HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-12-17 OrdinanceItem Number: 10.b.
�r
CITY OE IOWA CITY
www.iogov.org
December 17, 2019
Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 35.29 acres of land located
north of American Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street from County
Residential (R) zone to Interim Development - Single Family Residential (ID -
RS) zone. (REZ19-09)
/_1iETSUILTA 121ZIII & I
Description
PZ Staff Report wAttachments
P&Z Minutes
Rezoning Ordinance - Conditional
Conditional Zoning Agreement
STAFF REPORT - UPDATED
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: ANN19-01/REZ19-09
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner
Date: October 17, 2019
Updated: November 7, 2019
Applicant: Allen Homes, Inc.
PO Box 3474
Iowa City, IA 52244
319-350-8238
allenhomesinc@gmail.com
Contact Person:
Same as Applicant
Property Owner: Hieronymous Family Partnership, LLC
3322 Muscatine Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52240
Requested Action:
Annexation & Rezoning
Purpose: Annexation of 35.29 acres of land currently in
unincorporated Johnson County and rezoning it
from the County Residential (R) zone to Interim
Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -RS).
Location: East of Eastbrook Street and north of American
Legion Road
Location Map:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
Comprehensive Plan:
K
35.29 acres
Farmland, County Residential (R)
North: P-1 — Neighborhood Public (Parkland)
South: R — County Residential (Farmland and
Religious Space)
East: RS -5 - Low Density Single -Family
Residential (Residential)
West: P-1 — Neighborhood Public (Parkland)
RM -12 - Low Density Multi -Family
Residential (Residential)
Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area
Agreement
District Plan: Southeast District Plan — Low/Medium Single -
Family Residential and Duplex; Medium/High
Density Single -Family Residential and
Townhouse
Neighborhood Open Space District
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
SE3
July 25, 2019
N/A since associated with an annexation
The applicant, Allen Homes, Inc., with the consent of the owners, Hieronymous Family
Partnership LLC., is requesting annexation and rezoning of 35.29 acres of property located
east of Eastbrook Street and north of American Legion Road. The applicant has requested
that the property be rezoned from County Residential (R) to Interim Development Single -
Family (ID -RS) for the entire 35.29 acres.
This area is located adjacent to Iowa City's current boundary and within Fringe Area B of
Johnson County's Fringe Area Agreement with Iowa City. The Southeast District Plan
shows this area within the City's growth area with a future land use of low/medium single-
family residential and duplex housing at a density of 2-8 dwelling units per acre. A western
portion of the property (shown below in Figure 1.0) is shown as having medium/high
density single-family residential and townhouse housing at a density of 8-13 dwelling units
per acre.
PCD\Staff Reports\staff report ann19-01 rez19-09-revised final.doc
3
Fiqure 1.0 - Subiect Property within the Southeast District Plan Map
The applicant has chosen to not use the "Good Neighbor Policy" for this annexation and
rezoning. A subsequent rezoning will be necessary before the property is platted and
developed, at which time, staff would encourage the developer to hold a "Good Neighbor"
meeting.
ANALYSIS:
Annexation: The Comprehensive Plan has established a growth policy to guide decisions
regarding annexations. The annexation policy states that annexations are to occur
primarily through voluntary petitions filed by the property owners. Further, voluntary
annexation requests are to be reviewed under the following three criteria. The
Comprehensive Plan states that voluntary annexation requests should be viewed positively
when the following conditions exist.
1. The area under consideration falls within the adopted long-range planning boundary.
A general growth area limit is illustrated in the Comprehensive Plan and on the City's
Zoning Map. The subject property is located within the City's long-range growth boundary.
The boundary is located about 1 mile east of the subject property.
2. Development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without
imposing an undue burden on the City. The Comprehensive Plan encourages growth that is
contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the costs of providing
infrastructure and City services. The subject property is bordered by the city limits on the
west, north, and east sides. Therefore, the subject property is contiguous to current
PCD\Staff Reports\staff report ann19-01 rez19-09-revised final.doc
Southeast District - Plan Map
61
�O14t�east § 4 'I '.
oil
I
..
D1 s t r i C `. j
I
..�.T. �
Legend
+�
�
M
Creeb And 5lrcamsIL
-� GrowtRArealimrt
SE Drstrvi Bouvlaay
� � 9 n f I '
•
. PCf41dk EIMt!lAfry Shcf i
J
•,
1{
F—All"
-•• Future CM- S.— --
F.K LOUI5lreet
NLadd Ufp —..-
FW—_
,
LoMM.di—NnMy 6F80�01¢k
O Mki-Migh Density 3F B F-4—
- Mulo "ky __...
-MfnW -d Hot V
-
Fu— Udmn Da✓daWn
--
- C,pr(anfrpal �
j i l l i f
- Ind -1
-CsreratEmpoymenlllmMutnnal
11 �r
w {t
- PaxvPudlc UVdn space
- Pme�e Dpen 6pare
�
t ••-
J/
The applicant has chosen to not use the "Good Neighbor Policy" for this annexation and
rezoning. A subsequent rezoning will be necessary before the property is platted and
developed, at which time, staff would encourage the developer to hold a "Good Neighbor"
meeting.
ANALYSIS:
Annexation: The Comprehensive Plan has established a growth policy to guide decisions
regarding annexations. The annexation policy states that annexations are to occur
primarily through voluntary petitions filed by the property owners. Further, voluntary
annexation requests are to be reviewed under the following three criteria. The
Comprehensive Plan states that voluntary annexation requests should be viewed positively
when the following conditions exist.
1. The area under consideration falls within the adopted long-range planning boundary.
A general growth area limit is illustrated in the Comprehensive Plan and on the City's
Zoning Map. The subject property is located within the City's long-range growth boundary.
The boundary is located about 1 mile east of the subject property.
2. Development in the area proposed for annexation will fulfill an identified need without
imposing an undue burden on the City. The Comprehensive Plan encourages growth that is
contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods to reduce the costs of providing
infrastructure and City services. The subject property is bordered by the city limits on the
west, north, and east sides. Therefore, the subject property is contiguous to current
PCD\Staff Reports\staff report ann19-01 rez19-09-revised final.doc
ri
development and meets the goal of contiguous growth.
The Southeast District Plan pays specific attention to the subject area, calling it out as an
area that has been bypassed by past development in favor of leapfrog development to the
north and east. Within the subject area, the Southeast District Plan calls for single-family
and duplex residential development at low to medium densities, with some room for
medium/high density single-family residential and townhouse style development on the
property's west end. Development of this area will provide more efficiency for city services
and supply needed connections to existing surrounding development.
The proposed annexation will help to accomplish the City's larger goal of fulfilling the need
for expanded housing options to accommodate the City's growing population. Because of
this need, staff is recommending that as a condition of the rezoning, the developer satisfy
the Comprehensive Plan's amended Annexation Policy, as stated in Resolution 18-211. The
amended policy requires annexation of land for residential use of 10 or more dwelling units
satisfy the City's goal of creating and maintaining a supply of affordable housing by
providing affordable units equal to 10% of the total units in the annexed area, with an
assurance of long-term affordability.
3. Control of the development is in the City's best interest. The property is within the
Growth Area. It is appropriate that the proposed property be located within the city so that
residents of future development may be served by Fire, Police, water, and sanitary sewer
service. Annexation will allow the City to provide these services and control zoning so that
the subject area remains compatible with the Comprehensive Plan.
For the reasons stated above, staff finds that the proposed annexation complies with the
annexation policy.
Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned County (R) Residential. This zone allows for
single-family residential dwellings to be built in the subject area. Because of the subject
area's location in Iowa City's Fringe Area within the growth boundary, all development in
this area must be constructed to City standards and it is unlikely that development would
occur prior to annexation.
The applicant is requesting rezoning of the subject property to Interim Development Single -
Family (ID -RS) for all 35.29 acres of the property. The purpose of the Interim Development
zone is to provide areas of managed growth in which agricultural and non -urban land uses
can continue until the City is able to provide services to support development. Under this
zoning, the only use that is permitted by right is agriculture. The applicant is currently
exploring options for subdividing and developing the property. Because the proposed
layout of the property is still undetermined, interim zoning is appropriate for this property.
Sanitary Sewer and Water: The developer will be required to pay a water main extension
fee of $456.75 per acre before public improvements are constructed. The subject property
is located outside of the sewer tap -on fee district, and will not be required to pay sanitary
sewer tap -on fees. There is a stormwater detention easement over the northwestern
portion of the property. It is anticipated that any future development will mostly be located
outside of this easement area.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The subject property does not contain any
PCD\Staff Reports\staff report ann19-01 rez19-09-revised final.doc
5
environmentally sensitive features. The northern and western portions of the property
are located in the 100 and 500 -year flood plains.
Access and Street Design: To match existing right-of-way located to the west and east of
the subject property, staff is recommending that as a condition of the rezoning, the
developer dedicate 17 feet of additional right-of-way to the City when the property is
platted for future development. As the City performs road improvements to American
Legion Road over the next several years, staff is recommending another condition to
allow for the conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the
north side of American Legion Road.
Since the proposed rezoning is only for Interim Development Single -Family residential
(ID -RS), the applicant does not yet have a design for street access and interior street
connectivity on the subject property. These designs will become available for analysis
upon subsequent rezoning and platting of the property.
NEXT STEPS:
Pending recommendation of approval of the proposed annexation and rezoning from the
Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council will hold a public hearing. Before the
public hearing, utility companies and non -consenting parties will be sent the application via
certified mail. Pending approval of the annexation by the City Council, the application for
annexation will be sent to the Secretary of State's Office for final approval and
acknowledgement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of ANN19-01 and REZ19-09, a voluntary annexation of
approximately 35.29 acres and a rezoning from County Residential (R) to Interim
Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) with the following conditions:
1. The developer satisfies the Comprehensive Plan's Annexation Policy, as stated in
Resolution 18-211.
2. The dedication of 17 feet of additional public right-of-way along American Legion
Road to be dedicated to the City at the time of final platting.
3. Conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the north side of
American Legion Road.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Aerial Map
2. Zoning Map
3. Location Map
4. Applicants Statement
5. Temporary Construction Easement Map
Approved by: S,
e e Sitzman, AICP
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
PCD\Staff Reports\staff report ann19-01 rez19-09-revised final.doc
ROPL
!
It, 11171
SHAMCK r
.'�..�' 'ENDSHST"
wF FR IP
to
01
CO
w
't'�,
%K7: 01- P
r
T�
N AVE 1",u~j' LEGION R[
An application submitted by Allen Homes,
Inc. for the annexation of 35.29 acres of
property located East of Eastbrook St and North
of American Legion Rd and rezoning of the subject
property from County Residential (R) to Interim
Development - Single -Family Residential (ID -RS).
I ` i
CITY OF IOWA CITY
r CUMBERLAND ►
f ,�gIIP1Mi
BUCKINGHAM LN t �r z,.,.!�k�l
ROOK ` I OOO Z
t �
LL
NORWICH
ALPINE
W'
W
z
I .�
An application submitted by Allen Homes,
Inc. for the annexation of 35.29 acres of
property located East of Eastbrook St and North
of American Legion Rd and rezoning of the subject
property from County Residential (R) to Interim
Development - Single -Family Residential (ID -RS).
I— i
.Z.F.®4
CITY OF IOWA CITY
CUMBERLANDLN
BUCKINGHAM LN I I _ 'Zii I I I
.�seoRo o I R..
■ �Ay � 0 o!
!� I W I �R R —o
co
r NORWICH CT
R R rr
a ,
TOTTENHAM R
R JAVEI
>~ R
■ ��� o R W R
u NEWCASTLE DR,, �Gp� R R '
ct
R , o --R R
AMERICAN R R
LEGION RD
RS5 R R
RMFR��gN< R R R1�
F�,, \
R o
R
'AF R �r
�R`a
�Rf�
R
� p
R RJohnson Countv D & S
DESCRIPTION -ANNEXATION PARCEL
RSd
i 3.. RM92
RM12 F •s•' y" s' RM12
--OPf]o�an1=
5 �
'c
x P,
FrSS �
i HSS �su�s
A NEXATION PARCEL`"
RS5 P1
A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79
v
NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON
N89°26'40"W
COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
n
Commencing at the West Quarter Corner of Section 18, Township 79 North, Range
5 West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson County, Iowa; Thence S89°26'40"E,
O
along the South Line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 18, a distance of
O
Z
461.91 feet, to the Southeast Corner of Eastbrook Flats Addition, in accordance
o
with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 58 at Page 20 of the Records of the
00
Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence N00°33'49"E, along the East Line of
said Eastbrook Flats Addition, 509.80 feet, to the Northeast Corner thereof, and a
9)
Point on the South Line of Parcel 1 of "Ralston Creek South Property Acquisition",
w
in accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 19, at Page 84 of the
Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S89026'59"E, along said
South Line, 373.32 feet, to the Southeast Corner thereof; Thence N01 °31'04"W,
along the East Line of said Parcel 1, a distance of 756.10 feet; Thence
N20°10'51"E, along said East Line, 209.78 feet; Thence N50°29'32"E, along said
o
East Line, 690.91 feet, to the Northeast Corner thereof; Thence N89°45'05"E,
177.85 feet, to a Point on the West Line of Windsor West - Part Three, in
accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 58, at Page 235 of the
Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S00°50'20"E, along said
West Line, and the West Line of Windsor West - Part One, in accordance with the
Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 50 at Page 266 of the Records of the Johnson
o
County Recorder's Office, 1910.78 feet, to the Southwest Corner of said Windsor
West - Part One, and a Point on the South Line of the Northwest Quarter of said
o
Section 18; Thence N89°26'40"W, along said South Line, 1169.60 feet, to the Point
n
of Beginning. Said Annexation Parcel contains 35.29 Acres, and is subject to
easements and restrictions of record.
r
PARC EL I
[RALSTON CREEK SOUTH PROPERTY
ACOUMMON
IN AGGORPANGE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF REGORPEP IN PLAT 600' 19 AT PAGE 84 OF THE REGORPS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY REGORPER"S OFFICE
S89'26'59"E 373.32'(M) 373.47'(R)
PARC EL I
RALSTON CREEK
SOUTH PROPERTY
CP
ACOUMMON C�'
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF
REGORPEP IN PLAT HOOK 19 AT PA(vE 84 OF
THE RECORDS OE THE JOHNSON COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE
off'
(SLI V V V ll \4 — IN Ll \4
SEC 'R OO N I _79=5
N89°45'05"E
,177.85'(M) 177.66'(R)
I
M M DSOO RPART THREE
IN ACGORPANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT
HOOK 58 AT PAGE 235 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
I I
87
I O O I II
I
I I
I I -
I
I —
I
\ ANNEXATION ;PARCEL o ---
��
35.29 AC
I I
I II
I n I
� U
og I I
I I �
I of
I � I
I I II
�\�/��\�//7 /[�J � � �\�/��\�//7 /[�J � /LTJ � ���\\��� �\�/��\�//7 /LTJ �
O V V 1\4 - IJV V V 1\14 SE, 1\4 - IJN V V 1\4
SCEC NON 10-79-5
-79-5
I
G' I
I I I
I �
I� I
I
[PARCEL 2
RALSTON CREEK SOUTH
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 19
AT PAGE 84 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY REGORPER"S _
I --
O
I I �
v II
-----
I
mmbmH %vEsT
PART ONE
IN ACGORPANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORPED IN PL
600(\ 50 AT PAGE 266 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY RECORPERS OFFICE
I �
d
I
g
I ,
I
6 � I �
II I
I �I
I � I
� I
1 _= 1
-l_
WEST QUARTER CORNER
OF
SECTION 18—T79N—R5W
OF THE FIFTH P.M.
S89°26'40"E —
Y461.91' n 1169.60'
_MLE
i
EST
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT N ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREG RECORDED IN FLAT POCK 51 AT
gni iTv �F�i❑
BOO 40 AT PAGE m1�4 GF THE RECORDS OF THE J0INSON I / PA&E 346 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER"S OFFICE
�Fi nvnGn'c -----
11�
Cn
rn � o
D
O n
0
S Q
coo
a LF
LF
C
7
N
co
0
QI
9
(D
O
4
N
N
N
O
CD
Ef if: 00
0 DZ
z O
Z
Cn z
y 0
Z
Cn �
n
z
m
D
0
Z
X
00
-------------------+--I--low-f-
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST
v
W
N89°26'40"W
CHURCH OF CHMST
n
O
�jj�/�J
L�\
EAST B ROOIJ v
O
IF LA73
O
Z
POINT
o
00
IN AGGORPANGE WITH THE
PLAT THEREOF REGORPEP
z
IN PLAT 606K 55 AT PAGE
20 Of THE RECORDS OF
j
THE JOHNSON COUNTY
REGORPER"S OFFICE
PARC EL I
RALSTON CREEK
SOUTH PROPERTY
CP
ACOUMMON C�'
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF
REGORPEP IN PLAT HOOK 19 AT PA(vE 84 OF
THE RECORDS OE THE JOHNSON COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE
off'
(SLI V V V ll \4 — IN Ll \4
SEC 'R OO N I _79=5
N89°45'05"E
,177.85'(M) 177.66'(R)
I
M M DSOO RPART THREE
IN ACGORPANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT
HOOK 58 AT PAGE 235 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
I I
87
I O O I II
I
I I
I I -
I
I —
I
\ ANNEXATION ;PARCEL o ---
��
35.29 AC
I I
I II
I n I
� U
og I I
I I �
I of
I � I
I I II
�\�/��\�//7 /[�J � � �\�/��\�//7 /[�J � /LTJ � ���\\��� �\�/��\�//7 /LTJ �
O V V 1\4 - IJV V V 1\14 SE, 1\4 - IJN V V 1\4
SCEC NON 10-79-5
-79-5
I
G' I
I I I
I �
I� I
I
[PARCEL 2
RALSTON CREEK SOUTH
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 19
AT PAGE 84 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY REGORPER"S _
I --
O
I I �
v II
-----
I
mmbmH %vEsT
PART ONE
IN ACGORPANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORPED IN PL
600(\ 50 AT PAGE 266 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY RECORPERS OFFICE
I �
d
I
g
I ,
I
6 � I �
II I
I �I
I � I
� I
1 _= 1
-l_
WEST QUARTER CORNER
OF
SECTION 18—T79N—R5W
OF THE FIFTH P.M.
S89°26'40"E —
Y461.91' n 1169.60'
_MLE
i
EST
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT N ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREG RECORDED IN FLAT POCK 51 AT
gni iTv �F�i❑
BOO 40 AT PAGE m1�4 GF THE RECORDS OF THE J0INSON I / PA&E 346 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER"S OFFICE
�Fi nvnGn'c -----
11�
Cn
rn � o
D
O n
0
S Q
coo
a LF
LF
C
7
N
co
0
QI
9
(D
O
4
N
N
N
O
CD
Ef if: 00
0 DZ
z O
Z
Cn z
y 0
Z
Cn �
n
z
m
D
0
Z
X
00
-------------------+--I--low-f-
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER
W
N89°26'40"W
CHURCH OF CHMST
m
t
O
0
600K 30 AT PAGE 280 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
O
Z
POINT
OF o0
'�= I�
BEGINNING
Q
C)
PARC EL I
RALSTON CREEK
SOUTH PROPERTY
CP
ACOUMMON C�'
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF
REGORPEP IN PLAT HOOK 19 AT PA(vE 84 OF
THE RECORDS OE THE JOHNSON COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE
off'
(SLI V V V ll \4 — IN Ll \4
SEC 'R OO N I _79=5
N89°45'05"E
,177.85'(M) 177.66'(R)
I
M M DSOO RPART THREE
IN ACGORPANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT
HOOK 58 AT PAGE 235 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
I I
87
I O O I II
I
I I
I I -
I
I —
I
\ ANNEXATION ;PARCEL o ---
��
35.29 AC
I I
I II
I n I
� U
og I I
I I �
I of
I � I
I I II
�\�/��\�//7 /[�J � � �\�/��\�//7 /[�J � /LTJ � ���\\��� �\�/��\�//7 /LTJ �
O V V 1\4 - IJV V V 1\14 SE, 1\4 - IJN V V 1\4
SCEC NON 10-79-5
-79-5
I
G' I
I I I
I �
I� I
I
[PARCEL 2
RALSTON CREEK SOUTH
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 19
AT PAGE 84 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY REGORPER"S _
I --
O
I I �
v II
-----
I
mmbmH %vEsT
PART ONE
IN ACGORPANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORPED IN PL
600(\ 50 AT PAGE 266 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
COUNTY RECORPERS OFFICE
I �
d
I
g
I ,
I
6 � I �
II I
I �I
I � I
� I
1 _= 1
-l_
WEST QUARTER CORNER
OF
SECTION 18—T79N—R5W
OF THE FIFTH P.M.
S89°26'40"E —
Y461.91' n 1169.60'
_MLE
i
EST
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT N ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREG RECORDED IN FLAT POCK 51 AT
gni iTv �F�i❑
BOO 40 AT PAGE m1�4 GF THE RECORDS OF THE J0INSON I / PA&E 346 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER"S OFFICE
�Fi nvnGn'c -----
11�
Cn
rn � o
D
O n
0
S Q
coo
a LF
LF
C
7
N
co
0
QI
9
(D
O
4
N
N
N
O
CD
Ef if: 00
0 DZ
z O
Z
Cn z
y 0
Z
Cn �
n
z
m
D
0
Z
X
00
-------------------+--I--low-f-
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER
- - -
N89°26'40"W
CHURCH OF CHMST
/LINTY RECORDER'S OEFICE
SUBIDMISJON
IN A6GORPAN6E WITH THE PLAT THEREOF REGORPEP IN PLAT
600K 30 AT PAGE 280 OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON
I
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
�WMTE ISARN
IE37ATES
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT THEREOF REG
EP IN PLAT BOOK 43 AT PAGE 160 OF
THE RE(ORP3 OF THE JOHNSON
/LINTY RECORDER'S OEFICE
M
z
C
C)
z
�
o
n
z
r
r
M
p
z
0
o
�
rn
C-)
52
M
z
z
M
-<
z
M
Z75
c7
O
M
M
i
----i
�)o
;;a
;;a
Cf)
C/)
Cn
Cf)
Cn
Applicant Statement:
The property is proposed to be annexed and zoned as part of Iowa City, in order to meet the
continuing demand for residential housing. The property is adjacent to Iowa City corporate
limits, and within the growth area. With the pending American Legion Road reconstruction
project, urban infrastructure will be in place to serve this and surrounding properties.
• f. �3 ' ��145 r s�'R'! a.rW kM�.1l�� iW � !r!��+�lyRiiiYM LAXr�•r�RNfdbi�flNLW.dbHIR��. - ••• N �RVt..i ♦ _-e.'w�L�
' � ;� I I } - a• � -. d+f J..rA[ - �- irrr��R W-rLi1. Yr. ��. - .�r�VW �w..iYli•�i'w�4s1/wlliYftlM..-. � ♦+kM[.�i�.riY.�hdRwl�w'� R _
- r. j� i ria +Pits , _ -: ......a r. e..w - ....-�c..•..>,w..�.... _-�..�•e...�+.+;...:,Rar....al.[.-.r,,.:.��4..._ -..... . - . _ J . �. - f .wry"'n'"�'�..
y' - '�4. +T` -.�, a. >•--i.'A`d"i����..�,Ra,ly; �-��;� _ .. .«...r.R.�=...+.rre•.�*.....-.. �` r ....wR+cR.RRRw',� �r'' .^� _
}j' � ;•{,..;�.'}�., 'r _-..�� -�� .>c•`''N •�-,___ � ,.++Waa�`�ara+wsn ,w..�s'.w+,.�,��. - .+...-� �- � - xa,r...aa a.c...i-s•.ks•t-`
� . �T,Y^, ►A' HlwR'R�^wMr•� �. �_ � _ �- '- G:w.TM'✓owr}.
.lJ�r.-.i /aw•iLRRR ry •wrn.s.ihflY .. _ .MR�Rs�llRry�nN
-$Z #�WRR�� IMwRWRr.Rp �RrJ. M1'Rwi�Y. - ••M.y{.R..i�.t�[rr�y• •• ,•,•
r..b K'w . _ .. - - MWy.R •cam++. q. A...�.. - ..... �
iYRn.Rra�R;.rR►/� u _ �rs>/rrw[lrWutl.wNl�t�. '- �4��e allYfeArR�l�{+wR1.�soY.��� HtRA+Mw.�•��4�a••�• .
i. - � a+rw[�y,a+..�+�<iK++Ea+.rRwr..M.a�.r.=....� .a i...a+wi.Rn...r....,�a��an..,.��wu�.�w+.frwh.+V �� �.R..�.s. �.vi.R.. r�✓ r
JrWy.ya R Y?.!�.l r-s�.s+/�a,I. .. �- A. illu/R►�iYyR+:�R'w 1{ab t'Mw Js.Jrlany.IRyY - M+•.R•R.e'WRYwIi/rJ.Ki�_
.� r:r .' �.�n..+r.-vohl - ..� '�--+.wwar. w.-.... a'rnt or tf� .w� w+.cr iR=.•wWr�.+.ral.ni ,.r- t.li�in+r..aa wacR .n' :a..r. arwR+•.=
. H. -- .•.r.. t+ .y,. .'.+...�.,�. +...+•RSR-..i..w;•.r.r.. .n.r. - v...•RI►1...�+-.w....n»+.,[o.+ o...... .raR�.a .w+r.+.•
-
� r .. � 'X •.--N��r. Yu_Y. l•.- 1'•• l+vif - +4 - R •�Jr f '- - 'aaw\-. �a.wa�..•'+"�r•. - -._-
wIM_�}1nAlJ h4�RT. �..I�� M+ S -0.. r.Y_•. r .par•^-'� wM.YMM/ ` R[wu..
.•'N � - _ ` �'.' ,w'uRraw..r.aRW-' R� frin�w.�:%�`a�e�Fao.+���waMw
t`� .- C ..«c..����.. '... ...i�r�-►. - . ..�.. rr' -.: :...s,tt•IRebm auv�. �5.. Mc...z �+K.. \:.a ... r....►.. +u.: nv�a..:'.. -. .. .-_.w.
It � �.-� � .i.igRMi.ilN:�Y'.'.w.R.}-wiwati J= •• -�� rally=Wi �• Y.��•L +�w-_.fr..v.r^. •ROlire. 1- - pdiYW>aRRRF- '"� - 1�Itl.+�MRJfY� s .IMY'IA'<...a✓fL�IR•i
wrRAJR q .CRS-Y•YYvir.�w _ �R
L f1.wJlta^re. J. yf4ifMa 'I.bfRY.-aCA•.�'�f/K+�MJ'1nrY oPRL .R.M µ .R.l��� lbw <�-fir.
+fie.'�RRIRIl►�wtiMUiYM/MRu�RN1eV�4ta1...�Rrlc�. ..Yw.wl Jl.lLi{il.Y,� daM �'�=i'
w
4 �, a ��iiRrR � tb�p�.--t. ... ....., �• .:JK-�1R �.a.M-Y � �.i, � .. a[. ✓ � -
_ ' +^a.�'rt.., l.r^, _rw f �r�� .. u tl.q .''M'•l Js.. ,. . - r
yi�rR • - ./6 1N�w.11Yi1LVN-. ..�111af ��RrRar �w .
.` ;�.w.�Y--fa.w �__ •s�JwrRJlfL�t t aJ>.i.VP�RI�!Jli.tr..•R"�"Qt�f -'a
... r4�1/��-��r'}y T�..�. �'i.C' 4-y r�L1MY.�4i.•-'.•IiM6f.l+r12- r-� •,u- ...�a�.�t� �` � r...r ��i<✓I�i�•r.. L
_ •.t - ae.-."�...�w-,r ..w.�a.:vle...w.-- ..c.r.., r.�w..... -.. ..f--t�.t: •+4r'c:
+R.R..e�...,.w....R...�ir.a..w w..R. +:e ss.. w..;. w•..sa.z .awcww--_
Y' � - }r..1i wRaM.....gry.. - --':�a►niti+iR�n...Rc.-1-�...:r-mow. /lpssq.+f4r• .J.s.v«i rV.u.... - R w+•�•.•w yq.,rRRJ„�• �.�.r �1i'.�
• • ;" R - m .IRRf�?rr.N1^bR{lnr4.� +hR V.rw.yv�... 'f'Y�R.wrr`=�—. is �iR.:
.n.aJJ..:-reM .y. �.• +��.,-v.a= .-i w.�w w.+. -cwt .L 4wcnr+��C wa�ti�Wr' mfr : r f `i-� _
b } s M...G.I Y���t O ',rs..'r1 iW.a- sic.: -,n J�+i-«,v+Isla.�r.a..Ort,.�..w...s..-.�.m•� �.,�.�..r�� ... _ � .t+,�1y. -.
- •'+�T+• � .+.... - .•-,I.►� x...s-i..na�el_+,a.ahsr.�:.,.. ra...c - -a.+m - `
[�� - - M.�� -gar+ --.. � ....Rr.• �.�.tic�w.w.rw.aR+..as - �........m+rnw. _ .
SUMMIT RID', LLC
� '. _. - s � �- . � _,• �+rVrh�•.... ++.:-�..rR..w.a��•ar. _ . 'aK`+!+R[+Mi+-f.i �R - - _ : _ ' (• .. ti... ..-
.--..rL388.3/
- TEMPORARY EASEMENT
-i+�•!.�+.r+Y�.+rY J�.w.i.N.w.w�f a..4 -R iIRCW: r.+e.�. �R.a..a�«�a.r•..
_
APPROX. 136 16 FT-
-•
- - TEMPOR/�I- r Ca MEP�IT-
wR..
T _>rl1_:.•i3.'�=�-�" n�...+cw•a..a +`�'�"�►++Rar.w�l. r..--.-. - i
IGN
oYw
AOL
ROW s s
APPROX. 6630I� T EXISTING ROW
R/W
SHRUB REMOVAL
— - — - — — —
R/W R/W R/W R/W
R/W R/ R
PROPERTY EXHIBIT
LEGEND
- - - - - PERMANENT EASEMENT BOUNDARY ® PERMANENT EASEMENT
TEMPORARY EASEMENT BOUNDARY TEMPORARY EASEMENT
PROPOSED RIGHT -OR -WAY FEE ACQUISITION
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY _ _ — _ GRADING LIMIT BOUNDARY
EXISTING PARCEL LINE
OWNER:
PARCEL #3
SUMMIT RIDGE LLC
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF IOWACITY
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
y
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD SE
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Fot h
v
R/W
GW
❑ Ee -
i
c E„
N
I
0 30
F�
7/30/2019
_
F RLIPOSED PERMAN'EIT EJ-IE ;T
1�
Il'
O i. A
HIERONYMUIJ
FAMILY
PRTNRSHE LLP
PERMANENT EASEMENT
-FPROX. 1EE2-1 FT
PROPERTY EXHIBIT
HIERONYMUS FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LLP
LEGEND
- - - PERMANENT EASEMENT BOUNDARY ® PERMANENT EASEMENT
TEMPORARY EASEMENT BOUNDARY TEMPORARY EASEMENT
PROPOSED RIGHT -OR -WAY FEE ACQUISITION
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY _ _ - _ GRADING LIMIT BOUNDARY
EXISTING PARCEL LINE
OWNER:
PARCEL #4
HIERONYMUS FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LLP
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
RCW - R/W - -
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD SE
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Fot h
V
N
0 50
F�
7/30/2019
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 7, 2019 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max
Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Hektoen, Jesi Lile, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: John Yapp, Nicole Neal West, Siobhan Harman, Paul Esker,
Steve Gordon, Mike Pugh, Cordell Braverman, Ousainou Keita,
Gina Landau, Adam Jablaski
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0, the Commission recommends approval of ANN19-01 and REZ19-09, a
voluntary annexation of approximately 35.29 acres and a rezoning from County Residential (R)
to Interim Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) with the following conditions:
1. The developer satisfies the Comprehensive Plan's Annexation Policy, as stated in
Resolution 18-211.
2. The dedication of 17 feet of additional public right-of-way along American Legion Road to be
dedicated to the City at the time of final platting.
3. Conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the north side of
American Legion Road.
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NOS. ANN19-01 AND REZ19-09:
Applicant: Allen Homes, Inc.
Location: North of American Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street
An application submitted by Allen Homes, Inc. for an annexation and rezoning from County
Residential (R) to Interim Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) for approximately
35.29 acres of land currently in unincorporated Johnson County and located north of American
Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street.
Russett began the staff report showing a location map of the property, the property is currently
in the County zoned residential, it is surrounded by the City. To the north it is zoned P (where
there is a City park), to the east there is single family, to the west is multifamily and to the south
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 2 of 5
is more single family. The property is located in the Fringe Area B, which is inside the City's
growth boundary, and the proposed rezoning is to Interim Development Single -Family
Residential. That zone allows very low density single-family, it also allows plant related
agricultural uses such as row crops and some other non-residential uses (allowed provisionally
or through special exception). Russett noted an additional rezoning will be required before any
platting or development of this site takes place.
The applicant did not hold a good neighbor meeting, but staff will recommend a good neighbor
meeting be held upon the next rezoning. Staff has forwarded this application to the Johnson
County Board of Supervisors and the Scott Township Trustees and neither have expressed
concerns regarding the annexation or the rezoning.
The project site is located in the Southeast District Plan area, which again is within the City's
growth boundary. In terms of intended future land use Russett noted the majority of this site is
intended for low to medium single family residential and duplex housing at a density of 2-8
dwelling units per acre. A small western portion of the site allows for medium to high density
single-family residential and townhouse housing at a density of 8-13 dwelling units per acre.
Staff uses three criteria to review annexation requests. The area under consideration falls
within the adopted long-range planning boundary. (1) A general growth area limit is illustrated in
the Comprehensive Plan and on the City's Zoning Map; (2) Development in the area proposed
for annexation will fulfill an identified need without imposing an undue burden on the City and;
(3) Control of the development is in the City's best interest. Regarding the first criteria, the
subject property is located within the City's long-range growth boundary and surrounded by City
property. In terms of the second criteria, the Comprehensive Plan encourages growth that is
contiguous and connected to existing neighborhoods. The subject property is bordered by the
city limits on the west, north, and east sides. The property is specifically highlighted in the
Southeast District Plan as an example of leapfrog development to the north and east. The
proposed annexation will allow for implementation of the City's affordable housing policy upon
development of the site. Therefore, staff is recommending the satisfaction of this requirement
as a condition of the rezoning. For the third criteria, that control of the development is in the
City's best interest, this annexation will allow for contiguous provision of City services such as
Fire, Police, water, and sanitary sewer service. The City has an interest in administrating zoning
in this area to make sure that the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan are met.
Russett reiterated the requested rezoning is to ID -RS, Interim Development Single -Family.
Agricultural and nonurban uses can be continued within this zoning until the property is
developed. Because the applicant is still exploring options on how to develop and subdivide the
property this interim zoning designation is appropriate. In terms of sanitary sewer and water, the
developer will be required to pay a water main extension fee of $456.75 per acre before
development. The subject property is located outside of the sewer tap -on fee district, and will
not be required to pay sanitary sewer tap -on fees. The subject property is located within 100
and 500 -year flood plains. In terms of access and street design, to match existing right-of-way
located to the west and east of the subject property, staff is recommending that as a condition of
the rezoning, the developer dedicate 17 feet of additional right-of-way to the City when the
property is platted for future development. As the City performs road improvements to American
Legion Road over the next several years, staff is recommending the developer pay 12.5%
improvement costs to the American Legion Road frontage. Staff is also recommending another
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 3 of 5
condition to allow for the conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along
the north side of American Legion Road for the reconstruction of American Legion Road. The
improvements will extend from Scott Boulevard on the west side all the way to Taft Avenue on
the east side. The City is looking at installing a roundabout at the intersection of Scott
Boulevard and American Legion Road, the improvements will also include buffered bike lanes, a
10 -foot sidewalk along the north side of American Legion Road and a 5 -foot sidewalk along the
south side as well as a grade -separated crossing at Hoover Elementary School. In terms of the
City's timeline, the City is currently trying to acquire property in this area and may bid this
project in spring 2020 but it may be pushed to fall 2020 or winter 2021.
The role of the Commission in this rezoning and annexation is to determine if it satisfies the
conditions as stated in the Comprehensive Plan, whether the proposed annexation and
rezoning falls within the growth boundary, whether if development in the area proposed will fill
an identified need, and whether control of development in the City's best interest.
In terms of next steps, after the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a recommendation,
the City Council will hold a public hearing. Before the public hearing, utility companies and non -
consenting parties will be sent the application via certified mail. Pending approval of the
annexation by the City Council, the application for annexation will be sent to the Secretary of
State's Office for final approval and acknowledgement.
Staff recommends approval of ANN 19-01 and REZ19-09, a voluntary annexation of
approximately 35.29 acres and a rezoning from County Residential (R) to Interim Development
— Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) with the following conditions:
1. The developer satisfies the Comprehensive Plan's Annexation Policy, as stated in
Resolution 18-211.
2. The dedication of 17 feet of additional public right-of-way along American Legion Road to be
dedicated to the City.
3. Conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the north side of
American Legion Road.
Hensch sought confirmation that, since this was an ID rezoning, this property would definitely
come back before the Commission prior to development. Russett confirmed the Commission
would see it again when it is rezoned for development.
With regard to the improvements to American Legion Road, Hensch noted it is in the five-year
road plan. Russett confirmed that is correct and the latest the project would be bid is winter
2021.
Hensch noted to the west is a water detention area to combat flooding and asked if this property
was outside of that flooding area. Russett said a portion of that water retention area is in the
project site so that area will have to remain an outlot and not be developed.
Baker asked when this application comes back before the Commission on the next rezoning it is
possible the entire project could be developed at the higher density that is allowable in the
western portion. Russett stated that is not possible. When the applicant requests the rezoning,
they may just request one zone district but it is possible to request two zone districts, having the
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 4 of 5
western portion at a higher density
Hensch opened the public hearing.
John Yapp (930 4th Avenue) is representing Allen Homes, the applicant, he wanted to speak
about the temporary construction easement that staff has recommended. Yapp said he talked
with staff about (and it's not reflected in the report) if his project moves faster than the American
Legion Road project they would grade that area where the temporary construction easement is
to meet both their purposes and the City's purposes. This would potentially reduce, or
eliminate, the size of that temporary construction easement and this was something staff was
agreeable to and would put in the conditional zoning agreement.
Hensch asked if the area was currently being row cropped. Yapp confirmed it was. Hensch
asked it was being farmed by the owner or leased. Yapp replied it was leased. Hensch asked
what the CSR was for the property. Yapp is unsure of the CSR.
Hensch asked about the flooding area. Yapp said there was a floodway easement
approximately where the 100 -year flood plain is. Hench noted that in the 1993 flood that whole
area was under water.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved to recommend approval of ANN19-01 and REZ19-09, a voluntary
annexation of approximately 35.29 acres and a rezoning from County Residential (R) to
Interim Development — Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) with the following conditions:
1. The developer satisfies the Comprehensive Plan's Annexation Policy, as stated in
Resolution 18-211.
2. The dedication of 17 feet of additional public right-of-way along American Legion
Road to be dedicated to the City.
3. Conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the north
side of American Legion Road.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Baker asked about the next steps and what was meant by "non -consenting parties" to the
annexation. Russett noted that is not applicable in this case, it is only required if there are any
non -consenting landowners that don't want to be annexed. In this case all of the parties are
consenting.
Parsons feels this application makes sense for the overall development along American Legion
road. Signs agreed.
Baker went on record to say he feels it will end up being higher density than what is discussed
here, but that can be reviewed at the next stage of rezoning.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0
STAFF PRESENTATION TO FOLLOW:
1 r I
C04;qui h
CITY OF lOVVA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa S2240-1826
(319) 356-5000
(3I9) 356-5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
Item 10.b.: Rezoning American Legion Road
REZ19-09
An ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 35.29 acres of land
located north of American Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street
from County Residential (R) zone to Interim Development -Single Family
Residential (ID -RS) zone. (First Consideration)
Requested Zoning -(ID -RS)
Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) zoning requested
for all 35.29 acres.
Agricultural and non -urban uses can continue with this zoning until the
property is developed.
Because the applicant is currently still exploring options on how to
develop and subdivide the property, an interim zoning designation is
appropriate.
Review Criteria
Rezoning criteria:
• Compliance with the comprehensive plan
• Compatibility with the existing neighborhood
Comprehensive Plan
Southeast District Plan:
• Property within City's growth area
• Intended Future Land Use:
• Majority Low/Medium Single Family
Residential and Duplex Housing
Density: 2-8 dwelling units per acre
• Small Western portion calls for Medium/High
Density Single Family Residential and
Townhouse Housing
Density: 8-13 dwelling units per acre
Southeast District - Plan Map
`
�
IRONDistrict
�
..,.�
1
No
w
,
r
�r
��-
0
Access a n d
Street Design
To match existing right-of-way,
staff is recommending that as a
condition of the rezoning, the
developer dedicate 17 feet of
additional right-of-way to the
City when the property is
platted for future development.
Upon property development,
the developer will also be
responsible for payment toward
12.5% of improvements to the
American Legion Road frontage.
Temporary Construction Easement
Staff is recommending
that a condition of the
rezoning be conveyance
of a temporary
construction easement to
the City along the north
side of American Legion
Road.
FND SW IR -
- -
Ua��R Lor,
a WOMM6749
W/DCAW5T99 S FWD& Nt
I
MIyS I
�"�N+
TQC
�
,Oyu I
0.�®•lgb
311
59,c I
bEf 9ELl16V GOFNER MONIIYENT
1
z�1 PFAMARENT EApMENT
IRS 012ri DAIERIAPPIN6 jENP0RRRY
EOG
FNDCUTx RDg
WIM COMER
.,i :}rr .,... aa„38Dr�aeP:EGA U
.'_SSM:Sc.":::.RF�f Lb.+t°t :'.!rl1RV ti�:i'':-:.".'.:L
6EG 1°:n'°
i•nueelnsul
Tn —9 BV aD9r.. near wN ,
en�rw Lvunce F�
R o�E
�� Q�A4S
LOT 6
..N
PRD6B 9i
VdYCM1Pf61MS
cervra,
sEc.,e-Taa
LOT t
AREA SREAMOOMI,
m IT I ARES
TEMPMART EASEMEN 2E,3E1 0.47
PEMMANENT EASEMENT `05 O.GGi
TEMMRARY MN PE t9,ORI MW
BVRVEY NOfE:Rdlp CEryTERLME
EBTpBLLSHm VBNG IVII R'AT ROgp pL",
�RR9•R]AIID IWl TOOT ROWP! IOLR RE]
�FWWIR`FNDSffi'IR
Ua��R Lor,
a WOMM6749
W/DCAW5T99 S FWD& Nt
L0T7
�"�N+
�
.
0,marA
R o�E
�� Q�A4S
LOT 6
..N
PRD6B 9i
VdYCM1Pf61MS
cervra,
sEc.,e-Taa
LOT t
AREA SREAMOOMI,
m IT I ARES
TEMPMART EASEMEN 2E,3E1 0.47
PEMMANENT EASEMENT `05 O.GGi
TEMMRARY MN PE t9,ORI MW
BVRVEY NOfE:Rdlp CEryTERLME
EBTpBLLSHm VBNG IVII R'AT ROgp pL",
�RR9•R]AIID IWl TOOT ROWP! IOLR RE]
Ua��R Lor,
,Ex_J
�
IOlMp6FC110R LT1PNER,pNLIMEM
�
Q
bEf 9ELl16V GOFNER MONIIYENT
IOU N6R'W/IPlL CP➢.0.11%NERW ILP—P NOTENI
O
3El I;;MRW WIPINN LMp 7JUMMSI.V'TFPIME
(N(
MFMLMR OIMENSMMJ
SEAR[IIT5
(R)
pE�nu0m OIPEnIspN
I,-4
IR
RVNPM
we In
LP.
MAN PIPE
0I ,53Bq°302TE00'S098°F
b6M AYLINE
Ep6IING LOT LINE
M - PROPERTTLNE
R o�E
�� Q�A4S
LOT 6
..N
PRD6B 9i
VdYCM1Pf61MS
cervra,
sEc.,e-Taa
LOT t
AREA SREAMOOMI,
m IT I ARES
TEMPMART EASEMEN 2E,3E1 0.47
PEMMANENT EASEMENT `05 O.GGi
TEMMRARY MN PE t9,ORI MW
BVRVEY NOfE:Rdlp CEryTERLME
EBTpBLLSHm VBNG IVII R'AT ROgp pL",
�RR9•R]AIID IWl TOOT ROWP! IOLR RE]
Annexation into City & Zoned ID-RS-P&Z
recommendation to City Council (December
2019)
Rezoning from ID -RS to a Zoning District for
development--P&Z recommendation to City
Council
Preliminary Plat-P&Z recommendation to City
Council
Final Plat -City Council by Resolution
Planning &Zoning Commission
Recommendation
The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of ANN19-01
and REZ19-09, an annexation of approximately 35.29 acres and a
rezoning from County Residential (R) to Interim Development— Single -
Family Residential (ID -RS) with the following conditions:
1) The developer satisfies the Comprehensive Plan's Affordable Housing
Annexation Policy, as stated in Resolution 18-211.
2) The dedication of 17 feet of additional public right-of-way along
American Legion Road, to be dedicated to the City at the time of final
platting.
3) Conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the
north side of American Legion Road.
STAFF PRESENTATION CONCLUDED
� r
rrM as � h
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Strect
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(3 19) 356-5000
(3 19) 356-5009 FAX
www. icgov. o rg
Io.b
Prepared by: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5240 (REZ19-
09)
Ordinance No.
Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 35.29 acres of land
located north of American Legion Road and east of Eastbrook Street
from County Residential (R) zone to Interim Development - Single -
Family Residential (ID -RS) zone. (REZ19-09)
Whereas, the applicant, Allen Homes, Inc., has requested a rezoning of property located at
Eastbrook Street and American Legion Road from County Residential (R) to Interim Development
Single -Family Residential (ID -RM); and
Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Southeast District Plan, indicates that the
subject area is appropriate for residential development; and
Whereas, the applicant is still investigating options for property development; and
Whereas, interim zoning allows for managed growth until utilities are identified and the land is
platted; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with reasonable
conditions regarding satisfaction of these public needs through the provision of affordable
housing, the dedication of 17 -feet of right-of-way and a temporary construction easement along
the American Legion Road frontage, the requested zoning is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan; and
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa that:
Section I Aooroval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and
incorporated herein,property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning
designation of County Residential (R) zone to Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID -
RS) zone:
A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH,
RANGE 5 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Commencing at the West Quarter Corner of Section 18, Township 79 North, Range 5 West, of
the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson County, Iowa; Thence S89°26'40"E, along the South Line
of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 18, a distance of 461.91 feet, to the Southeast Comer
of Eastbrook Flats Addition, in accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 58 at
Page 20 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence N00°33'49"E, along
the East Line of said Eastbrook Flats Addition, 509.80 feet, to the Northeast Comer thereof,
and a Point on the South Line of Parcel 1 of "Ralston Creek South Property Acquisition", in
accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 19, at Page 84 of the Records of the
Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S89°26'59"E, along said South Line, 373.32 feet, to
the Southeast Corner thereof; Thence N01031'04"W, along the East Line of said Parcel 1, a
distance of 756.10 feet; Thence N20"10'51"E, along said East Line, 209.78 feet; Thence
N50029'32"E, along said East Line, 690.91 feet, to the Northeast Comer thereof; Thence
N89°45'05"E, 177.85 feet, to a Point on the West Line of Windsor West - Part Three, in
Ordinance No.
Page 2
accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 58, at Page 235 of the Records of the
Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S00050'20"E, along said West Line, and the West
Line of Windsor West - Part One, in accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 50
at Page 266 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office, 1910.78 feet, to the
Southwest Comer of said Windsor West - Part One, and a Point on the South Line of the
Northwest Quarter of said Section 18; Thence N89026'40"W, along said South Line, 1169.60
feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Annexation Parcel contains 35.29 Acres, and is subject to
easements and restrictions of record.
Section II. Zoning Map. The Building Inspector 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 this ordinance 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 to record the
same, at the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, at the owner's expense, all
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, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of , 20_.
Mayor
Approvc :
Attest: t-�� . /?—/a —I
City Clerk City Attorney's Office
Ordinance No.
Page
It was moved by and seconded by _
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Bergus
Mims
Salih
Taylor
Teague
Thomas
Weiner
First Consideration 12/17/2019
Voteforpassage: AYES: Mims, Salih, Taylor, Teague, Thomas,
Throgmorton, Cole. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None
Second Consideration _
Vote for passage:
Date published
that the
Prepared by: Ray Hehner, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5238 (REZ19-09)
Conditional Zoning Agreement
This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter "City"), Summit Ridge, LLC and Hieronymus Family Partnership, LLP (hereinafter
collectively referred to as "Owners"), and Allen Homes, Inc. (hereinafter "Applicant").
Whereas, Owners are the collective legal title holders of approximately 35.29 acres of
property located at the northeast corner of Eastbrook Street and American Legion Road; and
Whereas, Owners and Applicant have requested the rezoning of said property from
County Residential (R) zone to Interim Development Single -Family Residential (ID -RS) zone;
and
Whereas, this rezoning creates public needs for affordable housing and the
enhancement of American Legion Road; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with reasonable
conditions regarding satisfaction of these public needs through the provision of affordable
housing, the dedication of 17 -feet of right-of-way and a temporary construction easement along
the American Legion Road frontage, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan; and
Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2019) 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, upon annexation of this land into the City of Iowa City, Owners agreed to
support the City's goal of creating and maintaining the supply of affordable housing by providing
affordable units equal to 10% of the total units in the annexed area with an assurance of long-
term affordability for a term of 20 years
Whereas, the Owners and Applicant agree 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. Summit Ridge, LLC and Hieronymus Family Partnership, LLP are the collective legal title
holders of the property legally described as:
A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79
NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST, OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON
COUNTY, IOWA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Commencing at the West Quarter Corner of Section 18, Township 79 North, Range 5
West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Johnson County, Iowa; Thence S89°26'40"E, along
the South Line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 18, a distance of 461.91 feet, to
the Southeast Corner of Eastbrook Flats Addition, in accordance with the Plat thereof
Recorded in Plat Book 58 at Page 20 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's
Office; Thence N00°33'49"E, along the East Line of said Eastbrook Flats Addition,
509.80 feet, to the Northeast Corner thereof, and a Point on the South Line of Parcel 1
of "Ralston Creek South Property Acquisition", in accordance with the Plat thereof
Recorded in Plat Book 19, at Page 84 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's
Office; Thence S89026'59"E, along said South Line, 373.32 feet, to the Southeast
Corner thereof; Thence N01031'04"W, along the East Line of said Parcel 1, a distance of
756.10 feet; Thence N20°10'51"E, along said East Line, 209.78 feet; Thence
N50029'32"E, along said East Line, 690.91 feet, to the Northeast Corner thereof; Thence
N89045'05"E, 177.85 feet, to a Point on the West Line of Windsor West - Part Three, in
accordance with the Plat thereof Recorded in Plat Book 58, at Page 235 of the Records
of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S00050'20"E, along said West Line,
and the West Line of Windsor West - Part One, in accordance with the Plat thereof
Recorded in Plat Book 50 at Page 266 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's
Office, 1910.78 feet, to the Southwest Corner of said Windsor West - Part One, and a
Point on the South Line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 18; Thence
N89026'40"W, along said South Line, 1169.60 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said
Annexation Parcel contains 35.29 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of
record.
2. Owners and Applicant acknowledge that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the
principles of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code
§414.5 (2019) 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, Owners and Applicant agree
that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the
Zoning Code, as well as the following conditions:
a. Within seven days of execution of this agreement, Owners shall dedicate to the City,
with no compensation to the Owners:
i. that certain real estate described as "proposed right-of-way acquisition" and
"existing roadway easement to be acquired as right-of-way" on Exhibits 3-F and
4-F, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, for right-of-way
along American Legion Road. Such dedication shall be in the form of a
warranty deed;
ii, a temporary construction easement for the area as shown on Exhibits 3-T
and 4-T, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, in a form of
agreement approved by the City Attorney, to accommodate the American
Legion Road public improvement project; and
Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owners shall execute an affordable housing
agreement committing to one or more of the following methods to satisfy the
Annexation Policy:
i. rent or sell 10% of the total units constructed on the above-described real
estate to income -eligible families for a period of 20 years from the date
certificates of occupancy are issued for each such affordable unit, to be
administered in accordance with Iowa City Code of Ordinance 14-2G-8, or a
similar state or federal affordable housing program; or
ii. convey 10% of the total units to the City or an affordable housing provider for
such affordable housing purposes; or
iii. the payment of a fee -in -lieu thereof to the City's affordable housing fund, in an
amount established by Resolution 18-213, approved on July 17, 2018, or, if said
resolution has been rescinded at the time Owners apply for a building permit, as
otherwise established by Council resolution.
4. The conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under
Iowa Code §414.5 (2019), 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, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with
title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. The parties
further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all
successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. In the event the subject property
is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all development will conform with the
terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement.
6. Nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owners
or Applicant from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations.
7. 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 Applicant's expense.
Dated this day of
City of Iowa City
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor
Attest:
Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk
Approved by: £�f
° 'ty Attorney's Office
12�1(Q�l�
City of Iowa City Acknowledgement:
State of Iowa )
) ss:
3
20_
Summit Ridge LLC
BW T c55� 41", 44C
Hieronymus Family Partnership LLP
\-.
Allen Homes, Inc.
By: Ttss-411w1�`
Johnson County
This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 20_ by Jim
Throgmorton and Kellie Fruehling as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
(Stamp or Seal)
Title (and Rank)
Summit Ridge LLC Acknowledgement:
State of _LP tv r
County of T° N -N Son
This record was acknowledged before me on 20 , 2019 by
TLL5� tY/lci, (Name(s) of individual(s) as
(type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of Summit Ridge LLC.
L?�- fp�z
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
EREK P SITTIG
(Stamp or Seal) Commission Number 736974
My Commission Expires
Title (and Rank) epi /V
My commission expires:
Hieronymus Family Partnership LLP Acknowledgement:
State of
County of U4kj%j--%-N
This record was acknowledged before me on VI_, 2019 by
:Nd#^ �A-LProw!I4M.u.3 (Name(s) of individual(s) as
(type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of Hieronymus Familv Partn rsh , LLP.
n— . � 1 I r M
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa U
Stam or Seal ,�y�y MIRANDA HOLLOWAY
(Stamp ) f�OCm" * 'mnNubw8193351
Title (and Rank)
My commission expires:
Allen Homes, Inc. Acknowledgement:
State of liti,
County of
This record was acknowledged before me on Zo 2019 by
Tess
&46&&2 (Name(s) of individual(s) as
(type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of Allen Homes, Inc.
Notary Pubic innaand for the State of Iowa
(Stamp or Seal)
EREK P srrnG
Comysmission Number 7369
M 74
/ CDmmissbn Expires
ow o orano
Title (and Rank)
My commission expires: 10/ 057.1 L=
III T]UAciIdlowk19.1
SUMMIT RIDGE, LLC
CIO TOM KAUT
250 HOLIDAY ROAD
CORALVILLE, IA 52241
BOOK 5795, PAGE 448
N
o fiWWe lea
FEET
NOTE: MONUMENTSSHOWN TO BE
SET WILL BE ESTABUSHEO AFTER
CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED
e
EAS�eP O ��pN
LOT
a
CUT X
CORNER
18-79.5
S89-26'30' E 461.99'
ACQUISITION PLAT EXHIBIT 3-F
RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD
PARCEL 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER
OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
JOHNSON COUNTY. IOWA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18, THENCE SOUTH 89' 26'
30' EAST, 461.99 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 18 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00° 32'41' EAST, 60.22 FEET ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2013043; THENCE NORTH 89° 30' 27' EAST, 389.65 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 01' 32'47- EAST, 67.41 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST
QUARTER: THENCE NORTH 89.26' 30' WEST, 392.05 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID TRACT CONTAINS 24,935 SQUARE FEET OR 0.57 ACRES MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING 18,306
SQUARE FEET OR 0.42 ACRES MORE OR LESS OF EXISTING ROAD EASEMENT, SUBJECT TO
EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, ALL BEARING AND
TO NAD83(2011) IA SPCS SOUTH ZONE, US SURVEY FOOT.
BOB
FND 516- IR
#
WNCAP 036
e
LEGEND
FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
A SET SECTIONCORNERMONUMENT
0 FOUND 95' REROD WNELLOW CAPNTH65(UNLESS NOTED)
O SET 16' HEROD WIORANGE CAPT14243(UNLESS NOTED
(M) MEASURED DIMENSION
(R) RECORDEDOIMENSION
I.R. IRON ROD
I.P. IRON PIPE
— - — - SECTIONLINE
N, — RIGHT -0F -WAY LINE
EXISTINGLOTLINE
TIL — PRDPERTY LINE
PROPOSED RIGHT OF -WAY ACQUISITION
EXISTING ROADWAY EASEMENT TO
BE ACQUIRED AS RIGHT-OFWAY
\A'A% b
S��C Y0.'l9
S
26 30" W 392.05'
—FND518"IR
WIOCAP #15749
iLp*� LOT LOT 2
SIGNAL Ory
O
N
To WESLEY F. p
i SHIMP m
WO 24243 0
4)
a /OWN 0
END 5/8- IR
W/YCAP #9175
3 a LINE TABLE
'o I LINE LENGTH BEARING
< LI 43.22NOD-32'4I'T
�+ L2 11.00' NOD°J2'4I"E
° L3 1 17.00' 1 SOI -32'47"E
2 1 50.41' 1 501°32'47•'E
33'1 V AMERICAN LEGION
ROAD
1— WEB 26' 30' W 1897.17 ,"
FND 5187 IR
WIYCAP98165
END GS. IS
CENTER
WIOCAP#15749 SEC. 18-79-5
LOT 1
SUV 19NOW.27 ROAD ROADCENTERLINE ESTABLISHED
AND 1966100T ROAD PIAN (Ol� tl6E¢B)
FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED: NOVEMBER
supeMSlen and men I am a duly licensed Prelesswral Lend Surveyor
under the laws of the Slate of Imxa.
6'lest, � - '7--d5-aof9
WESLEY R SHIMB P.LS. U DATE
Lloense Number 24243
Myllcense renewal dela Is DECEMBER 31, 2020.
Pages or sheeF cmen l by This seal
u'f 1`
SURVEY FOR:
Index Legend
Location:
SW of NW, Section 18, Township 79 N. Range 5 W
Re uestor:
CitI, of Iowa City
Proprietor:
Summit Ridge, LLC
Surveyor:
Wesley Shim
Surveyor
Company:
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
Retum To:
3950 River Ridge Drive NE, Suite A
Cedar Rapids. IA 52402 319 365-9565
III T]UAciIdlowk19.1
SUMMIT RIDGE, LLC
CIO TOM KAUT
250 HOLIDAY ROAD
CORALVILLE, IA 52241
BOOK 5795, PAGE 448
N
o fiWWe lea
FEET
NOTE: MONUMENTSSHOWN TO BE
SET WILL BE ESTABUSHEO AFTER
CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED
e
EAS�eP O ��pN
LOT
a
CUT X
CORNER
18-79.5
S89-26'30' E 461.99'
ACQUISITION PLAT EXHIBIT 3-F
RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD
PARCEL 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER
OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
JOHNSON COUNTY. IOWA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18, THENCE SOUTH 89' 26'
30' EAST, 461.99 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 18 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00° 32'41' EAST, 60.22 FEET ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2013043; THENCE NORTH 89° 30' 27' EAST, 389.65 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 01' 32'47- EAST, 67.41 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST
QUARTER: THENCE NORTH 89.26' 30' WEST, 392.05 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID TRACT CONTAINS 24,935 SQUARE FEET OR 0.57 ACRES MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING 18,306
SQUARE FEET OR 0.42 ACRES MORE OR LESS OF EXISTING ROAD EASEMENT, SUBJECT TO
EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, ALL BEARING AND
TO NAD83(2011) IA SPCS SOUTH ZONE, US SURVEY FOOT.
BOB
FND 516- IR
#
WNCAP 036
e
LEGEND
FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
A SET SECTIONCORNERMONUMENT
0 FOUND 95' REROD WNELLOW CAPNTH65(UNLESS NOTED)
O SET 16' HEROD WIORANGE CAPT14243(UNLESS NOTED
(M) MEASURED DIMENSION
(R) RECORDEDOIMENSION
I.R. IRON ROD
I.P. IRON PIPE
— - — - SECTIONLINE
N, — RIGHT -0F -WAY LINE
EXISTINGLOTLINE
TIL — PRDPERTY LINE
PROPOSED RIGHT OF -WAY ACQUISITION
EXISTING ROADWAY EASEMENT TO
BE ACQUIRED AS RIGHT-OFWAY
\A'A% b
S��C Y0.'l9
S
26 30" W 392.05'
—FND518"IR
WIOCAP #15749
iLp*� LOT LOT 2
SIGNAL Ory
O
N
To WESLEY F. p
i SHIMP m
WO 24243 0
4)
a /OWN 0
END 5/8- IR
W/YCAP #9175
3 a LINE TABLE
'o I LINE LENGTH BEARING
< LI 43.22NOD-32'4I'T
�+ L2 11.00' NOD°J2'4I"E
° L3 1 17.00' 1 SOI -32'47"E
2 1 50.41' 1 501°32'47•'E
33'1 V AMERICAN LEGION
ROAD
1— WEB 26' 30' W 1897.17 ,"
FND 5187 IR
WIYCAP98165
END GS. IS
CENTER
WIOCAP#15749 SEC. 18-79-5
LOT 1
SUV 19NOW.27 ROAD ROADCENTERLINE ESTABLISHED
AND 1966100T ROAD PIAN (Ol� tl6E¢B)
FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED: NOVEMBER
supeMSlen and men I am a duly licensed Prelesswral Lend Surveyor
under the laws of the Slate of Imxa.
6'lest, � - '7--d5-aof9
WESLEY R SHIMB P.LS. U DATE
Lloense Number 24243
Myllcense renewal dela Is DECEMBER 31, 2020.
Pages or sheeF cmen l by This seal
u'f 1`
SURVEY FOR:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 E WASHINGTON STREET
F0th
SHEET
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240
PHONE: (319) 356-5000
F.Us InlyaefrMctura a Env lineament, LLD
1 OF 1
39.k—To. On. NE. St.A
Leen Nepp; n SNOS3515
FOTH PROJECT NO. 181003-00 DATE: 9/23/2019
Pmn.:3leasssxs F.=319,36s9av
ESTPBLISNEO USWO 192] )DOT ROAO PLANS
(F -H") ME INS )DOT ROTO PLAN (OLD P6)
END 518'IR
\1N WIYCAP#9715
N T 7g.5
xFoo
I 3
c,TWi
__ do z & I FND5/8'IR WNCAW78165
0.64 NORTH OF ROW LINE
(SURVEY NOTE)
N 69° 30 27' E ]]8.00'
S4EC \0.'tg
END CUT X
W114 CORNER L2 I
SEC. 18-79-6
`FND518'IR END 518- IR
IOCAPk15]49 WIOCAP#I5749 q
LO7 2 LOT 1
V
LEGEND COLOT
FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
0 SET SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
FOUND S'B-REROD WNELLOW CTP/8185 (UNLESS NOTED)
p SET lrs-REROD WIORANGE CAPe24243 (UNLESS NOTED)
(M) MEASURED DIMENSION
(R) RECORCEDDIMENSKW
I.R. IRON RICO
I.P. IRON ITPE
— - — - SECTIONLWE
— un — RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
EXISTING LOT LINE
— PROPERTYLINE
® PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION
Index ,Legend
Location:
NW Section 18, Towriship 79 N, Range 5 W
RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY
Requester.
City of Iowa City
Proprietor.
Hieronymus Family Partnership, LLP
Surveyor
Wesle Shimp
Surveyor
Company:
Folh Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
Retum To:
3950 River Ridge Drive NE, Suite A
Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 319 365-9565
ESTPBLISNEO USWO 192] )DOT ROAO PLANS
(F -H") ME INS )DOT ROTO PLAN (OLD P6)
END 518'IR
\1N WIYCAP#9715
N T 7g.5
xFoo
I 3
c,TWi
__ do z & I FND5/8'IR WNCAW78165
0.64 NORTH OF ROW LINE
(SURVEY NOTE)
N 69° 30 27' E ]]8.00'
S4EC \0.'tg
END CUT X
W114 CORNER L2 I
SEC. 18-79-6
`FND518'IR END 518- IR
IOCAPk15]49 WIOCAP#I5749 q
LO7 2 LOT 1
V
LEGEND COLOT
FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
0 SET SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
FOUND S'B-REROD WNELLOW CTP/8185 (UNLESS NOTED)
p SET lrs-REROD WIORANGE CAPe24243 (UNLESS NOTED)
(M) MEASURED DIMENSION
(R) RECORCEDDIMENSKW
I.R. IRON RICO
I.P. IRON ITPE
— - — - SECTIONLWE
— un — RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
EXISTING LOT LINE
— PROPERTYLINE
® PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION
ACQUISITION PLAT
�S1IONA4
04 O
N
w WESLEYE y
_ 2 43 m
J� 24243
4
EXHIBIT 4-F
RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY
BE ACOURED AS RIGHT -OF -WAV
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD
SHEET
PARCEL4
PROPERTY OWNER:
HIERONYMUS FAMILY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PARTNERSHIP, LLP
3322 MUSCATINE AVENUE
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18. TOWNSHIP
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
79 NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY. IOWA.
BOOK 4690, PAGE 537-540
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
N
COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1B, THENCE SOUTH 89'
26' 30' EAST 854.04 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 18 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 01. 32' 4r WEST, 67.41 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89'30'27- EAST, 770.00 FEETTO THE WEST LINE OF WINDSOR WEST PART
ONE SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 00' 50106d EAST, 81.65 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 89' 26'30' WEST, 777.38 FEET ALONG SAID
o 1e0 tare
SOUTH LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID TRACT CONTAINS 57,946 SQUARE FEET OR 1.33 ACRES MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING
FEET
44,722 SQUARE FEET OR 1.03 ACRES MORE OR LESS OF EXISTING ROAD EASEMENT,
ND3E: MONUMENTS SHOWN TO BE
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
SET WILL BE ESTABLISHED AFTER
CONSTRUCTIONISCOMPLETEO
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, ALL BEARING AND DISTANCES ARE
REFERENCED TO MADS31201111ARPC5 muni 7nNF uS RMRMPv Pnnr
ESTPBLISNEO USWO 192] )DOT ROAO PLANS
(F -H") ME INS )DOT ROTO PLAN (OLD P6)
END 518'IR
\1N WIYCAP#9715
N T 7g.5
xFoo
I 3
c,TWi
__ do z & I FND5/8'IR WNCAW78165
0.64 NORTH OF ROW LINE
(SURVEY NOTE)
N 69° 30 27' E ]]8.00'
S4EC \0.'tg
END CUT X
W114 CORNER L2 I
SEC. 18-79-6
`FND518'IR END 518- IR
IOCAPk15]49 WIOCAP#I5749 q
LO7 2 LOT 1
V
LEGEND COLOT
FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
0 SET SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
FOUND S'B-REROD WNELLOW CTP/8185 (UNLESS NOTED)
p SET lrs-REROD WIORANGE CAPe24243 (UNLESS NOTED)
(M) MEASURED DIMENSION
(R) RECORCEDDIMENSKW
I.R. IRON RICO
I.P. IRON ITPE
— - — - SECTIONLWE
— un — RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
EXISTING LOT LINE
— PROPERTYLINE
® PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION
�S1IONA4
04 O
N
w WESLEYE y
_ 2 43 m
J� 24243
4
EXI
®STING ROADWAY EASEMENT TO
IOWAP
BE ACOURED AS RIGHT -OF -WAV
Foth
SHEET
= END 518' IR
I
OUTLOT
LINE TABLE
LINE1 LENGTH BEARING
LI 1 50.41' NOI-32'47"V
L2 1 17.00' MI.324YV
L3 17.00 500°52'06E
TJ
L. 64.65' SEC °58'Ofi"E
rc i
�N
R E
�n I/ °il
zm if
LOTS
Flv3-*
A
e. FND 5i8'IR
W'TYCAP#8165
CENTER
SEC. 18-79-5
� @S
4
F,S'\p LOT 1
OPEN
FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED: NOVEMBER 20181
tuPrviecri aM INI I. a dixy 8cened PMrosc lLend survnar
Under Pe Ems d me Slate or Ions.
WESLEYF SHIM .LS. MTE
Lkomo N Prier. 24243
My fcenso mnowal dale is DECEMBER 31, 2020.
Pages or Threat wuered Uy IN. Teal'.
SURVEY FOR:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 E WASHINGTON STREET
Foth
SHEET
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240
V
PHONE: (319) 356-5000
Fo1A InrratlTuolura 6 Enrlronmrrnl, LLC
1 OF 1
JOSa R,var RbpaPM NE,3uuA
FOTH PROJECT NO. 181003-00 DATE: 9/23/2019
dooda
Pew. 1"es0sssFox 313- ]659611
rrepareu uy vveslay annnp, oaDv rtrvG' rtmye L/nvu ry omw " v �Piu -
TEMPORARY EASEMENT EXHIBIT 3-T
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD
PARCEL3
PROPERTYOWNER
SUMMIT RIDGE, LLC
CIO TOM KAUT
250 HOLIDAY ROAD
CORALVILLE, IA 52241
BOOK 5795, PAGE 448
N
I
0 50 1.
I S 89° 26 30" E 461.99' _i
--------
FEEL
1
_ - — .
— . — - _ . — - — .
S89°26'30"E 2751.20' 4
�lS
m
w n
CUT %
oO
LOT 1
0
W1/4 CORNER FND 51B' IR
SEC. 18-79-5
Fm- z
N
N 00° 32' 41" E 35.01'
IRFND
W/OCA #1
/OCAP5749
POB
fl/V
LI
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON
COUNTY, IOWA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
SAID SECTION 18, THENCE SOUTH 89° 26' 30"
NORTHWEST QUARTER CF SAID SECTION 18 TO
SOUTH 89' 30' 27" WEST, 389.65 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
SAID TRACT CONTAINS 13,615 SQUARE FEET OR 0.31 ACRES MORE OR LESS, SUBJECT TO
EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION. ALL BEARING AND DISTANCES ARE REFERENCED TO
NAD83(2011) IN SPCS SOUTH ZONE, US SURVEY FOOT.
J5,,
P,R
I S 89° 26 30" E 461.99' _i
--------
1
_ - — .
— . — - _ . — - — .
S89°26'30"E 2751.20' 4
POC R/v
n/v
CUT %
FOUND VT PERIOD WNELLOW CAW8165(UNLESS NOTED)
W1/4 CORNER FND 51B' IR
SEC. 18-79-5
Q SET W/ORANGECAPdI414J )UNLESS NOTED)
LINE
IRFND
W/OCA #1
/OCAP5749
�^�"` WA'CAP#703fi
LI
1 43.22 1 NOO.32'4 VE
LOT 2
LOT 1
1 17.00'1 NOO°32'41"E
I.R. IRON ROO
FNO 5/8" IR
m WIYCAP#9175
C.
�I
S01°32'47'E 3501'
n/v AMERICANLEGION
3 ROAD SE
-- -- - - - ---
- -
— e/v FNO 5/8'/IRfl
W/YCAP #8165
NO 5/8" IR CENTER
W/OCAP#15749 SEC. 18-79-5
LOT 1
LEGEND
A FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
SQL CQN`
-, SET SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
FOUND VT PERIOD WNELLOW CAW8165(UNLESS NOTED)
Q SET W/ORANGECAPdI414J )UNLESS NOTED)
LINE
INE TABLE
1 LENGTH 1 BEARING
UREO DIM DIMENSION
(M) MEASURED
LI
1 43.22 1 NOO.32'4 VE
(R) RECORDED DIMENSION
1 12
1 17.00'1 NOO°32'41"E
I.R. IRON ROO
I.P. IRON PIPE
- — - SECTION LINE
RIGHT-OFWAYLINE
SURVEY NOTE: ROAD CENTERLINE ESTABLISHED
E%)STING LOT UNE
USING 19271DOT ROAD PLANS IF -28415)
AND 1988 )OOT ROAD PLAN IGLU 96)
PROPERTY LINE
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED: NOVEMBER 2018
SURVEY FOR:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
F0h
410E WASHINGTON STREET
t
SHEET
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52260
PHONE: (319) 356-5000
1 OF 1
FotH Infrastructure 8 Environment,
LLL
ossa wire' wage en°. NE, sm. A
CeEvr RepG5.N52rOD35t5
FOTH PROJECT NO. 181003-00 DATE: 4/16/2019
Fno,eala9ss9sss F..:v9assswl
Prepared by Wesley Shimp, 3950 River Ridge Drive NE, Suite A, Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Phone: 31"65-9565
TEMPORARY EASEMENT EXHIBIT4-T
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF IOWA CITY
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD
PARCEL4
PROPERTY OWNER:
HIERONYMUS FAMILY
PARTNERSHIP, LLP
3322 MUSCATINE AVENUE
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
BOOK 4690. PAGES 537-540
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 5 WEST OF
THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18, THENCE SOUTH 89. 26'3W EAST 854.04 FEET
ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 01° 32' 47" WEST, 50.41 FEET TO THE
NORTH RIGHT -OF -WAV LINE OF AMERICAN LEGION ROAD SE; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 01° 32' 47" WEST, 17.00
FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF LOT 60F WINDSOR WEST PART ONE; THENCE SOUTH 00° 50' O6' EAST, 10.00 FEET
ALONG SAID WEST LINE: THENCE SOUTH 89° 30'27- WEST, 778.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 29,381 SQUARE FEET OR 0.67 ACRES MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THE PERMANENT N
EASEMENT CONTAINING 300 SQUARE FEET OR 0.007 ACRES MORE OR LESS, SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND
RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. _ - _
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION, ALL BEARING AND DISTANCES ARE REFERENCED TO NAD83(2011) IA 1417
SPCS SOUTH ZONE, US SURVEY FOOT.
0 100 ae
FNA file° 1 - FEL`
W/YCAP#971515
�1`PC�S SDSF,CCO
SS�G,g.'l9 aJ it i oa/�'1��Q FOY�p�
PERMANENT EASEMENT �'r° LOT6
N78• 50. 13" E OVERLAPPING TEMPORARY i LS
PDC L3 16fi 64' — S e4°33' 00" L4 FIND 0.64' NORTH
FND CUTX .. -. E 539.50' (OF ROWLINE
W1/4 CORNER FOB2 .. RrW {-ySURVEV
SEC. 18-95 a.v —S 89° 30'27" W 778.00' a/v
5D'
OTFS 89° 26 30" E 854804' _ �`-HMLaII.Nry Lcuwn muz u ac _
ND 518"IR FND518"IR
W/OLAP#15]49` WIOCAPp15]49 FND 518" IR
LOT 2 ER � 4'C a OF SCO
OUTLOTA
LOT 1 SCJ SV �Yv` I
LOT 1
LEGEND U�'��
FOUND SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
♦ SET SECTION CORNER MONUMENT
FOUND 51B- WNELLOW CAPN6165 PEROT) (UNLESS NOTED)
Q SET 518- PERIOD W/PINK CAP922047(UNLESS NOTED)
(M) MEASURED DIMENSION
(R) RECORDED DIMENSION
I.R. IRON ROD
I.P. IRON PIPE
- — - SECTION LINE
n/v — RIGHT-0E-WAYUNE
— EXISTING LOT LINE
Rn — PROPERTY LINE
Q TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION BASEMENT
SURVEY FOR:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 E WASHINGTON STREET
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240
PHONE: (319) 356-5000
FOTH PROJECT NO. 181003-00 DATE: 4/17/2019
LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
LI
50A I'
N01°32'47"W
L2
17.00'
NO1°32'47"W
L3
35.01'
NO1°32'47"W
L4
78.23'
N89°30'27"E
L5
IG.00'
500°50"O6"E
�Foth
Riy
FND 518" IR
W/YCAWI8165
CENTER
SEC. 18-795
a 'CES
SSP LOT 1
gPR�
AREA BREAKDOWN
SO FT
ACRES
TEMPORARY EASEMENT 29,381
0.67
PERMANENT EASEMENT J00
O.DO)
TEMPORARY W/O PE 1 29.0811
0.61
SURVEY NOTE ROAD CENTERLINE
ESTABLISHED USING 1927100T ROAD PLANS
(F-209-8) AND 1968IDOT ROAD PLAN (OLD 96)
FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED: NOVEMBEF
Fath Infmstructum & EmIronment, LLC
3950 RNe, R xA, D,Ire NE, S Ae A
Cedm Paplde. A 5340.2515
,g_16]6SR565 AB .,9']5STIG,
SHEET
1 OF 1
Item Number: 10.d.
CITY OIF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
December 17, 2019
Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning related to utility -scale, ground -
mounted solar energy systems. (ZCA19-05) (Second Consideration)
Iji ETIJ:I M l MUTI&V
Description
PZ Staff Report
P&Z minutes
Ordinance
dj
ANA=
CITY OF IOWA CITY
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 7, 2019
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner
Re: Amendment to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code Related to Utility -Scale Ground -
Mounted Solar Energy Systems in Public Zones (ZCA19-05)
Background on Proposed Amendments
The City and MidAmerican Energy are exploring options for locating ground -mounted photovoltaic solar
energy panels on City property located near the City Water Treatment Plant. The City Zoning
Ordinance does not currently contain any regulatory information regarding larger -scale solar energy
systems. Absent of a comprehensive solar ordinance, these uses are currently considered basic
utilities, and are permitted as a provisional use or special exception in industrial and commercial zones.
As the water treatment plant property is located in a Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone, a modification to
the zoning code is necessary to permit this use. To avoid negative impacts that might arise with
allowing all basic utilities to locate in Public zones, staff is proposing an amendment to the current
zoning ordinance that would create a new use for utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems.
This new use would be allowed in the zones that are shown in Table 1.0.
Table 1.0 — Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Use Mechanism by Zone
Background on Utility -Scale Solar Energy Systems
Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems are comprised of photovoltaic solar panels that
convert solar energy into electricity. This electricity is typically collected and distributed by a utility
company, which then uses the electricity to power a network of uses both on and off the solar energy
system site. The solar panels are usually mounted to the ground, and range in height between 10 and
15 feet.' Since utility -scale solar energy systems are used to power a larger, off-site, network of
properties, these systems can occupy vast tracts of land for one or more generations (typically between
1 American Planning Association. "Planning for Utility -Scale Solar Energy Facilities". September 2019.
Public
Industrial
Commercial
Research Park
Interim
Zones
Zones
Zones
Zones
Development
Zones
Provisional
P-1, P-2
ID -1, 1-1, 1-2
Use
Special
All Zones, ID -C
RDP, ORP,
ID -C, ID -RP
Exception
Background on Utility -Scale Solar Energy Systems
Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems are comprised of photovoltaic solar panels that
convert solar energy into electricity. This electricity is typically collected and distributed by a utility
company, which then uses the electricity to power a network of uses both on and off the solar energy
system site. The solar panels are usually mounted to the ground, and range in height between 10 and
15 feet.' Since utility -scale solar energy systems are used to power a larger, off-site, network of
properties, these systems can occupy vast tracts of land for one or more generations (typically between
1 American Planning Association. "Planning for Utility -Scale Solar Energy Facilities". September 2019.
November 1, 2019
Page 2
30 and 40 years)2. Attachment #1 shows a few photo examples of typical utility -scale ground -mounted
solar energy systems.
Solar photovoltaics are the fastest-growing energy source in the world due to the decreasing cost per
kilowatt-hour (60% since 2010), according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Utility -scale solar
installations are the most cost-effective solar photovoltaic option 3. Transitioning from coal plants to
solar decreases carbon dioxide emissions and eliminates sulfur, nitrous oxides, and mercury
emissions. The resulting growing demand for solar energy from companies and governments alike
have accelerated the energy industry's efforts to bring facilities online as quickly as possible.4 By
collaborating with MidAmerica Energy, the City is looking to address high priority energy efficiency
actions from the 2018 Climate Action Plan.
Current Regulations
City Code currently views utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems as a basic utility use.
These systems are currently allowed as a provisional use in ID -1, 1-1, and 1-2 zones and via special
exception in commercial and research park zones. Table 2.0 shows the conditions under which utility -
scale ground -mounted solar are currently allowed.
Table 2.0 — Current Specific Approval Criteria for Basic Utilities Not Enclosed within a Building
Zones:
Use Mechanism
Specific Approval Criteria:
•
ID -1
• Provisional
•
Located 200' from residential
•
I-1
zones.
•
1-2
•
Screened from public ROW.
•
City may require the use be
enclosed by a fence.
•
All Commercial Zones
• Special
•
Screened from public view and
•
RDP
Exception
any adjacent residential.
•
ORP
•
Evidence of compatibility with
•
ID -C
surrounding uses and structures.
•
ID -RP
•
Additional design elements may
be required.
•
Plus, special exception approval
criteria for basic utility uses.
•
P-1
• Not allowed
•
N/A
•
P-2
2 httDs://www.urbanaridsolar.com/solar-enerav-faa-14-freauentiv-asked-auestions-about-utilitv-scale-
solar/
3 Hawken, Paul. 2017. "Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming."
New York: Penguin Books.
4 American Planning Association. "Planning for Utility -Scale Solar Energy Facilities". September 2019.
November 1, 2019
Page 3
Solar uses in residential zones of the city are currently regulated as an accessory use to principal
structures. The proposed text amendment would not change how roof -mounted or non -utility -scale
solar uses are regulated as an accessory structure.
Proposed Code Amendments
The proposed code amendments are threefold. They include, crafting a definition for utility -scale
ground -mounted solar energy systems (amending 14-9A-1), allowing utility -scale ground -mounted solar
energy systems as a provisional use in Public zones (amending 14 -2F -2C), and outlining additional
use -specific approval criteria (amending 14-413-41D). Furthermore, the proposed text amendments will
still allow utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems as a provisional use in Industrial zones,
and via special exception in Commercial and Research Park zones. However, with the proposed
amendments, utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy system uses in these zones will also be
subject to the additional approval criteria. Facilities that choose to locate in zones that require a special
exception will need to also adhere to the special exception approval criteria required of basic utilities. In
addition, facilities that locate in Public zones are subject to additional agreements with public land
owners and may have additional requirements. Table 3.0 summarizes staff's proposed changes.
Table 3.0 — Proposed Specific Approval Criteria for Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy
Systems
Zones:
Use Mechanism
Specific Approval Criteria:
•
ID -1
• Provisional
•
Located at least 200' from any
•
I-1
residential zone.
•
1-2
•
Screened from public view and
view of any residential zone.
Exemptions from the S3 screening
standard can be made for
systems located in Public zones
that are used in part for
educational purposes.
•
Setback at least 20' from all
property lines, or minimum
setback requirement for base
zone.
•
Enclosed by 6' — 8' fence..
Additional height for (3) horizontal
strands of barbed wire fencing
may be added.
•
15' max height.
•
Full cutoff compliant lighting.
•
Nonreflective surfaces required.
•
All Commercial Zones
Special
•
Located at least 200' from any
•
RDP
Exception
residential zone.
•
ORP
•
Screened from public view and
•
ID -RP
view of any residential zone.
November 1, 2019
Page 4
The specific approval criteria outlined in Table 3.0 and listed in the amendment to 14-413-41D in the
attached draft text amendment (See Attachment #2) are generally compiled from the American
Planning Association model ordinance and several municipal ordinances pertaining to utility -scale solar
regulation.
Exemptions from the S3 screening
standard can be made for
systems located in Public zones
that are used in part for
educational purposes.
• Setback at least 20' from all
property lines, or minimum
setback requirement for base
zone.
• Enclosed by 6' — 8' fence.
Additional height for (3) horizontal
strands of barbed wire fencing
may be added.
• 15' max height.
• Full cutoff compliant lighting.
• Nonreflective surfaces required.
• Plus, special exception approval
criteria for basic utility uses.
• P-1
Provisional
• Located at least 200' from any
• P-2
residential zone.
• Screened from public view and
view of any residential zone.
Exemptions from the S3 screening
standard can be made for
systems located in Public zones
that are used in part for
educational purposes.
• Setback at least 20' from all
property lines,or minimum setback
requirement for base zone.
• Enclosed by 6' — 8' fence.
Additional height for (3) horizontal
strands of barbed wire fencing
may be added.
• 15' max height.
• Full cutoff compliant lighting.
• Nonreflective surfaces required.
The specific approval criteria outlined in Table 3.0 and listed in the amendment to 14-413-41D in the
attached draft text amendment (See Attachment #2) are generally compiled from the American
Planning Association model ordinance and several municipal ordinances pertaining to utility -scale solar
regulation.
November 1, 2019
Page 5
Staff is recommending a 200' separation distance between any utility -scale ground -mounted solar
energy system facility and any residential zone. This recommendation is a carry-over provision from the
basic utilities section of the current city code. Without these proposed code amendments, any utility -
scale solar energy system would be required to abide by this 200' setback distance from residential
zones as a basic utility. Since the physical characteristics of a utility -scale solar facility resembles those
of a basic utility, staff feels that this separation requirement also makes sense as we attempt to create a
new land use for utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems.
In addition to the residential zone separation requirement, staff is recommending a minimum setback
distance of 20' from all property lines, or the setback distance that is normally applied in the underlying
base zone, whichever is greater. The proposed setback language is consistent with language staff
reviewed in model solar ordinances.
Each model solar ordinance staff reviewed contained criteria requiring some sort of security fencing
around the ground -mounted solar arrays that are used in utility -scale solar energy systems. An industry
standard for security fencing typically involves a 6'-8' high fence, topped with 2-3 strands of barbed
wire. Most solar companies are willing to provide these security measures to help protect their
equipment. At this time, staff is recommending that a 6'-8' high fence be provided for the safety of the
public, and to help protect the facility. Staff is looking to allow up to three strands of barbed wire on top
of security fencing. Barbed wire strands will not be counted toward fencing height requirements. Model
ordinances also gave a range in height of 10'-15' for utility -scale solar facilities5. Staff is choosing to
cap the maximum height for utility -scale solar energy systems facilities at 15'.
Additional approval criteria are proposed to limit any light pollution and glare that might be caused by a
solar array field. These criteria were borrowed from the American Planning Association's model
ordinance for utility -scale solar energy facilities.6 With respect to omitted glare, solar arrays are
designed to absorb as much solar energy as possible, therefore negative impacts from omitted glare
are less likely.' However, staff will continue to monitor the recommended additional approval criteria
regarding light and glare to see if additional measures will be necessary in the future.
Rationale for Text Amendments
Staff recommends amending the City Code to allow for utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy
systems in Public zones as an entry into possibly expanding the City's solar energy policies. These
amendments will not have any effect on how smaller scale, residential and accessory solar facilities are
permitted, as these facilities will continue to be permitted as accessory structures to the principal use
and structure. As utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems are vast in size (generally more
than 1 -acre of land), they typically constitute the primary use on a parcel. Therefore, the City cannot
use the same codification it uses for smaller scale, accessory solar.
5 American Planning Association. "Planning for Utility -Scale Solar Energy Facilities". September 2019.
6 American Planning Association. "Planning for Utility -Scale Solar Energy Facilities". September 2019.
https://www.energV.gov/eere/solar/downloads/solar-pv-and-g lare-factsheet.
November 1, 2019
Page 6
Staff believes that the proposed text amendments will create opportunities for public entities to consider
incorporating solar facilities into their property to help offset traditional energy use and aide in the City's
efforts to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
Comments from MidAmerican
Staff provided the draft text amendment to MidAmerican for their review and comment. MidAmerican's
comments are provided in Attachment #3. Staff incorporated some, but not all of MidAmerican's
suggested edits. Specifically, staff did not incorporate the following suggested edits (highlighted):
Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems must be screened from pubk view and view of any
adjacent residential zones to at least the S3 standard. A utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy
system may be exempt from S3 screening requirements if the system is located in a Public zone and is
used in part for educational purposes.
To the extent any required screening does not minimize glare, the exterior surfaces of utility -scale
ground -mounted solar energy system panels shall have a finish to minimize glare and solar arrays shall
be designed and installed to minimize glare, without materially reducing energy production of the
system, to a degree that no after image would impact vehicular traffic and any adjacent building.
Next Steps
Pending recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council must
hold a public hearing to consider the proposed text amendments.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed text amendments
to include utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems as an allowable provisional use in Interim
Development Industrial (ID -1), General Industrial (1-1), Heavy Industrial (1-2), Neighborhood Public (P-
1), and Institutional Public (P-2) zones, and via special exception in all Commercial zones as well as
Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP), Research Development Park (RDP), and Office
Research Park (ORP) zones.
Attachments:
1. Photo Examples of Utility -Scale Solar Energy Systems and Solar Arrays
2. Draft Text Amendment
3. Draft Text Amendment with MidAmerican Comments
Approved by:
Danielle Sitzman, AICP
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
I 111 F I � k �4 I•~ _ l � � � �,-
y�i , � , I, 3 � , - •rte f { r/ f _ � R � � . ... _ • - - - - � � •
i. -I;�k' � . •tie ..,,, �_ �' —` _ ' �
i
.w• X11 � : � t' I'+ , 'y • a:' �, } l i R I � f
id
rp
{ I
IN
4.
r
_`J I
z'
_ 1_. -� - _ - - _
F Age
pp,
pp -imp,
I
ro
r.0•.+ I w
-mmao
DRAFT Text Amendments – Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy Systems –
Attachment #2
Amend Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones, as follows:
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones
CO- CN- CH- Cl- CC- CB- CB- CB -
Use Categories Subgroups 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 5 10 MU
— -F-F-F-F-F-F-F
Institutional and
civic uses:
Utility-scale��
ground -mounted
solar energy
systems S S S S S S S S
Amend Table 213-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones, as follows:
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones
Use Categories Subgroups 1-1 1-2 1 RDP ORP
Institutional and
civic uses:
Utility -scale
ground -mounted
solar energy
systems PR PR S S
Amend Table 2E-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Interim Development Zones, as follows:
Table 2E-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Interim Development Zones
Use Categories Subgroups ID- ID- ID- ID- ID -
RS RM C I RP
Institutional and
civic uses:
Utility -scale S PR S
ground -mounted
solar energy
systems
Amend 14 -2F -2C, Provisional Uses, as follows:
1. Privately -owned communication transmission facilities. (Ord. 09-4358, 10-20-2009)
2. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy system.
Amend 14 -4A -6A, Basic Utility Uses, as follows:
1. Characteristics: "Basic utilities" are infrastructure services that need to be located in or near the
area where the service is provided. Basic utility uses generally do not have a large number of
employees at the site. Services may be publicly or privately provided.
2. Examples: Utility substation facilities, such as electric substations, gas regulator stations,
telecommunications switching and relay facilities; water and sewer lift stations, water towers,
and reservoirs.
3. Accessory Uses: Parking; control, monitoring, data or transmission equipment.
4. Exceptions:
a. Services where employees or the general public are generally present are classified as
community service or office uses.
b. Utility offices where employees or customers are generally present are classified as office
uses.
c. Bus barns are classified as warehouse and freight movement.
d. Communications towers, including radio, television, and wireless communications
infrastructure, are classified as communication transmission facilities.
e. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energv systems are not considered a basic utility use.
Amend 14-413-41D, Institutional and Civic Uses, as follows:
18. Utilitv-Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Enerav Svstems:
a. Any utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may not be located closer than 200'
from anv residential zone.
b. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems must be screened from public view and
from view of any adjacent residential zones to at least the S3 standard. A utility -scale ground -
mounted solar energv system may be exempt from S3 screening requirements if the system is
located in a Public zone and is used in part for educational purposes.
c. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may not be closer than 20' from all
Property lines, or according to the minimum setback requirements in the underlying base zone,
whichever is greater.
d. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems shall be enclosed by security fencing.
Fencing must be between 6' and 8' in height. Up to three (3) individual horizontal strands of
barbed wire may be placed atop the fence. Barbed wire strands will not be included in the
overall fence height measurement.
e. The maximum height of utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems shall be no
greater than 15'.
f. Any on-site lighting provided for the operational phase of the utility -scale ground -mounted
solar energy system shall be equipped with full cutoff fixtures, shielded away from adjacent
properties, and positioned downward to minimize light spillage onto adjacent properties.
g. Exterior surfaces of utility -scale ground -mounted solar energv system panels shall have a
nonreflective finish to minimize glare and solar arrays shall be designed and installed to
minimize glare to a degree that no after image would occur towards vehicular traffic and any
adjacent building.
h. Any utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy system that intends to locate in a commercial
(CO -1, CN -1, CH -1, CI -1, CC -2, CB -2, CB -5, CB -10), research (RDP), office park (ORP), or
interim development zone (ID -C, ID -RP,) must also satisfy the approval criteria for a special
exception for a basic utilitv set forth in Section 14 -4B -4D-1 b-(2).
Amend 14-9A-1, Definitions, as follows:
Solar Energy System: A device, array of devices, or structural design feature, the purpose of
which is to provide for generation of electricity, the collection, storage and distribution of solar
energy
Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy System: A solar energy system that is structurally
mounted on the ground and is not roof mounted, and the system's footprint is at least 1 acre in
size. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may be used for both on-site and off-
site consumption of energy.
DRAFT Text Amendments – Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy Systems –
Attachment #3
Amend Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones, as follows:
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones
CO- CN- CH- Cl- CC- CB- CB- CB -
Use Categories Subgroups 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 5 10 MU
— -F-F-F-F-F-F-F
Institutional and
civic uses:
Utility-scale��
ground -mounted
solar energy
systems S S S S S S S S
Amend Table 213-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones, as follows:
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones
Use Categories Subgroups 1-1 1-2 1 RDP ORP
Institutional and
civic uses:
Utility -scale
ground -mounted
solar energy
systems PR PR S S
Amend Table 2E-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Interim Development Zones, as follows:
Table 2E-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Interim Development Zones
Use Categories Subgroups ID- ID- ID- ID- ID -
RS RM C I RP
Institutional and
civic uses:
Utility -scale S PR S
ground -mounted
solar energy
systems
Amend 14 -2F -2C, Provisional Uses, as follows:
1. Privately -owned communication transmission facilities. (Ord. 09-4358, 10-20-2009)
2. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energv system.
Amend 14 -4A -6A, Basic Utility Uses, as follows:
1. Characteristics: "Basic utilities" are infrastructure services that need to be located in or near the
area where the service is provided. Basic utility uses generally do not have a large number of
employees at the site. Services may be publicly or privately provided.
2. Examples: Utility substation facilities, such as electric substations, gas regulator stations,
telecommunications switching and relay facilities; water and sewer lift stations, water towers,
and reservoirs.
3. Accessory Uses: Parking; control, monitoring, data or transmission equipment.
4. Exceptions:
a. Services where employees or the general public are generally present are classified as
community service or office uses.
b. Utility offices where employees or customers are generally present are classified as office
uses.
c. Bus barns are classified as warehouse and freight movement.
d. Communications towers, including radio, television, and wireless communications
infrastructure, are classified as communication transmission facilities.
e. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energv systems are not considered a basic utility use.
Amend 14-413-41D, Institutional and Civic Uses, as follows:
18. Utilitv-Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Enerav Svstems:
a. Any utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may not be located closer than 200'
from anv residential zone.
b. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems must be screened fr^m publ;^ view and
from view of any adjacent residential zones to at least the S3 standard. A utility -scale ground -
mounted solar energv system may be exempt from S3 screening requirements if the system is
located in a Public zone and is used in Dart for educational purposes.
c. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energv systems may not be closer than 20' from all
Property lines, or according to the minimum setback requirements in the underlying base zone,
whichever is greater.
d. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems shall be enclosed by security fencing.
Fencing must be between 6' and 8' in height. Up to three (3) individual horizontal strands of
barbed wire may be placed atop the fence. Barbed wire strands will not be included in the
overall fence height measurement.
e. The maximum height of utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems shall be no
greater than 15'.
f. Any on-site lighting provided for the operational phase of the utility -scale ground -mounted
solar energy system shall be equipped with full cutoff fixtures, shielded away from adjacent
properties, and positioned downward to minimize light spillage onto adjacent properties.
g. To the extent any required screening does not minimize glare, €the exterior surfaces of utility -
scale ground -mounted solar energy system panels shall have a ReRreflentmye finish to minimize
glare and solar arrays shall be designed and installed to 4m -it -minimize glare, without materially
reducing energy production of the system, to a degree that no after image would GGGw
tewa-Fdsimpact vehicular traffic and any adjacent building.
h. Any utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy system that intends to locate in a commercial
(CO -1, CN -1, CH -1, CI -1, CC -2, CB -2, CB -5, CB -10), research (RDP), office park (ORP), or
interim development zone (ID -C, ID -RP,) must also satisfy the approval criteria for a special
exception for a basic utilitv set forth in Section 14 -4B -4D-1 b-(2).
Amend 14-9A-1, Definitions, as follows:
Solar Energy System: A device, array of devices, or structural design feature, the purpose of
which is to provide for generation of electricity, the collection, storage and distribution of solar
energy for crane heatORQ daylight fer interier lmght;RQer �� Ater heating
Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy System: A solar energy system that is structurally
mounted on the ground and is not roof mounted, and is--a-rt4east the system's footprint is at least
1 acre in size. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may be used for both on-site
and off-site consumption of energy.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 26 of 31
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Gina Landau (MMS Consultants) stated the proposal is to build one single family home on this
lot. She will address the outlot that was discussed for preservation, she understands the desire
for that but can confirm that people who move to the county and want to build homes in the
county want to keep those trees, they move there because they like the trees. They like the
ravines, they like all of that. So, that fact as well as the fact that the County's Sensitive Areas
Ordinance ties them really tightly to everything. In the County right now they are only allowed to
clear 25% trees to build a home but that is about to go to 15% with the Unified Development
Ordinance that is planned to be approved in December or January. So there's really not a reason
to worry about preservation because the Sensitive Areas Ordinance in the County already
handled that. Landau addressed Mr. Baker's comment about the Fringe Area Agreement. She
believes that the one with Iowa City has been expired since 2006. Hekteon stated there is a valid
Fringe Area Agreement in place right now, it is an automatic renewal. Landau understands it
automatically renews but it hasn't been updated with two of the current County updates. Russett
acknowledged it has been a long time since it's been updated, they are working on updating it
right now and recognize it's out of date.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved to recommend approval of CZ19-02 an application submitted by Charles
Ockenfels for a rezoning of approximately 2.43 acres of property located in
unincorporated Johnson County from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R)
with encouragement that the rest of the property be preserved.
Signs seconded the motion.
No discussion so Hensch called the question.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1 (Baker dissenting).
CASE NO. ZCA19-05:
Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to utility -scale,
ground -mounted solar energy systems.
Russett gave some background noting the City and MidAmerican energy are currently exploring
options for installing a solar facility near the water plant. Currently the Zoning Code doesn't have
a comprehensive solar ordinance. How the City regulates solar right now is to consider large
scale solar as a basic utility use, and basic utility uses are allowed in industrial and commercial
zones, they are not allowed in public zones. The proposed amendment is to create a new use
for utility scale ground mounted solar energy systems to add some additional approval criteria for
those uses, and to allow those uses as a provisional use in public zones. The City allows basic
utilities as a provisional use in the industrial zones via special exception and the commercial
zones and they are not allowed in our public zones. Staff is proposing is to continue to allow just
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 27 of 31
utility scale solar uses as a provisional use in industrial zones and via special exception in the
commercial zones, and then add utility scale solar as a provisional use in public zones.
Staff is also proposing some specific approval criteria for these utility scale uses. Some of these
were carried over from the approval criteria the City requires for basic utility uses. Additional
criteria were added based on the review of other jurisdictions solar ordinances. In terms of the
criteria, staff is proposing that the solar and energy facility would be located at least 200 feet
from any residential zone, it is screamed from public view and view of any residential zone, and
they are proposing an exemption from this screening requirement if the solar facility has some
educational purpose and it's located in a public zone. Staff anticipates that some public entities
will want to have some sort of educational component to future solar facilities, this could include
signage and explanation of the benefits of solar energy. In those instances it's important to
actually see the solar facility and not screen it. Staff is also recommending a setback of at least
20 feet from all property lines or the minimum setback that would be required in the bass zone if
it's larger than 20 feet. They are recommending a criteria that the solar facility would be
enclosed by a six to eight foot fence and are allowing additional height for barbed wire fencing.
Staff is recommending the solar facility height be maxed out at 15 feet and that any lighting be
full cutoff compliant lighting and that the solar panels use non -reflective surfaces to minimize
glare.
Regarding the solar facilities that would require a special exception process, all of those
provisional use criteria would be carried forward to the zones where special exception would be
required but then there would be some additional requirements that the Board of Adjustment
would have to review. The two additional criteria are that they use is be compatible with
surrounding structures and that the Board of Adjustment could consider additional design
elements for uses in highly visible areas. Russett noted these two criteria are carried forward
from the current code.
Staff are also proposing two definitions, one for a solar energy system, and then a definition for
utility scale ground mounted solar energy system. The important note here is they are
recommending the utility scale ground mounted start at a facility that's at least one acre in size.
The rationale for our text amendments is they feel this is kind of the first start and entry into the
City possibly expanding the solar provisions in the solar regulations, and in the future may
consider adopting a more comprehensive ordinance. These amendments also will not affect how
smaller scale accessory solar facilities are permitted on residential or commercial uses and it will
also create opportunities for public entities to consider solar on site. Finally it will help to achieve
the City's climate action goals.
After the Planning Commission's recommendation this will go to City Council for public hearing
and consideration of the amendments.
Staff is recommending approval of the text amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code
related to utility -scale, ground -mounted solar energy systems.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 28 of 31
Hensch asked if this regulation is only for PV fields that are one acre or more and they have to
be ground mounted units. Russett confirmed that was correct. Hensch asked if one is created in
an area zoned P1 or P2 does that have to go before the Board of Adjustment. Russett stated
they are recommending it be a provisional use so it would not have to go to the Board of
Adjustment in the P zones.
Martin asked if the screening requirement is also only for these large spaces. Russett confirmed
that was correct, for one acre or more areas.
Hensch comment the one thing he finds a little disturbing is the three strands of barbed wire the
top like it's a government secret or something, he can't really see how this is much of an
attractive nuisance. If you have a six-foot fence or eight -foot fence it seems cosmetically to look
bad and he doesn't agree with that.
Signs agreed and asked what is the rationale for screening from public view? Russett stated it is
a provision that they carried forward from the current regulations for basic utilities. The concern
was that especially if it's close to residential or public right-of-way people might not like to look at
these and think they're not aesthetically pleasing. They are talking about S3 screening.
Baker asked what full cutoff compliant lighting is. Russett said another way to refer to it is as
dark skies compliant so all the light shines down and it avoids spillage.
Signs asked about S3 screening. Hensch explained it's all the perimeter bushes and plants,
there is S1, S2 and S3 with S3 being the highest level. Russett added the S3 is between five and
six feet of screening height.
Signs wondered if there was any mention of any thought about roof mounted systems. For
example in the east side industrial park there's literally acres of roof out there, would this prohibit
that. Hensch asked if there was a regulation with the utilities that only a certain percentage of a
building power can be contributed by PV so that would prevent that from happening. Signs asks
because he knows there are communities across the country where public utilities lease rooftops
to put on large solar arrays to contribute to the to the net worth.
Hekteon stated this will not change how those are regulated. This is amendment is allowing
ground mounted large-scale solar arrays in the public zone and also establishing more criteria for
its use in other zones. It is not changing roof mounted regulations at this time.
Russett wonders if the question is if the roof mounted facility is more than an acre, and if you
have a building that has a roof that is that large, would that be still accessory or not? Hensch
noted an acre rooftop is like 60 feet by 660 feet and it's going to be tough to find a building to
accomplish that. Russett said that is something to be considered for the future.
Townsend stated she is pleased to see some things happening with conserving energy now.
She asked how these regulations differ from the wind energy that we're seeing going up around
Iowa. Russett replied from a zoning standpoint some of the concerns related to wind are
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 29 of 31
different than the concerns related to solar. Some people really don't like seeing the windmills
and there's some concern about the visual impact of them, there's concerns about birds and if
they're in a migratory bird path. Townsend added with all the talk about climate change, Iowa
City would be a nice place to be in the forefront so why hide it.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Adam Jablaski (MidAmerican Energy) is from the office in Urbandale, Iowa. He appreciates the
City putting this together, they do think it's a very workable ordinance and addresses some of the
City's residents' concerns. He wanted to add one comment, in the 18G section it says no after
image, after images are when you stare at a light and close your eyes you see the after image of
that light. So he recommends the City either say minimize the after image or completely remove
it because of the glare. The glare can cause any after image and the glare minimization is
already addressed in here, saying no to anything is a high standard to hit.
Hensch asked about the question about solar panels on rooftops of commercial or industrial.
Jablaski stated he is not a system planning expert for a MidAmerica but can follow up.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved to recommend approval of ZCA 19-05, Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of
the Iowa City Code related to utility- scale, ground -mounted solar energy systems with the
note about changing the draft code language regarding glare.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Dyer asked if this is installed at the Treatment Plant will it interfere with the walking trails.
Russett said it might temporarily during the construction phase but most of them will still be open
even during construction.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 17, 2019
Parsons moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 17, 2019.
Signs seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Russett noted on Monday the City Council adopted the rezoning ordinance and conditional
zoning agreement for the rezoning on East Prentiss Street for the Capstone Collegiate
Communities rezoning.
Prepared by: Ray Heitner, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5238
Ordinance No.
Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning, related to utility -scale, ground -
mounted solar energy systems. (ZCA19-05)
Whereas, in September 2018 the City adopted a Climate Action and Adaptation Plan that
outlines various strategies and actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and
Whereas, one of the actions identified in the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan is initiating
community solar projects; and
Whereas, the current City Code lacks a comprehensive solar ordinance; and
Whereas, the proposed ordinance would clarify the regulation of solar facilities by including a
definition for utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems; and
Whereas, the proposed ordinance allows utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems
in Public and Industrial zones as a provisional use, provided that additional use -specific criteria
are met; and
Whereas, the proposed ordinance allows utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems
in Commercial, Research, and Interim Development Commercial, Interim -Development Research
Park zones via special exception, provided that additional use -specific criteria are met, as well as
additional special exception approval criteria; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a meeting on November 7, 2019 and
recommend approval of the aforementioned zoning code amendments; and
Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance.
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that:
Section 1. Title 14 of the Iowa City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language
to the sections shown below:
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones:
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones:
Use Categories
Subgroups I-1
CO-
[CN-
CH-
CI-
CC-
CB-
CB -
Use Cate ories
g
Sub rou s
g P
1
civic uses:
1
1
2
2
[CB-
10
MU
and
F��������
systems
S
PR
PR
S
S
civic
civic uses:
solar energy
systems
Utility -scale
-
around -mounted
Fa
Fa
F�i
FaFa
Fa
Fa
Fa
F
solar enerav
systems
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones:
Use Categories
Subgroups I-1
I-2
RDP
ORP
Institutional and
—F—F—F—
Institutional and
F
civic uses:
civic uses:
Utility -scale
Around -mounted
Utility-scale
--FF
solar energy
systems
S
PR
PR
S
S
Table 2E-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Interim Development Zones:
Use Categories
Subgroups
FID --FID-
RS
RM
FID.
ID-
I
ID -
RP
Institutional and
F
civic uses:
Utility-scale
--FF
S
PR
S
around -mounted
solar energy
systems
14 -2F -2C, Provisional Uses:
1. Privately owned communication transmission facilities. (Ord. 09-4358,10-20-2009)
2. Utility -scale around -mounted solar energy system.
14 -4A -6A-4, Exceptions:
e. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems are not considered a basic utility use
14-413-41), Institutional and Civic Uses:
18. Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Enerav Svstems
a. Any utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may not be located closer than
200' from any residential zone.
b. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems must be screened from public view
and from view of any adjacent residential zones to at least the S3 standard. A utility -scale
ground -mounted solar energy system may be exempt from S3 screening requirements if the
system is located in a Public zone and is used in part for educational purposes.
c. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may not be closer than 20' from all
Property lines, or according to the minimum setback requirements in the underlying base
zone, whichever is greater.
d. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems shall be enclosed by security fencing
Fencing must be between 6' and 8' in height. Up to three (3) individual horizontal strands of
barbed wire may be placed atop the fence. Barbed wire strands will not be included in the
overall fence height measurement.
e. The maximum height of utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems shall be no
greater than 15'.
f. Any on-site lighting provided for the operational phase of the utility -scale ground -mounted
solar energy system shall be equipped with full cutoff fixtures, shielded away from adjacent
properties and positioned downward to minimize light spillage onto adiacent properties
g. Exterior surfaces of utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy system Danels shall have a
nonreflective finish to minimize glare and solar arrays shall be designed and installed to
minimize glare towards vehicular traffic and any adiacent building.
h. Any utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy system that intends to locate in a
commercial (CO -1, CNA, CH -1, CIA. CC -2, CB -2, CB -5. CB -10), research (RDP) office
park (ORP), or interim development zone (ID -C, ID -RP) must also satisfy the approval
criteria for a special exception for a basic utility set forth in Section 14-413-413-1 b-(2).
14-9A-1, Definitions:
Solar Energy System: A device array of devices or structural design feature the purpose of
which is to provide for generation of electricity, the collection, storage and distribution of
solar energy.
Utility -Scale Ground -Mounted Solar Energy System: A solar energy system that is
structurally mounted on the ground and is not roof mounted, and the system's footprint is at
least 1 acre in size. Utility -scale ground -mounted solar energy systems may be used for
both on-site and off-site consumption of energv.
Section II. 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 no adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
Section IV. 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 2019.
Mayor
City Clerk
Approved by
Ci y Attorney's Office itI2-4,1r%
Ordinance No.
Page
It was moved by and seconded by_
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Bergus
Mims
Salih
Taylor
Teague
Thomas
Weiner
that the
First Consideration 12/03/2019
Vote for passage: AYES: Salih, Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Throgmorton,
Cole, Mims. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration 12/17/2029
Vote for passage: AYES: Salih, Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Throgmorton,
Cole, Mims. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Date published
Item Number: 10.e.
�r
CITY OE IOWA CITY
www.iogov.org
December 17, 2019
Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 1.15 acres of land located at
the northeast corner of S. Gilbert Street and Highland Ave, from Intensive
Commercial (CI -1) zone to Riverfront Crossings - South Gilbert (RFC -SG)
zone. (REZ19-11) (Second Consideration)
/_1iETSUILTA 121ZIII & I
Description
Staff Report
Additional Correspondence
P&Z Minutes
Ordinance & CZA
Correspondence from Keith Weggen
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ19-11
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Jesi Lile
Date: November 7, 2019
Britni Andreassen
Kum & Go LLC
1459 Grand Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50309
(515) 547-6083
Britni.andreassen@kumandgo.com
Contact Person: Keith Weggen
Civil Design Advantage
3405 SE Crossroads Drive, Suite G
Grimes, IA 50111
(515) 369-4400
keithw@cda-eng.com
Owners: Kum & Go LLC
1459 Grand Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50309
(515) 547-6083
Mcdonough Structures
340 Highland Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52240
(515)512-6491
Kam Properties, LLC
3309 Highway 1 SW
Iowa City, IA 50240
GKLZ, LLC
325 E. 3rd St.
Iowa City, IA 50240
Requested Action: Rezoning from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone
to Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert (RFC -SG)
zone
Purpose: To accommodate a convenience store with fuel
sales
Location: 1310 South Gilbert Street and 348 Highland Ave
Location Map:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
Comprehensive Plan:
District Plan:
Neighborhood Open Space District:
Public Meeting Notification:
File Date:
45 Day Limitation Period:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
K
Approximately 1.15 acres
Commercial, Intensive Commercial (CI -1)
North: CI -1 — Intensive Commercial
(Commercial)
South: CC -2 — Community Commercial
(Commercial)
East: CI -1 — Intensive Commercial
(Commercial)
West: RFC -SG — Riverfront Crossings — South
Gilbert (Commercial & Residential)
Mixed -Use
Central District & Riverfront Crossings Master
Plan
C5
Property owners located within 300' of the
project site received notification of the Planning
and Zoning Commission public meeting.
Rezoning signs were also posted on the site.
October 1, 2019
November 15, 2019
The applicant, Kum & Go, LLC, has requested a rezoning of two properties located at 1310 S.
Gilbert St. and 348 Highland Ave. Both are currently zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1) and
the applicant is requesting a rezoning to Riverfront Crossings -South Gilbert. Kum & Go
3
currently owns the property at 1310 S. Gilbert St. and has a purchase agreement in place
with the property owners of 348 Highland Ave.
The subject property is located within the Riverfront Crossings Form Based Code District, an
area within Iowa City that has been targeted for redevelopment. Kum & Go has been
redeveloping many of their sites throughout the Iowa City area, the two most recent at
Benton St. & Riverside Dr. and Muscatine Ave. & 1St Ave. The applicant is proposing to
redevelop the subject site to expand the floor area of the convenience store, add two
additional gas pumps, and provide additional parking. This use is considered a Quick Vehicle
Servicing use, which is allowed by special exception in the Riverfront Crossings -South
Gilbert zone.
The current Kum & Go located on this property was built in 1991. The layout of the existing
site is not conducive to good traffic flow due to the canopy location over the store as well as
the layout of the parking lot. The parking lot has four access points on-site, two of them from
S. Gilbert St., one from Highland Ave., and one from E. 3rd St. The commercial condos located
at 348 Highland Ave. were built in 1955, and have been used for storage and construction
businesses.
The applicant held a Good Neighbor Meeting on October 23, 2019 and submitted a summary
(Attachment 4). Seven local business owners attended the meeting where the applicant
displayed their proposed site plan and elevations, described their project, and answered
questions about the proposed redevelopment. Neighbors were concerned with access to
their properties during construction and the proposed timeline. The applicant was able to
convey that the site will be entirely self-contained during the construction process and would
not disturb access to surrounding businesses. All attendees expressed excitement about the
redevelopment.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning:
Both properties are currently zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1), which allows for outdoor
display and merchandise, repair and sale of motor vehicles, outdoor commercial and
recreation activities, retail, eating establishments, office uses, and quick vehicle service
uses provisionally.
Proposed Zoning:
The applicant is requesting to rezone both properties to Riverfront Crossings — South
Gilbert (RFC -SG). The intent of this zone is to facilitate high-intensity mixed use
development, with active ground floors. The principal uses allowed are generally the same
as the Central Business Support (CB -5) zone, and include commercial recreational uses,
eating establishments, office uses, a variety of retail, and quick vehicle service uses through
a special exception. Upon approval of rezoning, the applicant must apply for a special
exception.
The Riverfront Crossings Form Based Code requires businesses to be oriented toward the
front of the lot with street -facing entries. This provides a more comfortable environment for
pedestrians and offers buffering from vehicular traffic. Parking must be located behind
buildings and screened from view. Specific building standards apply, and will be
administered through a staff design review process. These include streetscape
m
improvements, landscaping, fagade composition, etc.
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 Comprehensive Plan has designated this area for Mixed
Use Development. The Mixed Use land use designation includes a variety of retail, office,
and residential uses. The Comprehensive plan also supports urban infill and
redevelopment in certain areas of the City, including in the Riverfront Crossings District.
The Riverfront Crossings Master Plan calls for a pedestrian scale development in this area
along S. Gilbert St., with buildings to the front of the street and parking to the rear. It also
calls for a retail/convenience store in this area to serve local residential and commercial
uses. The Master Plan envisions this area to be redeveloped and shows a building placed
in the front corner of the lot with parking in the rear.
Compatibility with Existing Neighborhood Character:
The proposed convenience store and gas station, designed according to the Riverfront
Crossings Form Based Code, will be an improvement to the current subject property in
regard to traffic circulation and safety, pedestrian friendliness, and landscaping. The
surrounding neighborhood has been redeveloping in recent years with the addition of
new mixed-use residential buildings across the street as well as a brewery and the
Riverfront Crossings Park. The proposed rezoning will allow for improved convenience
retail in the neighborhood to serve local residents, business owners, and customers while
being brought up to Riverfront Crossings standards.
Traffic Implications and Access:
The intersection of S. Gilbert St. and Highway 6 just to the southwest of the subject
property had an average daily traffic count of 15,600 vehicles per day in 2018, according
to the DOT. There are four access point to the current Kum & Go; two on S. Gilbert St.
and one on each Highland Ave. and 3rd St. This is considered non -conforming, as the
Municipal Code allows only three access points on corner lots. The aerial photo below
illustrates the existing condition of the site and number of access points for both
properties.
5
324
. HIG HLANO AVE--
To bring this site into compliance, the applicant must close all but three access points.
The current access points off S. Gilbert St. create congestion and safety issues due to
their proximity to nearby intersections and the amount of traffic this street experiences
daily. Additionally, Highland Ave. experiences a significant amount of traffic as it is one of
the few through east/west streets that cross the CRANDIC railroad. To help mitigate these
issues, staff is proposing a condition that the applicant must close all access points onto
S. Gilbert St. and reduce the number of access points to one on Highland Ave.
Currently, the right-of-way along S. Gilbert St. is not adequate to create the pedestrian
environment envisioned in the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. In order to create a
wider landscaped buffer between traffic on S. Gilbert St. and the public sidewalk, staff is
proposing a condition that the applicant dedicate additional right-of-way along S. Gilbert
St., 3rd St., and Highland Ave. as shown in Attachment 5. The applicant must also
reconstruct the sidewalk that currently exists around the property on S. Gilbert Street,
Highland Ave, and 3rd Street.
Storm Water Management:
Staff anticipates that the existing stormwater infrastructure will be able to accommodate
runoff from the proposed redevelopment. At the site plan stage staff will analyze whether
the re -development of the site requires additional stormwater protections.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon recommendation of approval of the rezoning from the Planning & Zoning
M
Commission, a public hearing will be scheduled for consideration of the application by City
Council. Upon approval by City Council, the applicant must apply for a special exception to
allow for a quick vehicle servicing use in the Riverfront Crossings South Gilbert District.
Redevelopment of this site will also require compliance with the Riverfront Crossings Form -
Based Code, which requires review by the staff form -based code design review committee,
in addition to site plan review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff Recommends approval of REZ19-11, a proposal to rezone approximately 1.15 acres of
property located at 1310 S. Gilbert St. and 348 Highland Ave. from Intensive Commercial (CI -
1) to Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert Subdistrict (RFC -SG), subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant must close all access points along S. Gilbert St. and will reduce the
number of access points along Highland Ave. to one.
2. The applicant must dedicate additional right-of-way to the City along Gilbert St. based
on the dimensions shown in Attachment 5.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Zoning Map
3. Concept Plan
4. Good Neighbor Summary
5. Right -of -Way Dedication
Approved by:
Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator,
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
9
7-1
1
N w a ME 2ND_ST • �_ r ❑
z
.,i»I�..J
J.
ms's77
_ Cj
F
Gywgy6F
tr
P coo
44P ca
An application submitted by Britni
Andreassen on behalf of Kum & Go,Z� ;� 41'
STEVENS DR _r_F- r��,�;s ,,.3_' -�
LLC for the rezoning of approximately — �j " r, "fi *fog ,o •. +�
1.15 acres of property located at 1310
m
S Gilbert St and 348 Highland Ave from
i' _ t
Intensive Commerical (CI -1) to Riverfront-
Crossings - South Gilbert (RFC-SG).6L "4 dMIL
,xr;;.d •°# ', r-� r
I— i
.Z.F.®4
CITY OF IOWA CITY
co
J�
0
r�
I
I ,
�IILlow— — —
_ _- -- — --
�
� cn
I rl 1
i
I
I
II
— Bi III
OE—
GI -- , 0— G VIII — — — -----------------
I rN _
*—y� �— —
1� I
1
1 cf) I \
r
—s ---L
\y
III#" I j
I IJ
� II III I i I
ull
0
VIII I
I � I
I I
� Illlnll VIII I '
I �IIII III I
. II . Ill, lllllllllllll � I
IIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIINIVIomuVIllVlpplluu ml IIL
II
Illllll� I
IIIII�II.,, I I I
ll��lll�pl I S I I I I
1111111 I p I' I
Ir n
c
Ilolllll SII I
I aluull I
SNI I•� I l /I,Ir
w�l1111I •' ' I w
law ' i I(i ry
w
•IIS"' �,1„�II �� � I i �� I m
0
• .L�",..II I I � �
III. I
I
II \
I
I � s
I \
\I
NOWrTj
� \�
0
��. E 3RD STREET --
Ilk, �
S — s— — sem,
--\—s---s----s---�s ---s--
I
—s----s---- � �I— —X11111 �s--.— U
I
1 1 00
IIll�IIIt
--s--s----s---—
rs% -- —s— — s HIGHLAND AVENUE —s— — — —s—\ s —s — —s-
v--- — — — — — —-
- —0 —
c-
0 — — — OE— — OE— E - — -
KUM & GO #3504
1310 S GILBERT STREET
IOWA CITY., IOWA
CIVIL DESIGN ADVANTAGE
OCTOBER 2019
N
0
m
oT
0
m
m
0
M
0
m
I Im I'
0
m
m
- r..ew
M�Iwll,l� IIII I,
llllnl� IIII
cul
El
C '0�
=V004
CIVIL DESIGN ADVANTAGE
From:
Keith Weaaen
To:
Jessica Lile
Cc:
Britni Andreassen; Siobhan Harman - Kum & Go (Siobhan.Harmancaokumandgo.com)
Subject:
Kum & Go 3504 - Good Neighbor Meeting Summary
Date:
Friday, November 1, 2019 12:16:49 PM
r
Jesi,
Kum & Go hosted a Good Neighbor Meeting at Big Grove Brewer on Wednesday, October 23, 2019.
Seven people attended the meeting. No opposition was expressed, as those in attendance are
excited to see the site refreshed and that healthier food options will be available.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need anything else.
Keith Weggen, ASLA I project manager
CIVIL DESIGN ADVANTAGE LLC
3405 SE Crossroads Drive, Suite G Grimes, IA 50111
o 515.369.4400 f 515.369.4410 c 515.313.5445
KeithWaCDA-eng.com www.CDA-eng.com
`,A Please consider the environment before printing this email.
This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
This communication may contain information which is proprietary, privileged or confidential.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and
delete all copies of the message.
SOUTH GILBERT CENTER, LLC
% W. M. Bywater
621 South Summit Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
November 1, 2019 u
Jesi Lile
City of Iowa City
Dept. of Neighborhood &
Development Services
RE: S. Gilbert Kum & Go
REZ 19-11
Your letter of October 30
Dear Jesi,
I represent the ownership of 1204 and 1210 S. Gilbert Street. I
want to go on record as favoring the above application for
rezoning. I attended their informational meeting on October 23�d and
believe their development plans would be beneficial to all
concerned.
As you may have heard, I am very sensitive to the parking
situation in the area as are my neighbors Quincy Square (north of
our property) and the Rental Center (south side). I believe the Kum
& Go would not further compound the problem we currently deal with
when the Big Grove Brewery has a special event, something they are
makina an effort to deal with after numerous meetings with the
undersigned. One evening recently, one of our tenants had three
cars belonging to Big Grove customers towed from our lot.
Thank you for giving our thoughts your attention. Don't
hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance (337-
4663).
Bill Bywater
CC: Quincy, Rental Center, City Manager
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 5 of 31
Resolution 18-211.
2. The dedication of 17 feet of additional public right-of-way along American Legion
Road to be dedicated to the City at the time of final platting.
3. Conveyance of a temporary construction easement to the City along the north side
of American Legion Road.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Baker asked about the next steps and what was meant by "non -consenting parties". Russett
noted that is not applicable in this case, it is only required if there are any non -consenting
landowners that don't want to be annexed. In this case all of the parties are consenting.
Parsons feels this application makes sense for the overall development along American Legion
road. Signs agreed.
Baker went on record to say he feels it will end up being higher density than what is discussed
here, but that can be reviewed at the next stage of rezoning.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CASE NO. REZ19-11:
Applicant: Kum & Go LLC
Location: Northeast corner of S. Gilbert Street and Highland Avenue
An application submitted by Kum & Go LLC for a rezoning from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to
Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert (RFC -SG) for approximately 1. 15 acres of land located at
the northeast corner of S. Gilbert Street and Highland Avenue.
Lile began the staff report showing an aerial map of the subject property, to the south is Highway
6. The subject property is currently zoned Intensive Commercial (CI -1) and across Gilbert Street
to the west is zoned Riverfront Crossings -South Gilbert District.
The property at 1310 South Gilbert Street is owned by Kum & Go and they have a purchase
agreement with the owners of 348 Highland Avenue. The proposed redevelopment would
expand the floor area of the convenience store, add two additional gas pumps and provide for
additional parking.
The applicant held a Good Neighbor Meeting on October 23, 2019 where seven local business
owners attended. Neighbors were concerned with access to their properties during construction
and the proposed timeline. The applicant was able to convey that the site will be entirely self-
contained during the construction process and would not disturb access to surrounding
businesses. All attendees expressed excitement about the redevelopment.
Currently the subject property contains a Kum & Go to the west that was built in 1991, as well as
commercial condos to the east that were built in 1955. The current site is not conducive to good
traffic flow due to the location of the canopy on both sides of the store as well as the many
access points, specifically the two on South Gilbert Street. Lile showed the development
concept submitted by the applicant, the new convenience store will front along South Gilbert
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 6 of 31
Street, with both of those access points closed and six fuel pumps behind the store as well as
additional parking and landscaping.
Lile noted this area is part of the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan — South District which calls for
a high-intensity of mixed-use development with active ground floors. The uses allowed in this
subdistrict include commercial, recreational, eating establishment, office, retail and quick vehicle
service uses through the special exception process. Upon approval of a rezoning the applicant
must apply for a special exception to go through the Board of Adjustment.
The Riverfront Crossings Form Based Code requires businesses to be oriented toward the front
of the lot with street -facing entries. This provides a more comfortable environment for
pedestrians and offers buffering from vehicular traffic.
Staff uses the following two criteria in the review of rezonings:
1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan;
2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character.
The subject property is part of the Central District Commercial Redevelopment Area which calls
for redevelopment of commercial uses. To the right is the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan area
which calls for pedestrian scale development with buildings to the front of the street and parking
to the rear. It also calls for a retail/convenience store in this area to serve local residential and
commercial uses. The Master Plan envisions this area to be redeveloped and shows a building
placed in the front corner of the lot with parking in the rear.
As for compatibility with the existing neighborhood, across the street there are properties zoned
Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert and this rezoning would allow for an improvement to the
current subject property in regard to traffic circulation and safety, pedestrian friendliness, and
landscaping. The proposed rezoning will allow for improved convenience retail in the
neighborhood to serve local residents, business owners, and customers while being brought up
to Riverfront Crossings standards.
Lile noted this is a high traffic area with the intersection of South Gilbert Street and Highway 6,
there is an average daily traffic count of 15,600 vehicles per day in 2018. The four access points
on the current Kum & Go site are not conducive to safety. There are two access points on South
Gilbert Street and one each on Highland Avenue and 3rd Street. This is considered non-
conforming, as the Municipal Code allows only three access points on corner lots. To bring this
site into compliance, the applicant must close all but three access points. The current access
points off South Gilbert Street create congestion and safety issues due to their proximity to
nearby intersections and the amount of traffic this street experiences daily. To help mitigate
these issues, staff is proposing a condition that the applicant must close all access points onto
South Gilbert Street and reduce the number of access points to one on Highland Avenue.
Staff is also proposing a condition that the applicant dedicate additional right-of-way to the City
along South Gilbert Street. Currently the right-of-way along South Gilbert Street is not sufficient
to create a pedestrian friendly environment envisioned in the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan.
This additional right-of-way area would help to create a landscape area and a wider public
sidewalk. It should also be noted the applicant must reconstruct the sidewalks that currently
exist around the property on South Gilbert Street, Highland Avenue, and 3rd Street.
Lile stated the existing stormwater infrastructure should be able to accommodate the runoff from
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 7 of 31
this development but it will be analyzed and confirmed during the site plan stage.
The role of the Commission is to determine whether the rezoning complies with the
Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the existing neighborhood character.
Lile noted there was some late correspondence handed out today from a neighboring property
owner who was in support of the proposed rezoning and development and did mention parking
issues in the area but did not think this proposed redevelopment would further compound that
issue.
Regarding next steps, pending the Commission's recommendation City Council will set a public
hearing for this rezoning and upon City Council approval the applicant must apply for a special
exception. Lile noted that any redevelopment on this site must be reviewed by the staff form -
based code design review committee and also go though site plan review process.
Staff recommends approval of REZ19-11, a proposal to rezone approximately 1. 15 acres of
property located at 1310 S. Gilbert St. and 348 Highland Ave. from Intensive Commercial (CI -to
Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert Subdistrict (RFC -SG), subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must close all access points along S. Gilbert St. and will reduce the number of
access points along Highland Ave. to one.
2. The applicant must dedicate additional right-of-way to the City along Gilbert St. based on the
dimensions shown in Attachment 5 of the staff report.
Hensch began by acknowledging the applicant for holding a good neighbor meeting.
Hensch shared his surprise that the average daily vehicle count for that road was only in the
15,000 range, he drives that road daily and it sure seems like a higher number than that. He
asked if there would be any access points along 3rd Street. Lile stated the applicant is allowed
three access points and staff has made a condition to allow one on Highland Avenue and none
on South Gilbert Street so that will allow the applicant to have two access points on 3rd Street.
Hensch observed a lot of impervious surface on this site so in the redevelopment he hopes there
will be an increase in pervious area and be able to decrease the stormwater management
issues.
Martin asked if the additional parking was a requirement of the City or just something the
applicant wants to do. Lile stated it is just what the applicant is proposing, they currently meet
the minimum parking requirements for Riverfront Crossings.
Baker asked after this goes to Council it will then go to the Board of Adjustment and they will
have the final say in the elevations and how this building fronts on Gilbert Street. Will the
building actually front on Gilbert Street or front to the parking in the back. Lile said it will be
pedestrian oriented and front on Gilbert Street, it will be comparable to the Kum & Go on
Muscatine Avenue and 1St Avenue and the one on Riverside Drive and Benton Street. Baker
said that is then a fake fagade of a front with a door to get into the store. Lile confirmed that is
the proposed plan.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 8 of 31
Nicole Neal West (3405 SE Crossroads Drive, Grimes, IA) is from Civil Design Advantage
representing Kum & Go and came forward to answer any questions.
Martin asked why they need the additional parking.
Siobhan Harman (1459 Grand Ave., Des Moines, IA) is the site development manager for Kum &
Go and stated with the volume they have in the larger square footage stores, this one will be
5600 square feet, they need additional parking with customers coming and going. They have
made a big push to move to the inside of the store, they are pushing more fresh food, made-to-
order food, sandwiches, fresh pizza, fruits and vegetables. There is just more volume in these
new stores with food sales.
Martin asked if in Iowa City those parking spaces will get utilized on a regular basis. Harman
confirmed they do get utilized.
Dyer asked if there would be a pedestrian entrance on Gilbert Street. Neal West replied there
would be a pedestrian access off of Gilbert Street. Dyer said that would be different from the
stores on Benton Street and on 1St Avenue where there are blank walls. Neal West confirmed it
would be different from those stores.
Baker feels this is a wonderful project except for one thing, he filed a complaint against their
store at 1 st Avenue and Muscatine because of noise, the electronic music coming out of the
canopies. He asked if that was a standard Kum & Go practice. Neal West confirmed it is. Baker
asked what the advantage to that is in marketing. Harman said it is to keep the customers happy
and upbeat when out at the pumps. Harman did add when there have been complaints about
the noise in neighborhoods they respond to those requests. Baker believes it is one of the worst
abuses of commerce to impose noise on the public. He will vote in favor of this application but
hopes somewhere down the line someone rethinks that policy.
Paul Esker is a student who wanted to echo what Baker said as he lives across the street from
the Kum & Go at Benton Street and Riverside Drive. Additionally he doesn't feel the parking is
fully utilized either, there are a lot of empty spots.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Signs moved to recommends approval of REZ19-11, a proposal to rezone approximately
1.15 acres of property located at 1310 S. Gilbert St. and 348 Highland Ave. from Intensive
Commercial (CI -to Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert Subdistrict (RFC -SG), subject to
the following conditions:
3. The applicant must close all access points along S. Gilbert St. and will reduce the
number of access points along Highland Ave. to one.
4. The applicant must dedicate additional right-of-way to the City along Gilbert St.
based on the dimensions shown in Attachment 5 of the staff report.
Parsons second the motion.
Hensch is in favor of this application and is happy to see the start of improvements to the east
side of Gilbert Street. He acknowledged it is a difficult area because of the traffic and by closing
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 7, 2019
Page 9 of 31
off the access from Gilbert Street his concerns are largely resolved
Parson agreed it will be a huge improvement.
Signs agreed as well that it is nice to see improvements like this on Gilbert Street. He also noted
he goes to the Kum & Go on Riverside Drive and Benton Street a lot and their parking lot is
pretty full most of the times he is there.
Martin is excited about the improved walkability of this area, she loves the Riverfront Crossings
overlay, she is still hesitant on the need for additional parking for that particular business
because as Hensch mentioned impervious surfaces and that is something to think about. She
wants everyone to think about the big picture and that they are moving forward thoughtfully.
Noise, pollution, light pollution are a very big deal and the business owners need to take that to
heart as there is more and more residential in that area and need to be thoughtful of that moving
forward.
Baker asked when this goes before the Board of Adjustment do they have the right to impose a
condition of approval to prohibit the use of exterior amplified music. Russett does not believe so,
the Board of Adjustment is tasked with reviewing the proposed project based on the criteria that
are in the Code. Hekteon would like to review the specific criteria before commenting and can let
Baker know.
Signs wondered if Kum & Go has experienced with permeable pavement. Hensch agreed and
hoped as Kum & Go design this site they are mindful to create as much pervious surface as
possible.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CASE NO. REZ19-12:
Applicant: Pugh Hagan Prahm PLC
Location: Lehman Avenue and Soccer Park Road
An application submitted by Pugh Hagan Prahm PLC for a rezoning from Interim Development -
Multi -Family (ID -RM) and Rural Residential (RR -1) to Low Density Multi- Family (RM -12) for
approximately 42.01 acres of land located south of Lehman Avenue and east of Soccer Park
Road.
Russet began the staff report showing the project site, it is located south of Lehman Avenue and
east of Soccer Park Road. It's surrounded by Interim Development zones and the Sycamore
Greenway to the east. In 1994 this area was voluntary annexed as part of 422 -acre Sycamore
Farms annexation, and upon annexation the majority area was rezone to ID -RM and a small
portion around three and a half acres was rezone to RR -1 with the conservation easement. In
2015, the landowners submitted a rezoning application to RM -20, which is a medium density
multifamily zone and the Commission and the City Council voted to deny the application. The
property owners sued the City and the courts ruled that the owners were not entitled to any
particular zoning classification. The applicants have submitted a rezoning application now to RM -
12 which allows for high density single family and low-density multifamily development. The zone
is intended to provide a diverse variety of housing options such as detached and attached single
STAFF PRESENTATION TO FOLLOW:
1 r I
C04;qui h
CITY OF lOVVA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa S2240-1826
(319) 356-5000
(3I9) 356-5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
Item 10.e.: Rezoning S. Gilbert Street and
Highland Avenue
REZ19-11
An ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 1.15 acres of land
located at the northeast corner of South Gilbert Street and Highland
Avenue, from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone to Riverfront Crossings -
South Gilbert Subdistrict (RFC -SG) zone. (Second Consideration -
applicant has requested expedited action)
Parking Requirements
Quick Vehicle Servicing
Sales -Oriented Retail
RFC—South Gilbert District
1 stacking space/pump None
1 space/300 sq
area
ft of floor 15% of required spaces
(4 min)
1 space/500 sq. ft. of floor
area
• On -street parking can
count toward total
• Buildings less than 1,200
sq. ft. are exempt
1 space/1,500 sq. ft. of floor
area (4 min)
*Submitted concept plans show between 6,696-6,796 sq. ft., 6 pump stations
With RFC Zoning-approx. 14 vehicle spaces and 5 bike spaces required
Without RFC Zoning- approx 29 vehicle spaces and 4 bike spaces required
STAFF PRESENTATION CONCLUDED
� r
rrM as � h
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Strect
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(3 19) 356-5000
(3 19) 356-5009 FAX
www. icgov. o rg
Prepared by: Jest Ule, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-3565230 (REZ19-11)
Ordinance No. 19-4814
An ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 1.15 acres of
land located at the northeast corner of S. Gilbert Street and
Highland Avenue, from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Riverfront
Crossings — South Gilbert (RFC -SG). (REZ19-11)
Whereas, the applicant, Kum & Go, LLC, has requested a rezoning of property located at the northeast
corner of S. Gilbert Street and Highland Avenue, from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Riverfront Crossings -
South Gilbert (RFC -SG); and
Whereas, the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan has designated this area for Riverfront Crossings -
South Gilbert subdistrict; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed rezoning and determined
that it complies with the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan provided that it meets conditions regarding closing
access points along S. Gilbert Street and reducing the number of access points along Highland Avenue to
one, as well as the dedication of additional right-of-way; and
Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2019) 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, areas of public need will be met by the acceptance of this ordinance, including traffic
calming, vehicle safety, and creating a more pedestrian friendly environment; and
Whereas, the owners and applicant have 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 reclassified from its current zoning designation to Riverfront
Crossings - South Gilbert (RFC -SG)
The west 115 feet of out lot 1 in cook, Sargent and Downey's addition to Iowa city, Iowa,
according to the plat thereof recorded in book 16, page 84, deed records of Johnson county,
Iowa, excepting therefrom the south 30 feet thereof and further excepting the following tract:
beginning at the northwest corner of said out lot 1, thence east 5 feet along the south line of
third street; thence south parallel to the west line of said out lot 1, 115.38 feet; thencesoutherly
in a straight line to a point 13 feet east of the west line of said out lot 1 and 16 feet north of the
north line of Highland avenue; thence southeasterly on a straight line between said point and a
point on the north line of highland drive 25 feet east of the west line of out lot 1 to a point 6.59
feet northwesterly along said line from the point on the north line of highland avenue 25 feet
easterly from the west line of out lot 1; thence southeasterly 28.96 feet in a straight line to a
point on the north line of highland avenue 49.29 feet east of the west line of out lot 1; thence
west 49.29 feet along the north line of Highland avenue; thence north 182 feet along the west
line of out lot 1 to the point of beginning.
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.
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.
I o,e
Ordinance No. 19-4914
Page 2
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 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, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 17 thday of December 2014
Mao&
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved by
City Attorneys Office
Ordinance No. 19-4814
Page 3
It was moved by Mims and seconded by Thomas that the
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS:
ABSENT:
Cole
Mims
Salih
Taylor
Teague
Thomas
Throgmorton
First Consideration 12/03/2019
Voteforpassage: AYES: Mims, Salih, Taylor, Teague, Thomas,
Throgmorton, Cole. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration _
Vote for passage:
Date published 12/26/2019
Moved by Mims, seconded by Taylor, 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. Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Throgmorton, Cole, Mims1,,,Salih.
NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Prepared by: Jesi Lile, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5230 (REZ19-11)
Conditional Zoning Agreement
This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter "City"), and Kum & Go, LLC, McDonough Structures Inc., Kam Properties, LLC, and
GKLZ, LLC (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Owners"), and Kum & Go, LLC (hereinafter
"Applicant").
Whereas, Owners are the collective legal title holders of approximately 1.15 acres of
property located at the northeast corner of S. Gilbert Street and Highland Avenue.
Whereas, the Owners and applicant have requested a rezoning of said property from
Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Riverfront Crossings — South Gilbert (RFC -SG); and
Whereas, this rezoning creates public needs related to vehicle and pedestrian safety
and improvements of S. Gilbert Street; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with reasonable
conditions regarding satisfaction of these public needs through the provision of additional right-
of-way on S. Gilbert Street, access closures along S. Gilbert Street and the limitation of one
access point on Highland Ave. the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
and
Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2019) 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 Owners and Applicant agree 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. Kum & Go, LLC, McDonough Structures Inc., Kam Properties, LLC, and GKLZ, LLC are
the collective legal title holders of the property legally described as:
The west 115 feet of out lot 1 in cook, Sargent and Downey's addition to Iowa city, Iowa,
according to the plat thereof recorded in book 16, page 84, deed records of Johnson
county, Iowa, excepting therefrom the south 30 feet thereof and further excepting the
following tract: beginning at the northwest corner of said out lot 1, thence east 5 feet
along the south line of third street; thence south parallel to the west line of said out lot 1,
115.38 feet; thence southerly in a straight line to a point 13 feet east of the west line of
said out lot 1 and 16 feet north of the north line of Highland avenue; thence
southeasterly on a straight line between said point and a point on the north line of
highland drive 25 feet east of the west line of out lot 1 to a point 6.59 feet northwesterly
along said line from the point on the north line of highland avenue 25 feet easterly from
the west line of out lot 1; thence southeasterly 28.96 feet in a straight line to a point on
the north line of highland avenue 49.29 feet east of the west line of out lot 1; thence west
49.29 feet along the north line of Highland avenue; thence north 182 feet along the west
line of out lot 1 to the point of beginning.
2. The Owners and Applicant acknowledge that the City wishes to ensure conformance to
the principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan.
Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2019) 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, Owners and Applicant agree
that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the
Zoning Code, as well as the following conditions:
a. Upon redevelopment, there shall be no vehicular access to South Gilbert Street
and only one vehicular access point to Highland Avenue, the exact location of
which will be determined at the time of site plan review.
b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owners shall dedicate to the City, with no
compensation to the Owners, right-of-way along S. Gilbert Street, Highland Ave,
and E. 3"' Street as generally shown on Exhibit A attached hereto, the exact area
of which will be determined upon review and approval of a site plan for any portion
of the above described property. The form of dedication shall be a warranty deed.
4. The Owners and Applicant, and City acknowledge that the conditions contained herein
are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2019), and
that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning
change.
5. The Owners and Applicant and City acknowledge that in the event the subject property
is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the
terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement.
6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be
a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force
and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the
City of Iowa City.
The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind
all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties.
7. The Owners and Applicant acknowledge that nothing in this Conditional Zoning
Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owners or Applicant from complying with all
other applicable local, state, and federal regulations.
8. The parties agree that 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 Applicant's expense.
Dated this 17thday of December '2019.
City of Iowa City
Kum & Go, LLC
JIM Throgmorton, Mayor By:
Attest:
McDonough truc ures Inc
i
Kellfe Fruehling, Cly
Clerk By:
Kam
GKLZ,
0
Approved by:
�- U ->z,
City Attorney's Office
Dated this day of , 20_.
City of Iowa City
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor
Attest:
McDonough Structures Inc
Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk By:
Kam Properties, LLC
By:
GKLZ, LLC
M
Approved by:
City Attorney's Office
Dated this day of 20_.
City of Iowa City
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor
Attest:
Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk
Approved by:
City Attorney's Office
Kum & Go, LLC
0
McDonough Structures Inc
sftTPkA11'-
By:
Kam Properties, LLC
In
GKLZ, LLC
:m
Dated this day of , 20_
City of Iowa City
Kum & Go, LLC
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor By:
Attest:
McDonough Structures Inc
Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk By:
Kam Properties, LLC
By:
GKLZ, LLC
By:
Approved by:
City Attorney's Office
Dated this day of , 20_
City of Iowa City
Kum & Go, LLC
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor By:
Attest:
Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk
Approved by:
City Attorney's Office
McDonough Structures Inc
-32
Kam Properties, LLC
0
City Of Iowa City Acknowledgement:
State of Iowa )
) ss:
Johnson County )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on / / / 1 >�� '6er , 201 by Jim
Throgmorton and Kellie Fruehling as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City.
a
Notary Public in and for tate of Iowa
(Stamp or Seal)
Title (and Rank)
w9m
LNEYr 806232cpires
4
Kum & Go, LLC Acknowledgement:
State of 1 o � A
County of r...
This record was acknowledged before me on N o,J t.z , 2019 by
t'2�a��ri Aroon�wssc� (Name(s)ofindividual(s)as -ad~-. r.T2 D���•-"•'• `�"
(type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of Kum & Go, LLC. A�A,• -C rt'
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
(Stamp or Seal) - ROBERT R FIEBIC 111
" Cam MM JkW hm 803913
My Cam wion Expirn
Title (and Rank) Aril 14, 2720
My commission expires: '1 I t J. I to
McDonough Structures Inc. Acknowledgement
State of fwci
County o�
This record was acknowledged before me on /Viy. as 2019 by
(Name(s) of individual(s) as fres "�.r9
(type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of McDon h Structur In
otary Public in and for o owa
4Pa�c a SHAVM R CC LEY
(Stamp or Seal) o commission Nuft:79,
+My Commission Expims
Title (and Rank) '°""
My commission expires: /a-6 1
Kam Properties, LLC Acknowledgement:
State of —L& -
County of A 0 rt1
This record was acknowledged before me on ( ZZ 1 ( '�( , 2019 by R N h 2-
_� 1GiS-rinje I lEo w) &eA� (Name(s) of individ al(s) s AYeti � t t,1
(type of authority, such as officer or trustee) of Kam Properties, LLC.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
Has NOELLE IN PARSONS (Stamp or Seal)
My Com*" EWns
rovm
February y 2020 Title (and Rank)
My commission expires: 20
GKLZ, LLC Acknowledgement:
State of rowA
County of SOANsoN
This record was acknowledged before me on November 25 2019 by
Lisa 2iniel and Greg Kat tenheuser (Name(s) of individual(s) as
Members (type of auMQ:iA
ch asOfficer or trustee) of GKLZ, LLC.
j
Notary Public -in an -for the State of Iowa
(Stamp or Seal)
EM]
ft�CDGLLSTitle (and Rank)
rr,ber 727030n Expires� I-�Zl.�nZ7My commission expires: L ,- `L✓ (—
00 Z4
Q 001'5
1/ iiii.eiiiiii�
11
00 li
Kellie Fruehling
From:
Anne Russett
Sent:
Tuesday, November 12, 2019 8:41 AM
To:
Kellie Fruehling
Cc:
Jessica Lile
Subject:
FW: Kum & Go Rezoning Next Steps
Kellie — The applicant for a rezoning on S. Gilbert Street has requested that the 2nd and 3rd readings be consolidated. I
told them that'd we make a note of this. Jesi will be putting this into Novus today. We will be requesting that Council set a
public hearing for 12/3.
Jesi — Please put this in the file.
From: Keith Weggen <KeithW@cda-eng.com>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 4:40 PM
To: Anne Russett <Anne-Russett@iowa-city.org>
Cc: 'scott@mcdounoughStructures.com'<scott@mcdounoughStructures.com>;'gkaltenheuser@gmail.com'
<gkaltenheuser@gmail.com>; Jessica Lile <Jessica-tile@iowa-city.org>; Britni Andreassen
<Britni.Andreassen@kumandgo.com>
Subject: RE: Kum & Go Rezoning Next Steps
I
r
RISK
Anne,
We'd like to request that the 2"d and 3rd Rezoning readings be collapsed. Do you need us to do anything specific in
regards to this request?
Keith Weggen, ASLA I project manager
CIVIL DESIGN ADVANTAGE LLC
3405 SE Crossroads Drive, Suite G Grimes, IA 50111
o 515.369.4400 f 515.369.4410 c 515.313.5445
KeithW(@_CDA-eng.com www.CDA-eng.com
rA Please consider the environment before printing this email.
This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
This communication may contain information which is proprietary, privileged or confidential.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and
delete all copies of the message.
From: Keith Weggen
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 3:43 PM
To: Anne Russett <Anne-Russett@iowa-city.org>; Britni Andreassen<Britni.Andreassen@kumandeo.com>
Cc:'scott@mcdounoughStructures.com'<scott@mcdounoughStructures.com>; 'gkaltenheuser@gmail.com'
<gkaltenheuser@gmail.co >; Jessica Lile <Jessica-tile@iowa-citv.org>
Subject: RE: Kum & Go Rezoning Next Steps
Got it —thanks for the update!
Keith Weggen, ASLA I project manager
CIVIL DESIGN DVANTAGE LLC
3405 SE Crossroads Drive, Suite G Grimes, IA 50111
o 515.369.4400 f 515.369.4410 c 515.313.5445
KeithWP_CDA-eng.com www.CDA-eng.com
FA Please consider the environment before printing this email.
This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
This communication may contain information which is proprietary, privileged or confidential.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and
delete all copies of the message.
From: Anne Russett [mailto:Anne-Russett@iowa-citv.org]
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 12:19 PM
To: Keith Weggen <KeithW@cda-eng.com>; Britni Andreassen<Britni.Andreassen@kumandeo.com>
Cc:'scott@mcdounough5tructures.com'<scott@mcdounoughStructures.com>; 'gkaltenheuser@gmail.com'
<gkaltenheuser@gmail.com>; Jessica Lile <Jessica-Lite@iowa-city.org>
Subject: Kum & Go Rezoning Next Steps
Hi, Keith —
Last night the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the proposed rezoning on S. Gilbert Street
near Highland Avenue. Here is the tentative agenda moving forward:
- 11/19 — Staff will request that the City Council set a public hearing for 12/3
- 12/3 — Public hearing and 1 st reading
- 12/17 — 2nd reading
- 1/7 — 3rd reading
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks, Anne
CITY OF IOWA CITY Anne Russett, AICP
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Senior Planner
WWW.ICGOV.ORG P: 319-356-5251
410 E Washington St
0000 Iowa City, IA 52240
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.
Item Number: 10J.
�r
CITY OE IOWA CITY
www.iogov.org
December 17, 2019
Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City code related to single-
family site development standards. (ZCA19-04) (Pass & Adopt)
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
PZ Staff Report wAttachments
PZ Minutes
Additional Correspondence
Ordinance
CITY OF IOWA CITY
UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 17, 2019
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Amendment to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code Related to Single -Family Site
Development Standards (ZCA19-04)
Background
In 2018, the City amended its municipal code in response to State legislation that restricted the City
from enforcing any regulations that limited the occupancy of rental property based on familial
relationships. One of the code changes adopted in response to this legislation was a rental permit cap
that restricted rental permits to 30% in certain neighborhoods for single-family and duplexes. Earlier this
year, the State legislature passed another bill that prohibited cities from adopting rental permit caps.
Due to concerns related to the City's inability to regulate rental permit caps and the potential impacts to
preserving neighborhood stability, the City Council adopted a ten-month rental permit moratorium in
May 2019. The moratorium was adopted to give the City time to study and address how best to mitigate
the consequences of this legislation.
Table 1 outlines a timeline of the State bills and associated City code amendments.
TABLE 1. Timeline
April, 2017
State legislature passes a bill prohibiting cities from enforcing any
regulations that limits occupancy of rental property based on the existence
of familial relationships
April, 2018
City adopts neighborhood stabilization ordinance that made many changes
to the zoning code, including, but not limited to:
• Updated rear setback requirements to discourage inappropriate
expansions in certain zones
• Limited the number of bedrooms in attached single-family and
duplexes to 4
• Updated the private open space requirements
City moves to annual inspections for many rental properties and increases
nuisance and property maintenance enforcement.
City adopts an ordinance that capped rental permits at 30% in certain
neighborhoods for single-family and duplexes
April, 2019
State legislature passes a bill prohibiting cities from adopting or enforcing
rental permit caps
October 9, 2019
Page 2
May, 2019 City adopts a ten-month rental permit cap moratorium until March 7, 2020
on the issuance of new rental permits for single-family and duplex units in
areas that exceed the 30% rental cap
Ensuring that city neighborhoods include a variety of housing choices and options for all residents has
been a challenge, particularly in the core of the community, which is dominated by student housing.
With the changes in State law, which limit local control, the City is once again exploring options to
ensure City codes promote safe, healthy, and stable residential neighborhoods.
While adopting the moratorium back in May of 2019, the City Council articulated the following goals for
any new regulations:
1. Ensure single-family detached structures and duplexes provide healthy and safe living
environments for all occupants.
2. Maintain neighborhood characteristics and housing options suitable for attracting a diverse
demographic in the city's older single-family neighborhoods.
3. Prevent the overburdening of city infrastructure and operational resources.
Since the adoption of the moratorium, city staff has twice met with representatives of the Greater Iowa
City Landlord Association and the Iowa City Area Association of Realtors. Staff also met with
representatives of the Neighborhood Council and heard input from that group on the current state of
their respective neighborhoods.
Proposed Code Amendment
Without the ability to regulate occupancy or enforce rental permit caps, City staff spent the past few
months exploring other ways to address concerns related to neighborhood stabilization. Due to the
comprehensive nature of the April 2018 zoning code amendments and the additional resources for
nuisance and property maintenance enforcement, staff is only proposing one change to the zoning
code related to paving in front of single-family homes and duplexes.
The zoning code currently allows parking in front setback areas with certain restrictions. Table 2
outlines the current and proposed regulations.
TABLE 2. Current v. Proposed Regulations regarding Parking and Paving in the Front Setback Area for
Single-family and Duplex Uses
Current
Proposed
Parking spaces allowed in front setback area, as
Parking spaces allowed in front setback area, as
long as it leads directly to a parking space and at
long as it leads directly to a parking space and at
least 50% of the front setback area remains open
least 50% of the front setback area remains open
space.
space.
NEW: Additional paved areas shall be separated
by at least 9 feet of open space area from
conforming parking spaces or aisles.
October 9, 2019
Page 3
Currently, the code allows additional paving for patio and seating areas, basketball courts, grilling
areas, and other uses to be contiguous with conforming parking spaces within the front setback area.
The proposed code amendment would no longer allow additional paving to be contiguous with
conforming parking spaces. The 9 -foot separation distance between the parking spaces and the
additional paving will reduce the instances where the additional paved area is used as parking. Staff
selected 9 -feet for the separation distance — the minimum width of a parking space — to discourage
parking within the open space area.
Figure 1 is an example of additional paving installed by a property owner to provide tenants with a grill
and seating area. Instead, the space is used for parking. These are the types of improvements that
would no longer be permissible under the proposed text amendment.
FIGURE 1.
,,n�i
Y F�
Staff believes the additional restriction on front -yard paving will help address the second and third goals
that the City Council endorsed in May of 2019.
In addition to the zoning code amendment, staff will be proposing an amendment to Title 17, Chapter 5:
Housing Code to require all rental units to test for radon and mitigate, if necessary. This amendment
targets the first goal of the City Council and also dovetails with the City's ongoing healthy homes
initiative and protects renters from a known health hazard that is prevalent in our community.
Next Steps
Pending recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council will
hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment. The City Council will also consider the proposed
amendment to the Housing Code, which does not require Planning and Zoning Commission review.
October 9, 2019
Page 4
Pending adoption of the zoning and housing code amendments, the City Council will also consider
lifting the rental permit moratorium. Staff hopes that the City Council can remove the moratorium earlier
than expected, perhaps by January 1, 2020.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the following proposed text
amendment to 14 -2A -6C to restrict additional paving in the front setback area of single-family and
duplex uses.
Attachments:
1. Draft Text Amendment
Approved by: :�I)
Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
DRAFT Text Amendment
14-2A-6: SINGLE-FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
C. Garage, Driveway And Parking Location Standards:
1. For single-family uses and two-family uses, a required parking space may be located behind
another parking space on a regularly constructed aisle, provided the spaces are not stacked
more than two (2) spaces deep, counting the space within a garage. (See figure 2A.4
below.) Figure 2A.4 - Stacked Parking Spaces
2. Parking for single-family uses and two-family uses may be designed to allow cars to exit by
backing into a street, except if street access is restricted or alley access is required.
3. Parking is not permitted in the front principal dwelling setback, except in the following
situations:
a. For single-family uses, one of the required parking space(s) may be provided in the front
principal dwelling setback on a regularly constructed aisle that leads directly to a parking
space that is not located in the front principal dwelling setback, provided not less than fifty
percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area remains open space, free of
impervious surface. Additional paved areas shall be separated by at least 9 feet of open
space area, free of impervious surface from conforming parking spaces or aisles.
I
I
II
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
s�tbackl
2. Parking for single-family uses and two-family uses may be designed to allow cars to exit by
backing into a street, except if street access is restricted or alley access is required.
3. Parking is not permitted in the front principal dwelling setback, except in the following
situations:
a. For single-family uses, one of the required parking space(s) may be provided in the front
principal dwelling setback on a regularly constructed aisle that leads directly to a parking
space that is not located in the front principal dwelling setback, provided not less than fifty
percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area remains open space, free of
impervious surface. Additional paved areas shall be separated by at least 9 feet of open
space area, free of impervious surface from conforming parking spaces or aisles.
b. For two-family uses and group households, two (2) of the required parking spaces may be
provided in the front principal dwelling setback on a regularly constructed aisle that leads
directly to a parking space that is not located in the front principal dwelling setback,
provided not less than fifty percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area
remains open space, free of impervious surface. Additional paved areas shall be separated
by at least 9 feet of open space area, free of impervious surface from conforming parking
spaces or aisles.
c. For single-family uses, two-family uses, and group households, up to three (3) nonrequired
parking spaces may be provided in the front principal dwelling setback, provided any such
space is located on a regularly constructed aisle that leads directly to a parking space that
is not located in the front principal dwelling setback, and provided that not less than fifty
percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area remains open space, free of
buildings and impervious surfaces. (See figure 2A.5 of this section.) Additional paved areas
shall be separated by at least 9 feet of open space area, free of impervious surface from
conforming parking spaces or aisles.
Figure 2A.5 - Nonrequired Parking Within The Front Setback Area
4, r�5j r�lh
(Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005)
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 2of11
along the north side of American Legion Road. Due to an internal staff miscommunication this
condition was not included in the staff report, however this afternoon staff informed the applicant
that it intends to include the temporary construction easement as a condition of this rezoning.
Upon hearing this news, the applicant requested a deferral of the application to allow for
additional time to study the proposed temporary construction easement.
Parsons moved to defer ANN19-01 and REZ19-01 per the applicant's request. Townsend
seconded the motion.
Signs asked for staff to also be prepared to talk about the plans for American Legion Road at the
next meeting.
A vote was taken and the he motion passed 7-0.
CASE NO. ZCA19-04:
Discussion of Amendments to Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to single- family site
development standards.
Russett stated the background on this proposed amendment is the City wants to have
neighborhoods that provide a variety of housing choices and options for all residents and this can
be challenging in the core of the community which is dominated by student housing. So the
proposed text amendment is in response to a recent state legislation that limits local control of
city's zoning and regulations related to neighborhood stabilization efforts. Russett showed a
slide of the timeline of what has transpired over the past few years. In April 2017, the state
legislature passed a bill prohibiting cities from enforcing any regulations that limit occupancy of
rental property based on existence of familial status. In response to that legislation, in April 2018,
the City adopted a neighborhood stabilization ordinance that made many changes to the Zoning
Code. The changes included updating the rear setback requirements to discourage
inappropriate additions in backyards, limiting the number of bedrooms in attached single family
and duplexes to four and updating the private open space requirements for onsite open space.
The City also moved to annual inspections for rental properties and increased nuisance and
property maintenance enforcement. Lastly, the City adopted an ordinance that capped rental
permits at 30% in certain neighborhoods for single family and duplexes. Then in April 2019, the
state legislature passed a bill prohibiting cities from adopting or enforcing rental permit caps so
therefore in May 2019 in response to that state legislation the City adopted a 10 month rental
permit cap moratorium until March 2020 on the issuance of new rental permits for single family
and duplex units in areas that exceed that 30% rental cap.
Russett noted the City adopted this moratorium in May with the following goals of new
regulations in mind. One, to ensure single family detached structures and duplexes provide
healthy and safe living environments; two, maintain neighborhood characteristics and housing
options suitable for a diverse demographic in the City, particularly in older single family
neighborhoods; and three, prevent the overburdening of City infrastructure and operational
resources. Without the ability to regulate occupancy or enforce the rental permit cap staff has
spent the last few months exploring other options and other ways to address concerns related to
neighborhood stabilization. Due to the comprehensive nature of the 2018 Zoning Code
Amendments, as well as the additional resources that have been put forth for nuisance
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 3 of 11
abatement and property maintenance enforcement, staff is only proposing one change towards
Zoning Code at this time and it's related to single family site development standards and
specifically, front yard paving and front yard setback for single family homes and duplexes.
Russett showed a table with a summary of the current regulations and the proposed regulations.
Currently, parking spaces are allowed in the front setback area as long as it leads directly to a
parking space and at least 50% of the front setback area remains open space. Staff is proposing
to keep the regulation moving forward but add an additional requirement that states that any
additional paved areas must be separated by at least nine feet of open space from any of
conforming parking spaces or aisles. Russett showed a picture of an example of what the City
would like to avoid, a conforming parking space to the garage and the conforming space in front
of that garage with another space. This particular property owner requested some additional
paving to the left of that parking isle in that driveway for a grilling area, but they're using it for
parking and that's the type of improvements to avoid. Of course the City wants property owners
to be able to improve their site and to provide a patio and grilling areas and the like, but it
shouldn't be used for parking. Russett showed other slides of properties that are examples of
what they are trying to avoid. What staff is proposing some additional paving is allowed within
that front setback area but it must be separated by at least nine feet of impervious surface from
any of the conforming parking spaces. Additionally 50% of that front setbacks area must remain
as open space. City staff has done some outreach on this proposed amendment and meetings
have been held with the Greater Iowa City Landlord Association, the Iowa City Area Association
of Realtors as well as the Neighborhood Council and no major issues have been raised with the
proposed amendments.
Russett noted in terms of next steps after the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation this will go to City Council for a public hearing and consideration of the
amendment.
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed text amendment related to additional paving in
the front setback area of single family homes and duplexes.
Hensch stated he's always heard and presumed it's illegal to park in Iowa City in a front yard if
it's on grass. Russett confirmed that was correct. Hensch asked how the actual dimensions were
determined. He noted he does not like front parking at all and thinks it destroys the character of
the neighborhood. Russett said staff was proposing nine feet as open space area between the
conforming parking space and any in any additional paving based on current parking space
dimensions. Currently, the standard parking space is nine feet by 18 feet and what they want to
do is have it separation distance enough that discourages parking across the open space area
so they settled on nine feet.
Baker assumed anything that already exists, like the example in the staff report, is grandfathered
in and is not going to be affected. Russett confirmed that as long as it's a legal use and properly
permitted. However in the example in the staff report, the additional paving allowed in that
location was not permitted for parking so they cannot park there. Baker noted then the solution
staff is proposing looks like they are just adding a driveway that has access to the street.
Russett said it would be to the sidewalk so there would be no drive. Baker asked if somebody
just wanted to put in concrete in their front yard and extend it to the sidewalk, how wide could
that extension be. Russett stated the requirement is that no more than 50% of that front setback
area can be paved, 50% has to be open space, so as long as they met that requirement they
could add concrete to their front yard.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 4 of 11
Baker stated he is having a hard time seeing how this amendment is going to change behavior,
other than parking there's no other advantage to the homeowner adding a concrete slab in their
front yard. Russett stated the City stillswant to allow people to make those improvements if they
need a patio space, it just can't be adjacent to the driveway and people park on it.
Martin noted there's so much that's already done, and when looking at the timeline of what's
been going on with rental permits, how did the City come up with this solution as it doesn't
correlate. Russett acknowledged they struggled with thinking about additional amendments that
could be made to address the recent state legislation. The one thing they heard from the
enforcement staff is that they're seeing additional paving in the community like additional paving
adjacent to the driveway. While that is currently allowed, the paving can be there for a patio, it
cannot be used for parking. However it is being used for parking and it's hard for enforcement
staff to actually catch them in the act. It will be much easier for them to enforce this new
standard, which states that there needs to be a separation distance. If this amendment gets
adopted and someone paves right adjacent to their conforming drive aisle they automatically are
in violation of the Zoning Code. Enforcement staff doesn't need to keep following up and driving
past the property hoping they catch them in a violation.
Martin asked if there's been a rental house and now a single family is going to buy it and they've
got two kids that are teenagers and are also driving. In the beginning statement a diverse
demographic of people living in these neighborhoods was the reason for these change and that
includes families too. Normal families may need additional parking because a modern family
does not usually live on one car, parking then is an issue. Russett appreciated Martin's point
about larger families who do need more parking, but currently, even if it was a larger family, they
couldn't put additional parking next to their drive right now.
Baker feels this is still going to be an enforcement problem, people can say they are going to
build a patio space but then use it for parking. Russett stated it is the City's enforcement staff
who have to deal with these issues every day and with this amendment adding the additional
separation requirement, it would be easy for our enforcement staff to go out and see there's no
separation between the conforming drive and the additional paving, therefore it's a violation.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Mike Oliveira (330 North Gilbert Street) stated one of the things this regulation creates is a
problem for lots with the garage that sticks out in front of a house, as it appears on a typical Iowa
City house. They have had an additional drive added to the side of the drive to a single or two
garage to accommodate additional vehicles for the owner of the house or their teenage kids.
Oliveira shared some examples he printed out from very high end homes listed at over a million
dollars and worked his way down. This may be a knee jerk reaction to this situation where it
would hurt other people down the road and Oliveira being a potential developer of a lot of infill
lots sees this as a potential problem. He feels this amendment, the way it got worded needs
some work. Oliveira showed an example at 925 Meadowlark Drive, it's listed for $1,190,000 and
it's an example of a house with their garage and additional sidewalk. For another house he saw
listed it had a swimming pool or deck a violation, even though it was separated by a driveway by
a fence, but it did not appear to have a nine foot separation. Oliveira feels the City's requirement
of least 50% the front setback area must be open area accomplishes that purpose. The example
slides would be grandfathered as legal conforming developments, so he feels the only purpose
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 5 of 11
of this ordinance change is to affect future development or alterations to a house. He showed
more examples and reiterated the City needs to take more consideration on this
recommendation.
Martin noted that looking at the Meadowlark property, would that be a problem in the future.
Russett noted it would be helpful if Mr. Oliveira could point out on each of these examples what
he thinks is would be an issue. Oliveira said he did add a narrative underneath base on the
ordinance and what the problem is noting there are many different styles of houses in the
community.
Russett doesn't see any issues with the 925 Meadowlark Drive example. Oliveira pointed out it
would be the extension to the drive left of the garage, adding space there. If someone had a
house like that, and had five kids, teenagers, they would want an extra place to park their cars
and not tie up all the garages under that current ordinance, the way it's written one couldn't do
that. Russett stated they actually could, what he is showing here would still be allowed under the
proposed ordinance, it is a drive that is adjacent to a conforming parking space. There is a three
stall garage and therefore they could have three cars behind those conforming garages.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Parsons moved the Commission recommend approval of ZCA-1904, Amendments to Title
14, Zoning of the Iowa City Code related to single- family site development standards.
Signs seconded the motion.
Baker asked if a lot of these extensions are being built under these circumstances. Russett
replied she doesn't know the exact number, but it is has come up as an issue from the
enforcement staff. Baker noted if this ordinance is passed, the existing ones are still going to
have the same problem. Also if people are asking for patio spaces in their front yard, moving
that patio space to the center of the yard is the logical consequence of the ordinance. Russett
stated it would depend on the size of the lot and the location of the lot. This ordinance will
prohibit in the future someone using a new patio as an extension of the existing driveway. The
patio can be adjacent to the driveway, it just can't be in the front setback area.
Hensch confirmed this doesn't affect any existing structures unless it's currently being used
improperly. Additionally it doesn't take away anybody's ability to put an impervious surface in
their front area for fire pit, a picnic area, etc., as long as it isn't used as parking and 50% of the
area is still open. Russett confirmed that was correct. Hensch noted the key issue is to make
sure it's not a faint to create a parking space. If there is the nine foot separation, then it clearly is
not a parking space and has to be used for whatever other purpose it is. He noted he has
several friends who live on Johnson Street and it is just a cluster of cars in people's yards. It is a
big problem with them regarding the quality of life. This ordinance is not going to solve all the
problems because it doesn't address the issue of current structures that have the pavement
there, but at least it can stop it from spreading.
Baker asked for one small clarification. Under the current regulations if somebody wanted to add
a paved recreational area in the setback, they could do with no separation. With the new
ordinance they can still add a paved recreation area in the setback, they just need a nine foot
separation from any other pavement. Hensch confirmed a homeowner can do whatever they
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 17, 2019
Page 6 of 11
want with their property such as a picnic area in the front or a grilling area. He acknowledged
this may not solve a whole lot of problems, but it's at least a step.
Dyer stated the particular example in the staff report is in violation now. Russett confirmed the
use of it as parking is a violation of the Zoning Code. The concrete isn't a violation, but the way
they're using it is. So if an enforcer comes along and sees cars parked there they can issue a
citation.
Martin feels then the goal is to put more cars on the street, which she acknowledges is a
negative way to look at it but as a bicyclist and as someone who lives near downtown she would
want more cars off of the street. Regardless, she cannot understand how this verbiage can help
rental codes and make a difference in parking.
Russett clarified the proposed ordinance isn't changing how they currently allow and where they
allow parking.
Signs agreed he doesn't like concrete in front yards either and feels putting a nine foot grass
strip between it and some other concrete isn't going to stop any illegal parking. If there is an
enforcement issue now, there will still be an enforcement issue later.
Townsend asked if this would also apply to those that sell their cars and boats on their front
yards. Russett stated that is a whole other issue.
Hensch is not sure this will solve much of a problem because it doesn't do anything to fix existing
structures, but it does clarify things for the future. It doesn't limit the options with the homeowner
and it makes things easier to distinguish violations both for the homeowner and for the code
enforcement officer. Hensch added they need to minimize the amount of concrete overall
because of the whole storm water and the drainage issues. So even though he doesn't think this
will solve much he will vote in favor of this.
Dyer does see it as a problem if someone wants to put a sidewalk right next to the driveway as in
some of the illustrations that Mr. Oliveira brought forth. If someone added a garage and wanted
a sidewalk from the garage to go beside that towards the front of the house to the front door that
would seem to be a violation of this proposal and she doesn't see the problem with having a
sidewalk.
Russett agrees with that and stated they could clarify the Code language to state that it doesn't
apply to sidewalks, that additional paving wouldn't apply to sidewalks or any access to the to the
home.
Hensch asked if they should amend the motion or is that just a note staff will take to City Council.
Russett would like to discuss it further with staff.
Parsons moved to amend the motion to exclude add ons that are strictly for sidewalk use
and access to the dwelling and staff will work out the details.
Signs concurred and seconded the amendment to the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3 (Baker, Martin, Signs dissenting).
r4 �� Pvtold� k 0(WA-q,
911 S Van Buren St
Iowa City. IA 52240 • Single Family • Active
3 bedroom home listed for $190,000. These proposed changes would reduce the legal parking in this
driveway from two cars stacked to one car. The sidewalk to the front door is also a paved area not
separated by at least 9 feet from the drive aisle.
3922 Grindstone Dr.
Iowa Cfty. to 52240 • Single Family • Active
Listed for $333,900.
The garage extends in front of the front side of the house. Therefore, under the proposed new
ordinance 14-2A-6(Q3)(c) no parking spaces would be allowed in the aisle (driveway) leading to the
garage parking spaces. Further, the sidewalk that starts at the driveway (aisle) and extends to the left
around the two -car garage connecting to the front door is not separated by at least 9 feet from the
driveway (aisle).
3005 Parkview Ave
Iowa Cjiy. IA 52240 • Single Family • Active
Sa:.
�b��9,/y7� ' i+ .r 1-. `t1-. � Y ry � �ti� rY r,.• cr .4 • x.: `r t rPy � ri r` ' F ' �`- i -=3vs'
•�.Ywr•� �-t�< �T"�r �.�` 'b" ~ rrf i u• `"j yar i.• y •-,. J,f y.. �cw ai0 �Ar►
it • �..,r v :��, ik.7 ! y r... �i �. ! b�y�_ 1C � f a 2,
a�.a� ' �..�.{7'S'"-::.�'..�-.'_� r.. _. i'�.ii.' :� .-s:4• .c. -c _� sfi�'%` _-: L.:_�Y+ t�,• _' - ,
This 4 bedroom split level house is listed for $174,900. This proposed ordinance would make parking to
the left of the portion of the aisle that leads directly into the one car parking garage illegal for either
required or non -required parking stalls. However at least 50% of the front yard setback remains open
space. The walkway to the front door is also a paved area not separated by at least 9 feet from the
driveway.
2235 Russell Drive n
Iowa City. IA 52240 • single Family • AUive
Save
4 bedroom house listed for $197,000.
These proposed rules would make use of the driveway paved to the right of the aisle to the parking
garage for parking illegal, as well as making the walkway to the front door illegal. The addition of this
parking area is a typical solution for additional cars once teenagers reach driving age or in this case even
if the two adults both work, so that each can get out without blocking the other driver. For this property
clearly more than 50% of the front set back area remains open space.
3758 EEgin Dr
Iowa City, IA 52245 • Singte Fatuity • Pending
SavE
This 4 bedroom, 4 bath home is listed for $306,900.
The garage extends in front of the front side of the house. Therefore, under the proposed new
ordinance 14-2A-6(Q3)(a) and (c) no parking spaces would be allowed in the aisle (driveway) leading to
the garage parking spaces. Further, the sidewalk that starts at the driveway (aisle) and extends to the
right around the two -car garage connecting to the front door is not separated by at least 9 feet from the
driveway (aisle).
925 Meadowlark Dr
Iowa City. IA 132746 • `Migie Fa mly • Active
Listed for $1,190,000.
This would appear to violate the proposed new ordinance 14-2A-6(C)(3)(c) in that the garage appears to
extend in front of the front building face of the house. Thus, no parking spaces would be allowed in the
aisle (driveway) leading to the garage parking spaces. Further, the sidewalk that starts at the driveway
(aisle) and extends to the left around the garage and the sidewalk that extends from the driveway (aisle)
to the front door both are not separated by at least 9 feet from the driveway (aisle). It is quite possible
that a 6 -bedroom, 6 bath house, such as this, could be occupied by persons with more than 3 cars.
863 Kennedy Pkwy
Iowa City. IA 52244 • Single Family • Active
0
Save
This house is listed for $509,900.
The garage extends in front of the front side of the house. Therefore, under the proposed new
ordinance 14-2A-6(Q3)(c) no parking spaces would be allowed in the aisle (driveway) leading to the
garage parking spaces. Further, the sidewalk that starts at the driveway (aisle) and extends to the right
around the three -car garage connecting to the front door is not separated by at least 9 feet from the
driveway (aisle).
2918 Orchard View Ln Ne n
Iowa City, IA 52240 • Single Family - Pending
Pendlmg PRICE REDUCED
Listed for $899,900.
This would appear to violate the proposed new ordinance 14-2A-6(Q3)(c) in that the garage appears to
extend in front of the front building face of the house. Further, there is no space in the driveway that
would be directly behind the parking spaces in any of the garages given the orientation of these garages.
Thus, no parking spaces would be allowed in the aisle (driveway) leading to the garage parking spaces.
Further, the sidewalk that starts at the driveway (aisle) and extends to the left around the three -car
garage connecting to the front door and the paved area on the street side of the two car both are not
separated by at least 9 feet from the driveway (aisle).
Prepared by: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 (ZCA19-04)
ORDINANCE NO. t o-481 s
Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning of the Iowa City code related to
single-family site development standards (ZCA19-04)
Whereas, in April 2018, the City adopted a neighborhood stabilization ordinance
(Ordinance No. 18-4744) and an ordinance (Ordinance No. 17-4769) that capped rental
permits at 30% in certain neighborhoods for single-family and duplex uses; and
Whereas, in April 2019, the State legislature adopted a law (SF 447) that prohibited
municipalities from adopting or enforcing rental permit caps; and
Whereas, in May 2019, the City adopted a 10 -month rental permit cap moratorium
(Ordinance No. 19-4793) on the issuance of new rental permits for single-family and duplex
units in areas that exceed the 30% rental cap in order to allow time to explore how best to
mitigate the consequences of the State legislation; and
Whereas, the City explored alternative strategies to ensure older homes and duplexes
provide healthy and safe living environments for all occupants; maintain neighborhood
characteristics and housing options suitable for attracting a diverse demographic in our older
single-family neighborhoods; and prevent the over -burdening of city infrastructure and
operational resources; and
Whereas, the zoning code allows parking spaces within the front setback area as long as
it leads directly to a parking space and at least 50% of the front setback area remains open
space; and
Whereas, one alternative strategy identified for single-family homes and duplexes was to
require an unpaved separation between conforming parking spaces and additional paved
areas to ensure these additional paved areas are not used for parking;
Whereas, the proposed amendment to single-family residential zone site development
standards requires that any additional paved area (e.g. patio seating areas, basketball courts,
grilling areas) within the front setback area must be separated by at least 9 -feet from any
conforming parking spaces or aisles, with the exception of walkways that provide access to a
dwelling unit; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a meeting on October 17, 2019 and
recommended approval of the aforementioned zoning code amendment; and
Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance.
Now, therefore, be in ordinance by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that:
Section 1. Section 14 -2A -6C(3) "Single -Family Development Standards", "Garage,
Drieway and Parking Location Standards" of the Iowa City Code is hereby amended by
adding the following underlined language:
3. Parking is not permitted in the front principal dwelling setback, except in the following
situations:
Ordiffanee-Nd..19-4815
Page Z
a. For single-family uses, one of the required parking space(s) may be provided in the front
principal dwelling setback on a regularly constructed aisle that leads directly to a parkino
space that is not located in the front principal dwelling setback, provided not less than fifty
percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area remains open space, free of
impervious surface. With the exception of pedestrian paths that provide access to a dwelling
setback area and shall be separated from conforming parking spaces or aisles by at least 9
feet of open space area, free of impervious surface.
b. For two-family uses and group households, two (2) of the required parking spaces may be
provided in the front principal dwelling setback on a regularly constructed aisle that leads
directly to a parking space that is not located in the front principal dwelling setback, provided
not less than fifty percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area remains open
space, free of impervious surface. With the exception of pedestrian paths that provide access
c. For single-family uses, two-family uses, and group households, up to three (3) nonrequired
parking spaces may be provided in the front principal dwelling setback, provided any such
space is located on a regularly constructed aisle that leads directly to a parking space that
is not located in the front principal dwelling setback, and provided that not less than fifty
percent (50%) of the front principal dwelling setback area remains open space, free of
buildings and impervious surfaces. (See figure 2A.5 of this section.) With the exception of
Pedestrian paths that provide access to a dwelling unit additional paved areas may not
impervious surface.
Section II. 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 no adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval,
and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 17th day of December
Attest:
City Clerk
2019.
App ved by K A6,
nl( .;f Wiz"
City Attorney's Office
Ordinance No. 19-4815
Page 3
It was moved by Teague and seconded by Mims
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES:
NAYS: ABSENT:
_ x
Cole
x
Mims
x
Salih
x
Taylor
x
Teague
x
Thomas
Throgmorton
that the
First Consideration 11/19/2019
Vote for passage: AYES: Teague Teaor, Taylor, Thomas, Thro
y g gmorton, Cole,
Mims, Salih. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration 12/03/2019
Vote for passage: AYES: Thomas, Throgmorton, Cole, Mims, Salih,
Taylor, Teague. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Date published_ 12/26/2019
Item Number: 11.
AL CITY OF IOWA CITY
=�c�-
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
December 17, 2019
Ordinance amending Title 17, entitled "Building and Housing," Chapter 5,
entitled "Housing Code," to require radon testing and mitigation in single-
family and duplex rental units. (Pass & Adopt)
Prepared By: Tracy Hightshoe, NDS Director
Reviewed By: Geoff Fruin, City Manager
Fiscal Impact: No Impact
Recommendations: Staff: Approval
Commission: N/A
Attachments: Ordinance
Executive Summary:
In response to the state legislature prohibiting municipalities from adopting or enforcing any
regulation or restriction related to occupancy of residential rental property that is based on familial
or nonfamilial relationships, the City adopted multiple housing and zoning code changes to
mitigate the destabilizing effects of the legislation. One of the larger code changes was the
implementation of a rental permit cap for single family and duplex properties in university impacted
neighborhoods.
On April 23, 2019 the state legislature prohibited municipalities from enforcing or adopting rental
permit caps. Without the ability to regulate based on familial status or a rental cap in university
impacted neighborhoods, the City established a moratorium on single family and duplex rental
permits in university neighborhoods that had exceeded the 30% rental cap until March 7, 2020.
The moratorium provides an opportunity for the City to study alternate strategies to address three
Council goals: 1) Ensure single family detached structures and duplexes provide healthy and safe
living environments for all occupants; 2) Maintain neighborhood characteristics and housing
options suitable for attracting a diverse demographic in our older single-family neighborhoods; and
3) Prevent the overburdening of city infrastructure and operational resources.
Background /Analysis:
In response to the City's goal to ensure singe family detached structures and duplexes provide
healthy and safe living environments for all occupants, staff recommends the adoption of a radon
ordinance for all detached single family and duplex properties. There are approximately 2,700
single family and duplex properties in Iowa City.
Radon is the number #1 cause of lung cancer among non-smokers. It is a naturally occurring
radioactive gas produced from the decay of radium in the soil. It is odorless and tasteless.
Radon typically moves up through cracks and other openings in the foundation. The home then
traps the radon inside, where it can lead to increased levels of radon.
All 99 counties of I owa are in Zone 1, also known as the "red zone" for radon levels - meaning
people in these counties have the highest potential for radon in their homes. The average indoor
radon concentration in Iowa is more than six times the national average. In the Fall 2019 Blue
Cross Blue Shield newsletter, they estimate that 400 deaths per year in Iowa are caused by
radon -induced lung cancer, approximately the same number who die in traffic accidents each year.
When an owner -occupied home is listed for sale, it is a common requirement to have the home
tested for radon. If that test equals or exceeds the 4 pCi/L level, the purchase is often contingent
upon the installation of a radon mitigation system. We see this requirement far less often in the
sale of rental properties.
I n order to address the health and safety of occupants, staff recommends that prior to issuance or
renewal of a rental permit for single family detached and duplex structures, that the unit must be
tested for radon. If the unit tests above the 4 pCi/L level, a radon mitigation system must be
installed and tested to ensure radon levels remain below this threshold. The radon mitigation
system, if required, must be maintained for continued rental permit renewals. For single family,
duplex and townhomes built after August 28, 2002, the code requires the installation of a passive
radon system at the time of new construction. This makes it less expensive for the owner to install
a full mechanical radon abatement system if the home tests high for radon.
Staff is recommending that the owner must test every eight years to verify compliance as radon
levels may fluctuate over time, especially if a new HVAC system is installed or significant
rehabilitation has taken place.
Staff will be present at the November 19 work session to discuss any questions.
EPA.gov/radon and Iowa Department of Transportation
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Ordinance
Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030
ORDINANCE NO. 19-4816
Ordinance amending Title 17, entitled "Building and Housing," Chapter
5, entitled "Housing Code," to require radon testing and mitigation in
single-family and duplex rental units.
Whereas, in December 2017, the City adopted an ordinance (Ordinance No. 17-4769) that
capped rental permits at 30% in certain neighborhoods for single-family and duplex uses and in
April 2018, the City adopted a neighborhood stabilization ordinance (Ordinance No. 18-4744)
and;
Whereas, in April 2019, the State legislature adopted a law (SF 447) that prohibited
municipalities from adopting or enforcing rental permit caps; and
Whereas, in May 2019, the City adopted a 10 -month rental permit cap moratorium
(Ordinance No. 19-4793) on the issuance of new rental permits for single-family and duplex
units in areas that exceed the 30% rental cap in order to allow time to explore how best to
mitigate the consequences of the State legislation; and
Whereas, the City explored alternative strategies to ensure older homes and duplexes
provide healthy and safe living environments for all occupants; maintain neighborhood
characteristics and housing options suitable for attracting a diverse demographic in its older
single-family neighborhoods; and prevent the over -burdening of City infrastructure and
operational resources; and
Whereas, in response to the City's goal to ensure single-family and duplex rental units
provide healthy and safe living environments for all occupants, they should be tested for radon,
and if the test result is equal to or greater than 4 pCi/L, a radon mitigation system should be
installed; and
Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance.
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa:
Section I. Amendments.
1. Title 17, entitled "Building and Housing," Chapter 5, entitled "Housing Code," Section 18,
entitled, "Minimum Structure Standards for All Rental Housing," is amended by adding the
following underlined text as new Subsection T:
ordinance No. 19-4816
Page 2
5. If the unit has an existing radon mitigation system on July 1, 2020, the unit shall be
within 8 years of the date that the prior radon test was performed.
7. The owner shall provide a copy of all radon test results to the City.
2. Title 17, entitled 'Building and Housing," Chapter 5, entitled "Housing Code," Section 19,
entitled, 'Responsibilities of Owners Relating to the Maintenance and Occupancy of Premises,"
Subsection N, entitled "Supplied Facilities," is amended by adding the following underlined text:
1. Every facility, utility and piece of equipment required by this code, including a radon mitigation
system, and/or present in the unit and/or designated for the exclusive use of the occupants of said
unit, at the time that either the rental agreement is signed or possession is given, shall function
safely and shall be maintained in proper working condition. Maintenance of facilities, utilities and
equipment not required by this code shall be the owner's responsibility unless stated to the
contrary in the rental agreement.
2. No supplied facility, including a radon mitigation system, shall be removed, shut off or
disconnected from any occupied dwelling unit or rooming unit except for such temporary
interruption(s) as may be necessary while actual repairs, replacements or alterations are being
made.
Section II. 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 in effect after its final passage, approval
and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 17th day of December 2019.
L,
Ma or
Attest c -
City Clerk
City Attorney's Office
Ordinance No. 19-4816
Page 3
It was moved by Salih and seconded by Mims
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS
ABSENT:
Cole
Mims
Salih
Taylor
Teague
Thomas
Throgmorton
that the
First Consideration 11/19/2019
Voteforpassage: AYES: Teague, Thomas, Throgmorton, Cole, Mims,
Salih, Taylor. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration 12/03/2019
Voteforpassage: AYES: Throgmorton, Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor,
Teague, Thomas. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Date published 12/26/2019
Kellie Fruehling
From: Chris cammd5 <cammd5@mchsi.com> Late Handouts Distributed
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 10:05 AM
To: Council
Cc: Geoff Fruin; apartmentassoc
Subject: GICAA letter - Radon Testing
Attachments: GICAA letter to Iowa City City Council - December 1(D"pdf
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of Iowa City City Council,
Please find attached correspondence from the Greater Iowa City Apartment Association concerning potential
radon testing of rental units in Iowa City. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Chris Villhauer
President
Greater Iowa City Apartment Association
apartnientassoc@gmail.com
https: //protect -us. mimecast. com/s/ nGhxCADrkEf6vn 7hGSLlF?domain=gicaa. org
This email is from an external source.
2019 - 2020 Board:
President —
Chris Villhauer
Vice -President —
Tony Vespa
Secretary —
Michelle Lamkins
Treasurer —
Kyle Vogel
David Kacena
Jim Houghton
Celeste Holloway
Greater Iowa City Area Apartment Association
P.O.Box 1765
Iowa City, IA 52244
www.gicaa.org
December 16, 2019
City of Iowa City
Attn: City Council
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear City Council Members,
We agree radon testing and necessary mitigation of high levels is important for
the health and safety of occupants of all housing, rental and owner occupied.
We disagree with the conclusion that only licensed radon measurement
specialists should be allowed to do the testing in Iowa City's 2700 single family
and duplex rentals. We believe that state code agrees with this position as
follows in Iowa Administrative Code 641 chapter 43, rule 43.8 in Exemptions:
"Certification requirements shall not apply to those persons who test for
radon/radon decay products in buildings that they own or who perform
radon tests for no compensation."
The state of Maine is the only state mandating radon testing for all rental units.
Maine allows landlords to conduct their own testing following explicit
guidelines. Landlords must use approved devices which are analyzed at a lab
rather than continuous radon monitors which require recalibration.
The state of Iowa and the EPA clearly prescribe protocols to be followed
regarding testing including what devices to use, how to place them, how to
record conditions and reporting results. Inexpensive kits are made available by
the Johnson County Department of Health.
The state requires that necessary mitigation be performed by a licensed
professional. The state requires that the person that does the testing for radon
must be different from the person that does the mitigation. Multiple tests may
be needed. Radon levels can fluctuate widely especially due to unforeseen
weather. A long term test may follow a short term test. Testing is recommended
to be done in the winter which narrows the window for accomplishing this
mandate. All of this adds to cost and scheduling complexity when using a third
person. The cost of testing by a licensed professional is significantly higher than
the cost of the kit.
There are 3 licensed testers in Iowa City, 2 in Coralville, 1 in North Liberty, 2
in Solon, and 2 in Kalona. Mitigation can be done by 3 of those plus 2 others in
the area. It will be difficult for these few testers to get through 2,700 units,
many which have rental permits expiring every year.
Better Landlording Through Education
2019 - 2020 Board:
President —
Chris Villhauer
Vice -President
Tony Vespa
Secretary —
Michelle Lamkins
Treasurer —
Kyle Vogel
David Kacena
Jim Houghton
Celeste Holloway
Greater Iowa City Area Apartment Association
P.O.Box 1765
Iowa City, IA 52244
www.gicaa.org
The EPA considers radon testing to be a simple procedure and wants to
encourage all homeowners to perform the test. The state code is in line with
this, accepting the testing of one's own property as valid. Appropriately, those
who charge for this service must be credentialed. Owners who test their own
property are expected to follow set guidelines, to report accurately, and to
mitigate as necessary.
Over legislating unnecessarily by requiring something beyond what the state
and the EPA require would appear to be profiling a group of people who
perform a needed community service. Landlords who feel unqualified could
certainly hire someone.
Members of the community ask for affordable housing but over the last few
years more and more fees and regulations have been added to rental housing in
Iowa City. We should adopt the principle that the goal is to reduce regulation
that adds to the cost of rental housing whenever possible and adjust policies
accordingly. If radon testing is mandated, please allow landlords who maintain
homes to assist in the task. Allowing owners and landlords to test their property
would accomplish the overall goal as expeditiously as possible.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Chris Villhauer
President
Greater Iowa City Apartment Association
apartmentassoce.gmail.com
www.gicaa.org
Better Landlording Through Education
Item Number: 12.
1 CITY OF IOWA CITY
��.:. -dry
in � at
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
December 17, 2019
Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 19-4793, a temporary moratorium on
new rental permits for single-family and duplex units. (First Consideration)
Prepared By: Susan Dulek, Ass't. City Attorney
Reviewed By: Geoff Fruin, City Manager
Fiscal Impact: none
Recommendations: Staff: Approval
Commission: N/A
Attachments: Ordinance
Executive Summary:
Following a law passed last spring prohibiting the City from having a rental permit cap, Council
passed an ordinance issuing a temporary moratorium on new rental permits for single-family and
duplex units in certain neighborhoods to allow staff time to explore alternative strategies to mitigate
the impact of rental housing on such areas as neighborhood stability and affordable housing. The
moratorium automatically sunsets on March 1, 2020, and with the passage of the ordinances on
radon testing and single-family site development standards, the moratorium should be repealed
prior to its sunset.
Background /Analysis:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
OrdinancE
Correspondence from Austin Wu and Charlotte Lenkaitis, UISG Council Liaisons
Correspondence from Nancy Carlson
Correspondence from Sara Barron, Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition
Correspondence from Maryann Dennis, Housing Fellowship
Deferred to 1/7/2020
Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030
ORDINANCE NO.
Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 19-4793, a temporary moratorium
on new rental permits for single-family and duplex units.
Whereas, Ordinance No. 194793 established a temporary moratorium on new rental
permits for single-family and duplex units in certain neighborhoods to allow staff time to study
options to enhance and stabilize neighborhoods in light of the passage of HF 134 that prohibited
the City from enforcing its rental permit cap;
Whereas, Ordinance No. 194793 will sunset on March 7, 2020;
Whereas, with the consideration of an ordinance to require radon testing and mitigation and
an ordinance related to single-family site development standards, Ordinance No. 19-4793
should be repealed prior to its sunset date; and
Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance.
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa:
Section I. Amendments.
1. Ordinance No. 19-4793, codified at Title 17, Chapter 15, is repealed.
Section II. 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 in effect after its final passage, approval
and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of 2019.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
7 =419. 1 ft -
City Attorney's Office
j2
Kellie Fruehling
From:
Wu, Austin <austin-wu@uiowa.edu>
Sent:
Wednesday, December 11, 2019 3:54 PM
To:
Council
Cc:
Lenkaitis, Charlotte E; Lakadat, Colin J
Subject:
UISG thoughts on the rental permit moratorium
Attachments:
UISG Rental Permit Moratorium Thoughts.pdf
Ai
RID
Hello there,
Attached are thoughts from UISG regarding the future of the rental permit moratorium. Not mentioned in the attached
document, but of particular note nonetheless is the role parking and making space for cars plays into housing costs —
both in space taken up by surface parking, but also in the expenses incurred with underground parking, especially with
new construction.
Thanks,
Austin Wu
(he/him/his)
B.A. Public Health I University of Iowa '20
City Liaison I UI Student Government
austin-wu@uiowa.edu
11 December 2019
Iowa City Council
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear City Council,
In August 2017, an article was published in The Atlantic' about the boom, and later bust, of luxury
student dorm construction in American colleges in the early 2010s. An architect on such projects
who was interviewed for the article was quoted as saying, "Students are more open to these new
[more affordable] living arrangements than we give them credit for... If you can get the cost down,
students will live in a closet."
I would reckon that the experiences of most student renters in Iowa City would be similar. More
often than not, students are not looking for luxury amenities such as granite countertops, floor -
to -ceiling windows, and exercise rooms. They are simply looking for somewhere clean, safe, and
affordable to sleep at night and make a home here, even only if temporarily. This desire for
modest, affordable arrangements is what draws many to houses near campus. If the goal of the
City is to reduce the number of short-term renters, especially students, living in single-family
houses in the University Impact Area, then credible alternatives to single-family houses must not
only become possible, but available in large enough numbers for a critical mass of renters to use.
Of particular note here are more modest housing options for one to two people that could be
built in core neighborhoods without substantially altering their character, or options that more
effectively use existing supply, such as accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in back alleys, basement
walk -out units, or reviving the single room occupancy units (SROs) of yesteryear'. The question
here would be to ask how the City could most effectively aid in the development of such new
housing or provide incentives to do so, short of the City acquiring land and doing it itself. To just
say 'promote' would be a weasel word at best; mechanisms would have to be identified to keep
the costs of construction down and to limit the transfers of those costs to prospective renters.
In a sense, some of the new 'luxury' student housing options currently on the market, such as RISE,
Hawks Ridge, or The Quarters, seeks to fill in the gap once occupied by SROs with individual leases
per room. However, the target demographic of such developments, as well as some of the
amenities offered, such as pools and arcades, negates any benefit in convenience that might be
gained from a prospective renter by placing such buildings outside of the price range for most
https://uisg.uiowa.edu/news/renters-guide-2019-2020/
' https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/02/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-american-sro/553946/
students. In the UISG 2019-2020 Renter's Guide', average monthly rent per person before utilities
was $620.10, a $63.80 increase from the year prior'. This is almost undoubtedly due to the
influence of new developments such as RISE, where average rent per person on the Guide was
$965 per person. On the 2019-2020 Renter's Guide, five landlords were above average rent; the
other nineteen were below average. Going forward, it might be prudent to more closely review
proposals for student housing brought forward to Council to see what kinds of amenities are
offered, how much square footage and parking per person is planned, and what average rents are
likely to be, in order to ensure that the question of housing for whom includes the majority of the
student body.
An option that has been floated around previously, and could be implemented relatively quickly,
would be the implementation of parking maximums within the Impact Area, especially regarding
on -street parking. A potential mechanism for doing so would be to mandate parking permits for
on -street parking in addition to off-street parking, and then to tether the issuance of permits to
leases, limiting the number of permits to let's say, three per parcel or unit. Such a scheme could
lower the impetus for over -occupancy and for students to bring their cars into the City, easing up
on parking and congestion concerns as well as reducing transportation emissions.
Also integral to long-term solutions is reigning in the influence of some of the largest landlords
within the Impact Area. It is them, not renters, that bear the most responsibility for poor upkeep
and neglecting properties to the point of irreversible decay. In the case of snow removal for
example, it is usually stated in leases that outdoor maintenance is the responsibility of the landlord
rather than the renter. Solutions to this issue lie in either stricter enforcement of existing leases,
or transferring responsibility of outdoor maintenance to renters, as part of neighborhood
stewardship by all residents.
In order to advance the City's climate goals — namely, increasing energy efficiency in residences,
increasing the use of transit, walking, and bicycling, and increasing compact and contiguous
development — new models of housing will have to be employed, including increasing density in
core neighborhoods. Renting students can be part of a vibrant, sustainable Iowa City community;
on the other hand, free on -street parking might be a separate matter.
Sincerely,
Austin Wu
UISG City Liaison
3 https://uisg.uiowa.edu/news/renters-guide-2019-2020/
4 https://uisg.uiowa.edu/news/2018-2019-renters-guide/
Charlotte Lenkaitis
UISG Deputy City Liaison
chapter 2, Base Zones of the zoning code deals with the establishment and intent of
Single Family Residential Zones. In that section the purpose of the RNS 12 zone is to "
stabilize certain existing residential neighborhoods by preserving the predominately
single-family residential character of these neighborhoods". Provisions were put in place
to prevent either conversions or redevelopment of single family uses to multi -family uses.
When the moratorium was adopted on May 2019 one of the goals expressed by the
City Council was "Maintain neighborhood characteristics and housing options suitable
for attracting a diverse demographic in the city' s older single family neighborhoods.
We believe the construction of 938 Jefferson exposes the existing housing code as
inadequate in keeping and achieving these goals.
What are the characteristics of a typical house, the proportion of bedrooms and
private bathrooms to collective living areas and unhabitable living spaces.
SUGGESTIONS
Maximum of 3 bedrooms in house, 3 bedrooms in duplexes
Decrease bedroom maximum % when we enacted the 35% rule I remember seeing
other cities that had lower percentages, 27% sticks in my mind.
If bedrooms have bathrooms accessible only from the bedroom, the square footage of
the bathroom should not be included in the bedroom sq. ft. requirement but should be
included as personal space in calculating the bedroom % requirement.
Base the maximum % on habitable space of house rather than finished floor space.
Habitable space only consisting of space used for living, cooking, eating.
Definition of habitable room- room or enclosed floor space having minimum of 70 sq.
ft. with not less than 7' in any direction used for living, sleeping , cooking, eating. not
included -bathrooms, pantries, laundries, foyers, community corridors, closets, storage
spaces, stairways, and basement rooms. I
Habitable space for 3 bedrooms q. ft. per bedroom. 4 or more bedrooms
increase sq. ft. to 125 -150 per bedroom.
Unhabitable space definition bathrooms pantries, laundries, foyers, community
corridors, closets, storage spaces, stairways and basement recreation rooms.
Establish a % of space allowed for this category.
A house with more than 4 bed rooms automatically triggers a review by a committee,
commis xl j p b } Tut included.
91 :i Eyd 1 J330 0 i' l
S , r`C e- V rn, � I
Kellie Fruehling
From: Sara@jcaffordablehousing.org
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 3:07 PM
To: Council; Geoff Fruin
Cc: John McKinstry; John Greve; Andrew Martin; Crissy Canganelli; Bronis Perteit; Heath
Brewer; Maryann Dennis; Ellen McCabe; June A. Juenger; Rafael Morataya; Paula and
Richard Vaughan; Mark Signs
Subject: Northside neighborhood, rental permit moratorium: Our thoughts
Attachments: JCAHC Memo re rental moratorium 20191212.pdf
Ar
RIK
Attached, please find a memo from the Affordable Housing Coalition for your consideration.
Thank you,
Sara
A.9,Lc'
JOHNSON COUNTY
Affordable Housing CoaWon
Sara Barron I she/her/hers
Executive Director
www.icaffordablehousine.orR
www.facebook.com/*caffordablehousing
*please note my new email address, sara@jcaffordablehousing.org
ANC,
JOHNSON COUNTY
Affordable Housing Coalition
12/12/2019
TO: City of Iowa City Council and Staff
Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition
308 E, Burlington Street, PMB 121
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
sa ra@jcaffordablehousing,org
www,facebook.com/jcaffordablehousing
FROM: Sara Barron, Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition
RE: Northside Iowa City and the Rental Permit Moratorium
As you know, the rental permit moratorium is currently set to expire at the end of March
2020. We understand that the Council is considering a vote to end the moratorium early.
We appreciate that staff and council have already invested a significant amount of time
and effort in addressing concerns about the long-term vibrancy, diversity, stability, and
housing opportunity of north Iowa City.
Recently, the Coalition was approached by a council member asking for our
consideration of another potential solution that can better address these goals.
Specifically, the Coalition considered an idea that would enact zoning changes in the
Northside neighborhood allowing multiple units (up to four) to be built on a single lot. In
exchange for this upzoning, some type of affordable rental and/or homeownership policy
would be instituted. Details of this policy would be established over the next few months
while the moratorium is in place.
Below, please find the Coalition's response to the possibilities posed by the suggested
solution.
• If enacted, zoning changes could provide a better variety of affordable rental
and/or homeownership opportunities in the Northside area, which is a desirable,
amenity -rich neighborhood where currently there are few affordable homes for
purchase and few rentals for single people, couples, or smaller households.
• The rezoning strategy proposed would employ incentives, rather than restrictions
and regulations, to stimulate a more diverse range of development and housing
opportunities.
• It may not be necessary to keep the moratorium in place in order to enact this type
of change. At the same time, it is reasonable to expect that applications for
additional rental properties will be processed as soon as the moratorium is lifted.
If zoning changes were to occur, they may lead to new, important considerations
for current owners and potential buyers in their decision-making process.
• The strategies that have been approved up to this point, including the moratorium,
have not fully explored the potential for stimulating more diverse housing
opportunities in the Northside in the same way that a rezoning discussion might.
• We welcome further discussion, whatever your decision on the moratorium,
regarding the economic and housing opportunities that could be produced by
offering conditional upzoning in the Northside neighborhood.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input for your consideration. We appreciate
your work, and we applaud your commitment to building an Iowa City where housing is
available, in neighborhoods throughout the community, for all Iowa City residents.
Kellie Fruehling
From: MaryAnn Dennis <mdennis@housingfellowship.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 3:27 PM
To: Sara@jcaffordablehousing.org; Council; Geoff Fruin
Cc: 'John McKinstry'; 'John Greve'; 'Andrew Martin'; 'Crissy Canganelli'; 'Bronis Perteit';
'Heath Brewer'; 'Ellen McCabe'; 'June A. Juenger'; 'Rafael Morataya'; 'Paula and Richard
Vaughan'; 'Mark Signs'
Subject: RE: Northside neighborhood, rental permit moratorium: Our thoughts
Maryann Dennis
From: sara@jcaffordablehousing.org [mailto:sara@jcaffordablehousing.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 3:07 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org; Geoff Fruin
Cc: John McKinstry; John Greve; Andrew Martin; Crissy Canganelli; Bronis Perteit; Heath Brewer; Maryann Dennis; Ellen
McCabe; June A. Juenger; Rafael Morataya; Paula and Richard Vaughan; Mark Signs
Subject: Northside neighborhood, rental permit moratorium: Our thoughts
Attached, please find a memo from the Affordable Housing Coalition for your consideration.
Thank you,
Sara
J0HN VM r -MINTY
Sara Barron I she/her/hers
Executive Director
www.ecaffordablehousing.ore
www.facebook.com/*caffordablehousing
*please note my new email address, sara@jcaffordablehousing.org
Kellie Fruehlin
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
ARID
That's a good memo!
Thanks
Andy
l2,
Andrew Martin <martinconstruction@live.com>
Friday, December 13, 2019 8:36 AM
sara@jcaffordablehousing.org; Council; Geoff Fruin
John McKinstry; John Greve; Crissy Canganelli; Bronis Perteit; Heath Brewer, Maryann
Dennis; Ellen McCabe; June A. Juenger; Rafael Morataya; Paula and Richard Vaughan;
Mark Signs
RE: Northside neighborhood, rental permit moratorium: Our thoughts
From: sara@jcaffordablehousing.org <sara@jcaffordablehousing.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 3:07 PM
Late Handouts Distributed
J 2—
(Date)
To: council@iowa-city.org; Geoff Fruin <Geoff-Fruin@iowa-city.org>
Cc: John McKinstry <Adisciple0040@msn.com>; John Greve <johnhgreve@aol.com>; Andrew Martin
<martinconstruction@live.com>; Crissy Canganelli <crissy@shelterhouseiowa.org>; Bronis Perteit
<bronis@dvipiowa.org>; Heath Brewer <heath@iowavaIleyhabitat.org>; Maryann Dennis
<mdennis@housingfellowship.com>; Ellen McCabe <emccabe@htfjc.org>; June A. Juenger <1Juenger@nxtbank.net>;
Rafael Morataya <rafael@cwjiowa.org>; Paula and Richard Vaughan <prvaughan@mchsi.com>; Mark Signs
<mark@bigguyhomes.com>
Subject: Northside neighborhood, rental permit moratorium: Our thoughts
Attached, please find a memo from the Affordable Housing Coalition for your consideration.
Thank you,
Sara
SAIL
AfNordab eso NrOoaLi4 on
Sara Barron I she/her/hers
Executive Director
www.ocaffordablehousing.org
www.facebook.com/mcaffordablehousing
*please note my new email address, sara@icaffordablehousina.org
)2—
Kellie Fruehling
From: Leslie Schwalm <ahardfight@gmail.com> Late Handouts Distributed
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 10:06 AM
To: Council
Subject: Northside Rental Permit Moratorium
(Date)
r
AI!K
Council members,
I am writing as a longtime Northside homeowner to ask that the current rental moratorium be kept in place until further
study can be made to find a way to alleviate the threat that unrestrained occupancy might bring to my
neighborhood. There is no need to rush this!
Leslie Schwalm
819 East Market St.
Iowa City, IA 52245
Kellie Fruehlina
From: Susan Futrell <sfutrell@mchsi.com> Late Handouts Distributed
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 10:28 PM
To: Council; Rockne Cole; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Pauline Taylor; Bruce Teague; John
Thomas; Jim Throgmorton I _ I � — I C1
Subject: neighborhoods and rental moratorium
(Date)
To the Iowa City City Council,
I urge you to vote no on early repeal of the moratorium on new rental permits in core neighborhoods. We in
the Northside neighborhood and other neighborhoods near downtown have worked very hard for several
decades to stabilize and maintain our neighborhoods of mixed rental and owner -occupied homes. The city has
supported these efforts in various ways, including the recognition of historic districts and the UniverCity
housing program.
We recognize that recent changes by the state legislature have made it more difficult to maintain appropriate
rental densities in these neighborhoods and place limits on actions that can be taken by the City. However, we
urge the city to take the full time allowed under the current moratorium to search for options to address high
rental occupancy, and to find additional ways to help stabilize and maintain these neighborhoods --all of which
are already well over the 30% rental levels that the old ordinance was meant to maintain.
It's impossible to travel anywhere near the central parts of Iowa City without seeing the great extent to which
new rental development is being actively supported by the City. Surely there are additional building and zoning
options available in neighborhoods already designated as historic districts which would keep those
neighborhoods from being steadily eroded, without unduly constraining the development and density plans for
the Riverfront Crossing area. Please ask the City staff to continue to look harder for options in the several
months still left while the moratorium currently in place.
Here are a few ideas. A walk around the northside neighborhood might suggest additional avenues for City staff
to explore.
— City -provided trash containers and all trash to be stored inside a garage or other structure or on a non -
street -facing side of the building.
— All rental properties with more than 3 occupants to be ineligible for city -subsidized trash pick up and must
provide containers and contract for regular trash removal from a private service.
—All rental properties with over 3 occupants required to provide lawn care and snow removal services for their
units and may not require tenants to maintain the property.
— Mailing addresses listed/delivered to rental units must not exceed the number of occupants on the lease.
— Over 3 Combined violations of trash removal, snow removal and noise ordinances within a 12 month period
= loss of rental permit.
— Consider changes to the building code to limit the number of bathrooms and kitchens that can be added to a
single structure/unit on a single house -sized lot. When a former single-family home or duplex is renovated or
razed and replaced with multiple rental units, each with one or more bathrooms and kitchens, the impact on
public infrastructure —sewer, water, trash disposal, etc --is significant in neighborhoods originally built for
single and duplex structures.
To allow all possible options to be explored, we strongly urge the city council to vote no on early repeal, and to
maintain the rental permit moratorium until the intended March expiration date.
Thank you,
Susan Futrell
Will Jennings (former member Iowa City Board of Adjustment)
311 Fairchild St.
This email is from an external source.
�1Z
Kellie Fruehling
From: Bruce Ayati <bruce.ayati@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 1:13 PM Late Handouts Distributed
To: Council
Subject: Rental Permit Moratorium Repeal
12—I—j-1�
Dear Members of the Iowa City City Council, (Date)
I am writing to urge the repeal of the rental permit moratorium during your December 19 session. As a
homeowner in the Northside, I am acutely aware of the impetus behind the rental permit
moratorium. Nonetheless, I believe it to be a regulation with too large and heavy a footprint.
Defensive tactics such as the rental moratorium can at best slow things down -- a historic home only needs to
be leveled once before it is leveled forever.
In the meantime, the inability to rent can result in homes remaining vacant. Homes are unable to maintain
themselves. They need proactive stewardship. This moratorium, at least in one case I know of, is prevent that
from happening.
Sincerely,
Bruce P. Ayati
Iowa City, IA
This email is from an external source.
BIZ
Kellie Fruehling
From: Susan Shullaw <smshullaw@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:47 PM
To: Rockne Cole; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Pauline Taylor; John Thomas; Jim
Throgmorton; Council; Bruce Teague
Subject: Dec. 17 Council Agenda item 12 / Repeal of rental cap
Late Handouts Distributed
I
RISH 12--)-7-1
To Members of the Council: (Date)
This is a follow-up to my email to Council on December 1, 2019. 1 understand Councilman Thomas has now
introduced three short-term housing policies that could advance the Council's goal of creating more diverse
demographics and housing choice in our core neighborhoods:
1. Prohibit de facto boarding houses in single-familv zones that fall approximately within the UniverCity
boundaries east and west of campus. Example: 938 E. Jefferson St. is being converted from a 1 -bedroom
residence into a 7-bedroom/7-bath boarding house. This type of use should not be permitted in single-family
zoned neighborhoods that Iowa City has identified as in need of a more diverse demographic. The zoning code
should define what constitutes a boarding house and prohibit it, or the code needs to be re -written to prevent
such use, e.g., controls on the use of interior space, off-street parking requirements, etc.
2. Preserve existing owner -occupied residences in the historic core neighborhoods. In trying to make living in
the core neighborhoods an easier housing choice, the city should adopt a program to incentivize/subsidize the
improvements that are often required to bring dwellings up to current housing standards when purchased for
owner -occupancy. These improvements include kitchen renovation, air conditioning, insulation and utility
upgrades, as well as other property improvements, such as building a garage, basic site development, etc.
3. Ensure rental properties do not pose a safety or public health risk, and are more marketable to a wider
demographic. Certain housing improvements could be required when a property owner applies for a rental
permit or when a rental property is sold, if such improvements are related to public health and safety. If a
property owner rents a dwelling to a low-income household, these improvements could qualify for a subsidy.
Each of these proposals requires discussion and investigation sufficient to warrant retention of the rental
housing cap until its original sunset date of March 1. 1 hope you will give these recommendations your full
consideration and, as a result, leave the rental cap in place to allow a fuller exploration of the issues.
With thanks,
Susan Shullaw
718 N. Johnson Street
Iowa City IA 52245
smshullaw(@Rmail.com
319-351-2606
J*12
Kellie Fruehlin
From: Jesse Singerman <jesse.singerman@mchsi.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 10:35 AM
To: Rockne Cole; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Pauline Taylor; Bruce Teague; John Thomas;
Jim Throgmorton; Council
Subject: keep the rental moratorium in place until March 1st to consider these excellent ideas
Late Handouts Distributed
RISK
12-1-7 iq
Hello City Council- (Date)
I am writing from the Northside to ask you to keep the rental moratorium in place until March 1st in order to fully examine
these excellent ideas from council member John Thomas, listed below.
All we are asking for is livable neighborhoods. Please help us maintain balance in the character of our
neighborhood with a reasonable mix of family home owners, rental properties and student
apartments.Each of you ran for office by promising to preserve and protect Iowa City neighborhoods and residents. Now
please act on those promises.
Thank you,
Jesse Singerman and Flora Cassiliano
219 Ronalds St.
Iowa City, IA
Advancing City Council's Goals of Ensuring a Diverse Demographic and Housing Choices in the Core Neighborhoods
Short-term Housing Policy
Prohibit de facto boarding houses in single-family zones that fall approximately within the UniverCity boundaries east and
west of campus.
938 E. Jefferson St. is being converted from a 1 -bedroom residence into a 7-bedroom/7-bath boarding house. This type of use
should not be permitted in single-family zoned neighborhoods that Iowa City has identified as in need of a more diverse
demographic. The zoning code should define what constitutes a boarding house and prohibit it, or the code needs to be re-
written to prevent such use, e.g., controls on the use of interior space, off-street parking requirements, etc.
Preserve existing owner -occupied residences in the historic core neighborhoods, In trying to make living in the core
neighborhoods an easier housing choice, the city should adopt a program to incentivize/subsidize the improvements that are
often required to bring dwellings up to current housing standards when purchased for owner -occupancy. These
improvements include kitchen renovation, air conditioning, insulation and utility upgrades, as well as other property
improvements, such as building a garage, basic site development, etc.
Ensure rental properties do not pose a safety or public health risk, and are more marketable to a wider demographic.
Certain housing improvements could be required when a property owner applies for a rental permit or when a rental property
is sold, if such improvements are related to public health and safety. If a property owner rents a dwelling to a low-income
household, these improvements could qualify for a subsidy.
Long-term Housing Policy
Consider how "missing middle" can be employed to provide in a balanced manner both rental and owner -occupied dwellings.
Large lots with alley access have the potential for "house -form" buildings with 2 to 4 units and pocket neighborhoods/cottage
courts, as well as accessory units (aka "backyard cottages"). A path needs to be identified to allow the supply of owner -
occupied dwellings to increase, in balance with new rental opportunities (e.g., 50% of dwellings shall be owner -occupied by
income -qualified households).
"Missing middle" zoning shall only allowed if it provides a public benefit, i.e., increasing the demographic/income diversity.
Consider how to incentivize development that meets the affordable housing needs of the student -aged demographic, located
outside those areas where the goal is greater demographic diversity (i.e., UniverCity zones). Such housing, such as rooming
houses and micro -unit apartments, could have less square feet per student, share bathrooms and/or kitchens, and provide
ample common areas. Accessory units are another potential housing type.
Other Policy Considerations
Address the everyday things that core neighborhood residents struggle with.
In addition to housing issues, we should draw attention to the things that core neighborhood residents struggle with every
day, undermining public safety and quality of life. They include:
• Traffic safety, especially for our most vulnerable residents
• Trash/recycling/compost containers/dumpsters highly visible from the public right-of-way
• Sidewalk snow removal
• Unavailability of street parking for those residents without off-street parking
These nagging issues need to be addressed for the core neighborhoods to fully realize their potential as walkable places. A
"walkability/livability analysis" conducted by city staff and residents should be scheduled for Spring 2020 to identify where
residents struggle, and potential remedies.