75% dedicated land Council Approval] Subdivisions, site plans, building permits adding Single-Fam: 15% oftotal acres being certified S.M.A. R.T. Housing Policy units, 50%of acreage in the 100-year flood plain that is Austin None dedicated, privately owned and maintained parkland for residential or hotel units developed, Multi-fam: 10% income restricted units public use Fayetteville Residential Subdivisions, development that creates 1 or None None None None ore residential unit. Norwalk Residential Subdivisions None None None Value of park improvements installed Any development that results in a net increase in Admin Fee: 5% of dedication fee ($1,000 tax parcel splits, minor subdivisions, lot line Enter into an agreement for the private development Minneapolis employees and/or residential dwelling units 10%of total acres being developed cap) adjustments, conversions of apartments to and/or maintenance of land for public use condominiums. All affordable housing units Commercial < 5,000 sq.ft. added, Industrial <Enter Saint Paul Any development that results in a net increase in Residential: 4.5% of acres being developed. None 12,500 sq.ft. added, warehouse < 2,5000 sq.ft. into an agreement for the private development employees and/or residential dwelling units Other: 0.5% of acres being developed and/or maintenance of land for public use added College Station Development of land for residential use None Park Development Fee: $4,150 per single- Affordable Housing Private park and ammenities (25%), value of park fam unit, $1,486 per multi-fam unit improvments installed Madison Residential Sites, Land Divisions, PUD, Residential None None None Privately -Owned open space credited Building Complexes Brooklyn Park plat, replat or subdivision of land allowing development None None None None for residential, commercial, industrial West Saint Paul all platting that involves development or None None land that park dedication has been received Partial credit for private parkland redevelopment that is being re -platted with the same # of lots Whenever any land in the city is subdivided by any The water surface area of required holding Blaine None None ponds shall not be included in the gross area Previous park dedication orfees process for the talc. Stearns County Residential Subdivisions with 3 or more new units 10%of the Estimated Market Value None Residential Subdivisions that create less than 3 None units Altoona Subdivisions and Developments $300 per lot None None Value of park improvements installed Bloomington Any development that results in a net increase in None None None Previous park dedication or fees employees and/or residential dwelling units Other Elements of the Code City Iowa City When # of Units is Unknown Fee In Lieu Based On Appraised Fair Market Value Santa Cruz County maximum number of such units permitted bythe existing zoning Assessor's or Appraised Fair Market Value Pleasant Hill Appraised Fair Market Value Dallas Center Appraised Fair Market Value Waukee maximum number of such units permitted bythe existing zoning No fee in lieu option Fort Worth Appraised Fair Market Value density is assumed to be the highest permitted in the zoning district to for firing an (DU/person) x [(avg. purchase(city Austin or applicant may reduce the assumed density by agreeing that any pop/netce park acrage)]y acre of parkland)/(city pop/net park acrage)] increases in density may require additional dedication of parkland $1,089 per additional single-fam DU Fayetteville $952 per additional multi-fam DU Norwalk No fee in lieu option Minneapolis Appraised Fair Market Value $1,200 per additional DU (4.5%of assessor's estimated market Saint Paul value cap) College Station (average fair market value of an acre of land/dwelling units per acre of parks) x (1 + adjustment ratio MFU/SFU) Madison Alternative payment times: At platting, installments, at building Listed fee per unit (20.08) permit issuance Brooklyn Park Assessor Fair Market Values West Saint Paul Assessor Fair Market Values Blaine Fair Market Value determined by City Manage and City Council Stearns County Assessor Fair Market Values (10%cap) Altoona Land dedication shall be based upon the maximum number of units Land Acquisition Cost ($300 per lot fee cap) permitted by the City Zoning Code Dedicate or preserve land,easements, or cash =to the lesser of 10% Bloomington of undeveloped land value or calc. of maximum development Assessor Fair Market Values potential Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 17 of 22 A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT ITEMS: CASE NO. REZ25-0012: Consideration of an amendment to 14-51K Neighborhood Open Space Requirements Schaefer explained the proposed ordinance is an amendment to the City's Neighborhood Open Space requirements that were initially adopted in 1994. The Neighborhood Open Space dedication requirement is for developers to set aside land for parks or pay a fee in lieu of land dedication to be used by the City's Parks and Recreation Department to acquire and develop park facilities for the community. This requirement ensures that those responsible for creating the need for new parks cover the cost rather than existing residents in the community. Schaefer reviewed the current formula used to decide how much required open space dedication is needed for development. The current formula used to calculate that requirement is acres of undeveloped property multiplied by the maximum dwelling units allowed per undeveloped acre of the property being developed and that is multiplied by 65% which is a rough estimate of the average development density of Iowa City. That then is further multiplied by persons per dwelling unit based on the most recent census and then multiplied by 3/1000 which is the community standard of the goal of requiring three acres of neighborhood park space per 1000 people. Schaefer stated the reason the City is needing to update the code is because there's been several zoning code updates since 1994 when this was originally approved. The main issue with the existing formula is it is based on the requirement to utilize maximum density, which causes several problems. One of those problems is in residential zones. Since 1994 the City has allowed more housing types (duplexes, attached single family housing types) and all of those things contribute to an increased maximum density than what was originally envisioned in 1994. The formula is also not calculable for projects in Riverfront Crossing and the Central Business District because there is no maximum density for those districts. Also, the form based zones again allow an even wider range of housing types and that creates a very high maximum density for those properties if they were to be rezoned to form based code districts. Schaefer noted even though the City allows that maximum density, they don't foresee any developer building to maximum for those sites so the requirements end up being a little overbearing for those properties. The current requirements also create a burden for small infill projects such as having one lot that a single homeowner is simply trying to divide into two, the fees tend to be a barrier to get that done. The goal of the update is to remove density as the main part of the calculation and adopt a formula that works for all zoning districts and works within the City's goals and budget that is reasonable and approachable for developers and subdividers. Schaefer stated for proposed amendments there's four main sections, applicability and the procedures of the code, the formula itself, the addition of a dedication cap, or maximum amount of land to be dedicated, and then the neighborhood Open Space District Boundary Map. The first change is related to the applicability of the code, the current ordinance applies the Neighborhood Open Space requirements to residential subdivisions, commercial subdivisions containing residential uses, and planned developments. The proposed amendment simplifies the process by simply stating that the requirement is required at preliminary plat stage which recognizes that the major developments, including most planned developments, already go Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 18 of 22 through preliminary platting where infrastructure and unit layout are determined, making it an appropriate point to assess open space needs. It also exempts smaller projects like the division of one lot, that only require a final plat, as those are typically follow ups to earlier subdivisions that have already accounted for open space. This update improves clarity, avoids duplication and ensures the requirements align with the scale and the timing of the proposed development. Regarding a change in the formula, Iowa City's ordinance was compared to 18 other jurisdictions that require Neighborhood Open Space dedication, and the new formula was selected based on its alignment with the updates, goals, and conformance with best practices informed by the research that they conducted on those other jurisdictions, and then also ease of use between the developer and staff. The updated formula is number of units times person per dwelling units, based on the most recent census, times 3/1000 again, that's three acres per 1000 residents. Schaefer noted the new formula is basically taking out the density requirement and relating the density to the land and going strictly for the number of units being proposed as the means in which they're calculating. She explained because the City zoning districts vary significantly in how and when unit counts are established, they incorporated into this new formula a flexible method for estimating unit numbers at the time of preliminary plat. For example, in single family residential zones the lot size provides a reliable proxy for unit count, since lots are typically platted individually for those units being proposed in single family. In multifamily residential zones and commercial zones it gets a little bit more complicated as unit counts are not known until later in the development process, typically. So instead of each platted lot, staff would determine the maximum dwelling units that could be allowed and it would be adjusted by that estimated 65% build out, which offers a consistent estimate for those specific lots that can fluctuate unit count wise after preliminary plat. This allows staff to not have to go back and recalculate those units if they do change after preliminary plat and then in the Riverfront Crossings and east side mixed use districts, where flexibility and mixed use configurations are common, the applicant will provide an estimated unit count at preliminary plat, with final numbers being verified at final plat. For the form based zones staff will get unit numbers from the neighborhood plan, which is much more specific for the form based code districts. The neighborhood plan shows the building types the developers are proposing and that'll have an accurate unit count. Similarly, for OPDs (Planned Development Overlays) they will get a total unit count from their OPD plan. In addition to changing that calculation, staff is also proposing the addition of a dedication cap and that will cap the requirement for Neighborhood Open Space at 10% of the total site area. After calculating the required open space staff will compare those results to the 10% of the total site area, and if it's greater than that they will default to that maximum dedication. This cap is needed to ensure the requirement remains reasonable, particularly in high density or mixed use developments where the formula could otherwise generate an open space requirement that consumes an excessive portion of the site. Without a cap projects in areas like Riverfront Crossings or the form based zones where unit counts are high but land is limited, could face unrealistic dedication expectations that hinder development feasibility on those sites. Wade asked if the intention of the cap is to ensure that developers do not dedicate more than 10%. Schaefer confirmed it is to ensure that they're not required to dedicate more than 10% and the intent is because when they do the calculations in some of the very dense zones with small lots and high unit counts the calculation works out where it could be something greater than what's actually on the site. For those super dense sites, staff needs some way to control and be able to actually develop those sites without all of the land used up with open space dedications. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 19 of 22 Schaefer stated the last part of the change is the Neighborhood Open Space District Boundary Map and explained these maps are utilized when instead of getting land as part of the requirement the City instead gets a fee in lieu of land. She explained the money from those fees taken in must be utilized within the same district boundaries and that's what they utilize the maps for. Currently, the map is housed in the Parks Master Plan, a totally separate document than where these requirements live, so the first thing staff is proposing is to bring this map into the zoning code so it's with the requirements. Staff is also proposing to revise the boundaries by consolidating several subareas into larger districts. When discussing the implementation of this ordinance with Parks and Rec staff it was noted that the current boundaries are too segmented, which can make land acquisition and use of fee in lieu funds restrictive and difficult. By expanding and consolidating these boundaries they are providing Parks and Recreation a little bit more flexibility as to where they can use these funds. Schaefer noted this is especially needed because there is a time limit on when those funds are used, Parks and Rec has five years to use those funds or return them. Again, this allows them more flexibility to move to a different area. Schaefer stated the fee in lieu can go to acquire property or it can also be used to improve existing park systems. She shared the new map districts and noted they also expanded the district boundaries to incorporate growth boundaries for when they acquire and annex land. She then shared some examples of how the change in the formula would impact the dedication requirements. Wade noted it would make sense to use major arterial roads as boundary lines, so perhaps a few of the boundaries could be adjusted. Russett agreed that would be a good practice and it should be revised. Davies asked who determines whether to use fee and lieu or an actual dedication. Schaefer explained the code describes what they're looking for when it comes to open space and the City has the option to take what's offered or the fee in lieu. Quellhorst asked if that fee in lieu is a material part of the Parks budget. Schaefer stated no, because it fluctuates so much and there is no predicting timing of when developers come forward it's something they do appreciate and utilize fully, but not something that they build into their main budget line. Schaefer next shared some examples of the Riverfront Crossing districts and the form based code zones and some conceptual projects to give an idea of what it would look like using the current ordinance and then the updated one. Using the current ordinance open space fees in high density projects, particularly in areas like the Riverfront Crossing districts they would see numbers exceeding $1 million and ultimately that is hard to justify from a planning and policy standpoint and doesn't encourage that dense development that the City wishes to see in those zones. It creates a significant barrier to those type of compact, walkable developments that align with a lot of the City's other goals. So with the combination of the update and only requiring dedication for the actual units being proposed, and that 10% cap also ensures that the open space requirements remain reasonable, it makes sure that projects are feasible. Ultimately, these changes align actual development patterns while maintaining the City's goal of acquiring high quality open space as new housing is developed. Overall, the updated formula approves predictability, fairness and scalability across all the zoning districts without compromising the Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 20 of 22 City's open space objectives. Staff recommends that Title 14 zoning be amended, as illustrated in attachment one, to update the requirements related to Neighborhood Open Space dedication, to continue implementing the City's goal of providing adequate open space for the City's residents. Schaefer stated if there's a positive recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, they're looking at September 16 to get all the way through the process. Quellhorst commented on the wording of the proposed text of the dedication cap, it says the maximum amount of land to be dedicated is 10% of the total acres of land being developed and it might be worth considering saying something like the maximum amount of land required to be dedicated onto this section will not exceed just to clarify that if somebody wants to dedicate more than that they could and it wouldn't be prohibitive. Townsend asked about the five year limit and how much money does the City have and how much have they lost by not utilizing that. Russett stated they use it all, they find a way. Davies asked how land is identified and then converted to space. Russett stated typically if they get a subdivision application they will talk with Parks if there is an interest in acquiring any of the land for park space. It really is a conversation with Parks staff to see if it makes sense to locate a park in the area, if there's enough land to have a park, but in many cases they will take the fee in lieu of land dedication. It is up to the City, the developer can propose to give land for a park but if the City is not interested in that land for a park, as oftentimes it's heavily wooded and sloped and is just not usable, the City will request the fees. Davies asked if there is any concern that this would encourage less dense development. Schaefer stated that is the main reason they added that 10% cap to help not deter development any more than what the current ordinance is doing and if anything, hopefully it promotes development. Davies asked if staff has heard specifically from developers that this is a particular pain point as he would just hate to see less space or less money dedicated to parks. Russett stated the main reason they're doing this is the current code is unworkable. They have a formula that's based on maximum density, they have zones that don't have maximum density, they have zones that encourage so much housing and a diversity of housing the fees that would be required are unreasonable, so they want to encourage development and the proposed formula is definitely better in terms of encouraging infill development and encouraging high density development. Wade moved to recommend that Title 14 zoning be amended, as illustrated in attachment one and as they've been amended by the Commission and staff this evening regarding updating the map and dedication cap language, to update the requirements related to Neighborhood Open Space dedication, to continue implementing the City's goal of providing adequate open space for the City's residents. Townsend seconded the motion. Davies stated he is all for simplifying and removing the requirement for smaller split infill Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2025 Page 21 of 22 developments. He generally has concern about dedicating less land and less money to park improvements but can see why it is prohibitive to development, and it needs to be simplified so generally supportive. Miller agreed that old formula was confusing. Quellhorst agrees it streamlines things nicely and he appreciates the proposal and the comparison to similarly situated communities. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JULY 2 2025: Miler moved to approve the meeting minutes from July 2, 2025. Townsend seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Craig noted this year the Iowa Legislature passed House File 706 which modified Iowa's Open Meetings Law and increased the penalty for Open Meeting violations, and so as part of that change the City is recommending that Commissions not go into closed session unless they've received a written memo from the City Attorney's Office or one of the attorneys had made a recommendation on the record that going into closed session is acceptable. The reason for that is the defense to that violation is they've received and relied upon the reasonable advice of an attorney in going into closed session. Craig stated another change to the Open Meetings Law was that board and commission members in Iowa that were appointed after July 1 are now required to undergo a one to two hour training that's been approved by the Iowa Public Information Board. As part of that, the City Attorney's Office and City Council would like all board and commission members to undergo that training for consistency's sake and given the new increased penalties for Open Meeting violations. There is a training that's being offered by the Iowa Public Information Board on August 26 and staff can supply more information about that. It will be an online training, and they'll provide some kind of certification that the City will keep a record of. Russett noted there will be no meeting on August 20, but instead on August 27. Schaefer noted tomorrow's is her last day as she is moving to Syracuse, New York, it was great working with all. ADJOURNMENT: Townsend moved to adjourn, Davies seconded and the motion passed 5-0. Prepared by: Rachael Schaefer, Associate Planner, 410 E Washington St, Iowa City, IA 52240 (REZ25-0012) Ordinance No. 25-4965 Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning Code and Title 15, Land Subdivision, to update the Neighborhood Open Space Requirements (REZ25-0012) Whereas, neighborhood open space is considered a vital part of Iowa City's community and often serves as a focal point of neighborhood activity; and Whereas, attractive open space enhances and serves the immediate and future needs of area residents in the same way as other capital improvements such as streets, water mains, and sanitary and storm sewers serve residents of a neighborhood; and Whereas, it is the intent of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to ensure that adequate usable neighborhood open space, parks and recreation facilities are provided in a manner consistent with the Parks Master Plan adopted on September 19, 2017 (Resolution No. 17-309), and that the method of assuring such open space is calculated in a predictable and reasonable way as development occurs in the City; and Whereas, the City of Iowa City, Iowa has determined that new subdivisions impact existing neighborhood open space, as well as a need for additional neighborhood open space; and Whereas, the provision of neighborhood open space through dedication and/or the payment of fees to be used for land acquisition in lieu of dedication is a reasonable and objective method for addressing and alleviating such impact, and also promoting and protecting the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of Iowa City; and Whereas, the current neighborhood open space requirements, adopted in 1994 (Ordinance No. 94-3648), are based on maximum residential density, and significant zoning code updates since that time have rendered this formula unworkable in some cases; and Whereas, the adoption of the Form -Based Code and Standards allows a wide range of housing types, resulting in theoretical maximum densities that do not reflect likely development patterns, and thereby distort the open space calculation; and Whereas, some zoning districts, such as those in the Riverfront Crossings District and the Central Business District, do not have maximum density standards, making the existing open space formula infeasible to implement; and Whereas, the City seeks to adopt a new open space formula that is predictable and functional across all zoning districts, regardless of density assumptions; and Whereas, the inclusion of a 10% cap on the neighborhood open space requirement ensures that the amount of land or fee in -lieu contribution remains proportional to the scale of the development, preventing disproportionately high burdens on projects with smaller sites or higher densities; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the zoning code amendments set forth below at the July 16, 2025 meeting and recommended approval. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. The Code of Ordinances of the City of Iowa City, Iowa is hereby amended as follows: Ordinance No. 25-4965 Page 2 A. Amend 14-5K-1, Purpose, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: The neighborhood open space requirements ensure that adequate usable neighborhood open space, parks and recreation facilities are provided in a manner that is consistent with the parks master plan, as amended, by using a calculable method to equitably apportion the costs of acquiring and developing land for those purposes. The provisions of this article require development, which creates increased needs for neighborhood open space ("open space impact"), to pay a proportionate share of the city's capital improvements to full said open space impact. Usable neighborhood open space includes pedestrian/bicycle trails, preferably located within natural greenway systems, private open space that is publicly accessible, and neighborhood parks that serve nearby residents. sports.Pad% OF aFg9 playing fields for organ zed This article is also intended to encourage, wherever reasonably feasible, the dedication of sensitive areas in conjunction with usable open space. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) B. Amend 14-5K-2, Applicability, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: As a condition of approval for preliminary plats containing residential use Fes identiA' subd visions, and GommArGin' q IhdiiA ORR Wilts R R9 FOG &Rtial Uses, and planned develepmeafs, the applicant shall dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu of land, or a combination thereof, for park, greenway, recreational and open space purposes, as determined by the city and in accordance with the provisions of this article. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) C. Amend 14-5K-3, Dedication of Land, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. Amount Of Land To Be Dedicated: The amount of land dedication shall be determined by the following formula. This formula is deemed a reasonable calculation of the additional need for neighborhood open space created by the subject subdivision. base zone); Iewaty; # of units x PDU x 3/1000, where # of units = Number of new units is determined as noted in the Table 5K-1; PDU = Persons per dwelling unit based on the most recent census; and 3/1,000 = The commun ty 6tandaFd ef a Acres for of active neighborhood open space required per 1,000 persons, as detenn ned by the f9Fmulas set out n the Re ghbGFh99d GpeR -pace plan, as amended. Table 5K-1: Determining Unit Number Ordinance No. 25-4965 Page 3 Zone Unit Number Determined by Single -Family Residential Allowable units based on the following dimensional requirements: Lot size. Lot frontage. and Lot width Multi -Family Residential and For every olatted lot: Maximum dwelling units per undeveloped Commercial Zones (with residential uses) acre (43,560 divided by the minimum lot area requirement for the highest density residential use allowed in the sub act base zone) x 0.65 River Front Crossings and Unit number to be Provided by developer at submittal of Eastside Mixed Use Districts preliminary plat application Form -Based Total unit number on Neighborhood Plan Planned Development Overlays (OPDs) Total unit number on Preliminary OPD Plan B. Dedication C.aD: The maximum land dedication reauirement is 10% of the total acres of land being developed. B: C. Nature Of Land To Be Dedicated: Except as otherwise required by the city, all dedications of land shall meet the following criteria: 1. Usability: At least ninety percent (90%) of the land required to be dedicated shall be located outside of floodways, lakes or other water bodies, areas with slopes greater than fifteen percent (15%), wetlands subject to federal or state regulatory jurisdiction and other areas the city reasonably deems unsuitable for neighborhood open space due to topography, flooding or other appropriate considerations. Dry bottom storm water detention facilities and dry creek areas may be credited toward reaching a portion of the required land dedication when the city determines that such areas are suitable for use as neighborhood open space. Pedestrian/bicycle trails and private open space that is Publicly accessible may be credited toward reaching the required land dedication when the city determines that such areas are suitable for use as neighborhood open space. The city encourages the dedication of lakes, ponds, creeks, other water bodies, wetlands falling under the jurisdiction of state or federal agencies and other sensitive areas including woodland areas, both as ten percent (10%) of and in addition to the dedicated land required by this article, if sufficient abutting land is dedicated as a usable, public recreation area or park. 2. Unity: The dedicated land shall form a single parcel of land, except where the city determines that two (2) or more parcels or greenways/trails would best serve the public interest, given the type and distribution of neighborhood open space needed to adequately serve the proposed development. If the city determines that two (2) or more parcels would best serve the public interest, the city may require that such parcels be connected by a dedicated strip of land at Ordinance No. 25-4965 Page 4 least twenty feet (20') wide in order to provide access and continuity between said parcels. 3. Location: The dedicated land shall be located so as to reasonably serve the recreation and open space needs of the residents of the subdivision er plaaaed develepmen . 4. Shape: If a sufficient amount of land is dedicated to accommodate recreational facilities and activities, such as fields, courts or playground equipment, the shape of the dedicated land shall be suitable for such facilities and activities. Linear open space should be of sufficient width to accommodate trails and adjacent greenways. 5. Access: a. Greenways/Trails: Public access to greenways/trails shall be provided by a public access easement at least twenty feet (20') in width. In addition, greenways/trails shall be connected to existing or proposed greenways/trails on adjacent property. b. Parks: Public access to the dedicated land to be used for parks shall be provided either by adjoining public street frontage or by a dedicated public access easement at least fifty feet (50') in width, which connects the dedicated land to a public street or right of way. The grades adjacent to existing and proposed streets shall permit reasonable access to the dedicated land. The parcel shall be safely accessible to pedestrian traffic. 6. Responsibility For Site Preparation: a. The city may require the subdivider or developer to grade and seed those portions of the dedicated land to be improved prior to dedication of the property and prior to the city's acceptance of the dedication. b. Where the dedicated land is located adjacent to a street, the subdivider or developer shall remain responsible for the installation of utilities, sidewalks and other improvements required along that street segment. c. Prior to dedication, the subdivider or developer shall be responsible for restoring satisfactory ground cover and controlling erosion on land to be dedicated that has been disrupted as a result of development activities by the subdivider or developer. D. Q Procedure For Dedication Of Land: 1. The dedication of land shall be reviewed as part of the preliminary subdivision plat OF PF81 m nary planned development plan, Wh Gh8VGF 6 applicable. The subdivider or developer shall designate the area or areas of land to be dedicated pursuant to this article on the preliminary subdivision plat OF planned development plea. Where wetlands have been delineated on the property, the preliminary subdivision plat shall also identify the boundaries of such wetlands. 2. Upon receipt of the preliminary subdivision plat, the ireclor of neighborhood &development services (NDS) shall submit a copy to the director of parks and recreation for review by the parks and recreation commission. The parks and recreation commission shall submit Ordinance No.25-4965 Page 5 recommendations concerning the land to be dedicated to the planning and zoning commission within twenty-one (21) business days of the receipt of a complete application for preliminary subdivision plat ec-preliminaryy Plaaned developmenf. 3. Once the final subdivision plat 9F fiRal PlaRRed develaipmen is approved, and any public improvements required to be installed by the subdivider or developer within the land to be dedicated have been installed, approved, and accepted by the city, and the subdivider or developer has completed site preparation pursuant to subsection B6 of this section, the subdivider or developer shall provide a properly executed warranty deed conveying the dedicated land to the city within two (2) years of final plat approval (9F final planned developman approval) or by the time the city issues fifty percent (50%) of the certificates of occupancy for the subdivision, at the discretion of the city, or as otherwise specified in the subdivider's or developer agreement. 4. The city shall formally accept the dedication of land for open space, parkland or greenways/trails by resolution. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) D. Amend 14-5K-4, Payment of Fees in Lieu, by deleting the strlkethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. General: The payment of fees in lieu of dedication of land may occur at the request of the subdivider or developer with approval by the city, or may be required by the city. The payment of fees in lieu of land dedication shall be reviewed and approved as part of the preliminary subdivision plator aFal m RaFy plaRRed dovelopmen . B. Request By Subdivider Or Developer: 1. If a payment in lieu of open space is requested, the subdivider or developer must include such request in a letter submitted with the application for a preliminary subdivision OF PF81 in naFy plaRRed developmeR , whichever is applicable. 2. The PCD directer director of neighborhood & development services (NDS) will forward a copy of the preliminary subdivision plat OF PF81 miaaFy planned development, along with a copy of the letter requesting payment of fees in lieu of land dedication to the director of the depm~men of parks and recreation for review by the parks and recreation commission. The commission shall submit any and all recommendations concerning the payment of fees in lieu of dedication to the planning and zoning commission within twenty one (21) business days of the date a complete application for preliminary subdivision platis submitted. 3. The planning and zoning commission will consider the request for payment of fees in lieu of land dedication during the subdivision OF planned deVeopMeR review process and forward its recommendations to the city council. C. Determination Of Fees In Lieu Of Dedication Criteria: The city may, at its discretion, require the payment of fees in lieu of the subdivider dedicating land, if the city finds that all or part of the land required for dedication is not suitable for public recreation and open space purposes, or upon a finding that the recreational needs of the proposed subdivision can be met by other park, greenway, or recreational facilities planned or constructed by the city within reasonable proximity to the subdivision. The city shall consider the following factors in making its determination: Ordinance No. 25-4965 Page 6 1. Recreational and open space elements of the city comprehensive plan, as amended, and the relation of the subdivision to the proposed open space and recreational areas; 2. Topographic and geologic conditions of the land available for dedication; 3. Size, shape, location of and access to the land available for dedication; 4. The character and recreational needs of the neighborhood where the subdivision is located; 5. The costs of developing open space and recreational areas in the subdivision; 6. The actual or potential development of open space and recreational areas on land adjacent to the subdivision which will serve the needs of the subdivision; 7. Recommendations of staff, the parks and recreation commission and the planning and zoning commission; and 8. Any other relevant information. D. Time Of Payment: Fees in lieu of dedication must be paid in full by the subdivider/developer prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a lot in the subdivision. E. Amount Of Payment: The fee shall be equal to the fair market value of the land that otherwise would have been required for dedication. The fair market value of the undeveloped land shall be determined by a qualified real estate appraiser or by other means wheisacceptable to both the city and the subdivider or developer. The city and subdivider/developer will equally share the appraisal costs. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15- 2005) E. Amend 14-5K-5, Requiring Both Dedication of land and Payment of Fee, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: The city may, at its discretion, require a subdivider development to dedicate a portion of the land required under the formula set forth in this article, and also to pay a fee in lieu of dedication for the remaining portion of the land by said formula. The fee for the remaining portion shall be determined by a qualified real estate appraiser or by other means who acceptable to both the city and subdivider or developer. The city and subdivider/developer will equally share the appraisal costs. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) F. Amend 14-5K-6, Use of Funds, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. The ne�rhood open space district boundary map. (see figure 5K-1 of this section), divides the city into neighborhood open space districts. All payments in lieu of dedication shall be deposited in a special neighborhood open space account designated by the name of the contributing development. All payments will be used to acquire or develop open spaces, parks, recreation facilities and greenways/trails that are located within the neighborhood open space district containing the subject subdivision eFplanned-develepmen and will benefit the residents of the subdivision of planned -development for which payment has been made. FIGURE 5K-1 Neighborhood Open Space District Boundary Mao Ordinance Nn.25-4965 Page 7 Legend o IewUry&uMzry ;�'- lane Gry G,w fi i Nm I a t e �Y �� Iowa Gfy� lrn-me f f sm ✓°e M Mia Aoaso, Is x B. The city must use the payment in lieu of dedication within five (5) years from the date received. This period will be automatically extended an additional five (5) years if the subdivider/developer has not constructed at least fifty percent (50%) of the units within the subdivision OF plaMad develepmen for which payment in lieu of dedication has been made. C. If the city has not spent the funds by the last day of the five (5) year period or, if extended, by the last day of an additional five (5) years, the city shall, within ninety (90) days thereafter, mail to the property owner, at the address on file with the Johnson County treasurer's office, a proportional refund based on the percentage of the platted lots they own of the total platted lots in the subdivision or planned develepmeR . The subdividers agreement/development agreement for each subdivisionlplaaned develeprnent for which the subdivider/developer has made payments in lieu of dedication shall inform all property owners and successors in interest to properties in the subdivisioNplanned-development of the right to a refund as provided for herein. (Ord. 054186, 12-15-2005) G. Amend 15-3-5, Neighborhood Open Space Requirements, by deleting the strikethrough text and adding the underlined text: A. Intent And Purpose: The neighborhood open space requirements are intended to ensure provision of adequate usable neighborhood open space, parks and recreation facilities in a manner that is consistent with the parks master plan, as amended, by using a fair and reasonably calculable method to equitably apportion the costs of acquiring and/or developing land for those purposes. Ordinance No.25-4965 Page 8 Active, usable neighborhood open space includes pedestrian/bicycle trails preferably located within natural greenway systems private open space that is publicly accessible, and alsse-includes neighborhood parks that serve nearby residents. Port ons Of GOMMUR typapiks may be adapted fef Re ghbGFheed use, but this GhapteF B. Dedication Of Land Or Payment Of Fees In Lieu Of Land Required: The dedication of land shall be reviewed as part of the preliminary subdivision plat. As a condition of approval for preliminary plats containing residential uses the applicant shall dedicate land or pay a fee in lieu of land, or a combination thereof, for park, greenway, recreational and open space purposes, as determined by the city and in accordance with the provisions of title 14, chapter 5, article K, "Neighborhood Open Space Requirements", of this code. (Ord. 08-4313, 8-26-2008) Ordinance No.25-4965 Page 9 Section 11. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severabilily. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Dale. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication in accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 380. Passed and approved this 2nd day of September 2025. ayor Approved by Attest: G City Clerk City Attorne s Office - 08/14/2025 Ordinance No. 25-4965 Page No. 10 First Consideration: August 19. 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS: None ABSENT: None Second Consideration: It was moved by ra„a , and seconded by Alter that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS:None ABSENT: None Pass and Adopt: It was moved by Bergus and seconded by Salih , that the ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Alter Bergus Harmsen Moe �t— Salih x Teague x Weilein Date published: September 11,2025 Item Number: 9.b. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT September 2, 2025 Ordinance amending Article V., entitled "Boards, Commissions and Committees", Section 5.01, entitled "Establishment", of the Iowa City Charter, and repealing Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations", Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board", to dissolve the Community Police Review Board. (Second Consideration) Prepared By: Reviewed By: Fiscal Impact: Commission Recommendations Attachments: Ordinance Eric R. Goers, City Attorney Chris O'Brien, Deputy City Manager None. The Community Police Review Board unanimously recommended the body be dissolved. Executive Summary: The City of Iowa City has for years had a Community Police Review Board. It was originally created so that members of the community could make complaints about police conduct to fellow members of the community serving on the Board, for the Board to review. With the passage of SF 311, that review is no longer permissible. The CPRB unanimously recommended that the Board be dissolved, given the defeat of their primary purpose for being. These amendments to the City Code and Charter effectuate that recommendation. Background / Analysis: The City Council will soon be discussing whether a different group, formal or informal, might be able to continue to serve in an advisory capacity to the Chief of Police. ?, b Prepared by: Eric R. Goers, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 Ordinance No. 25-4966 Ordinance amending Article V., entitled "Boards, Commissions and Committees", Section 5.01, entitled "Establishment", of the Iowa City Charter, and repealing Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations", Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board", to dissolve the Community Police Review Board. Whereas, with the passage of Iowa Senate File 311, effective August 16, 2025, Iowa municipalities can no longer, "adopt, enforce, or otherwise administer ... a board or other entity for the purpose of citizen review of the conduct of officers..."; and Whereas, at its July 8, 2025 meeting, the Community Police Review Board ("CPRB") discussed the passage of SF 311 and what to do in response; and Whereas, the CPRB wrote a letter to Council, dated July 29, 2025, which stated as follows, "The Board agrees SF311 removes the primary purpose for which the CPRB was originally created. With the ability to receive and to review officer conduct no longer an option, any community impact would be limited. While Police Department policies have also been reviewed, the general orders are now available to the public online. Annual forums have been held over the years with limited success, again related in part to the constraints of the meeting agenda. With the original purpose no longer an option, there would be limited scope and impact. The CPRB unanimously recommends dissolving the Board, and reallocating time and resources to a staff led process with the goal to strengthen trust & involvement across the community."; and Whereas, Council considered the CPRB's July 291h letter in its August 5rh Work Session and decided to accept the CPRB's unanimous recommendation to dissolve the body; and Whereas, Council will soon discuss the scope and form of an alternative to the CPRB to engage in pertinent activities which remain legal following SF 311; and Whereas, the CPRB is a body described in and required by both Section 5.01 of the Iowa City Charter and Title 8, Chapter 8 of the Iowa City Code; and Whereas, both Section 5.01 and Title 8, Chapter 8 need to be amended and deleted, respectively, to effectuate the CPRB recommendation and Council decision. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. Iowa City Charter: Article V. of the Iowa City Charter, entitled "Boards, Commissions and Committees", Section 5.01, entitled "Establishment", is hereby amended by repealing paragraph B. in its entirety. Ordinance No.25-4966 Page 2 Iowa City Code: Tile 8, entitled "Police Regulations', is amended by repealing and reserving Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board", in its entirety. Chapter 9, entitled "Unbiased Policing', shall remain identified as Chapter 9. Section It Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective upon publication. Passed and approved this end day of September 2025. r/ or Attest: City Clerk Approved by City Attomey Office-08/13/2025 Ordinance No. 25-4966 Page No. 3 First Consideration: August 12, 2025 Vote for passage: AYES: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague, Weilein NAYS: None ABSENT: None. Second Consideration: It was moved by Moe , and seconded by Salih , that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES. Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Moe, Salih , Teague, Weilein NAYS: ABSENT: Pass and Adopt: It was moved by Salih , and seconded by Alter , that the ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Alter x Bergus x Harmsen x Moe x Salih x Teague Weilein Date published: September 11, 2025