HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet 01.18.2023PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Wednesday, January 18, 2023
Formal Meeting – 6:00 PM
Emma Harvat Hall
Iowa City City Hall
410 E. Washington Street
Agenda:
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
Development Items
4. Case No. REZ22-0016
Location: Southern corner of N. Dodge St. and N. Scott Blvd.
An application for a rezoning of approximately 2.04 acres of land from Commercial Office
Zone (CO-1) to Community Commercial Zone with a Planned Development Overlay
(OPD/CC-2) and approximately 1.83 acres from CO-1 to Low Density Multi-Family
Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12).
5. Consideration of meeting minutes: January 4, 2022
6. Planning and Zoning Information
7. Adjournment
If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact
Anne Russett, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5251 or arussett@iowa-city.org. Early requests are
strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: February 1 / February 15 / March 1
Informal: Scheduled as needed.
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Item: REZ22-0016 Timber Valley Run
Prepared by: Parker Walsh, Associate Planner
Date: January 18, 2023
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
A Latte Buzzness
Mark Holtkamp
4611 Timberland Ct NE
Solon, IA 52333
markholtkamp@yahoo.com
Contact Person: Brian Boelk
Axiom Consultants, LLC
60 E. Court Street, Unit 3
Iowa City, IA 52240
bboelk@axiom-con.com
Owner: Greenstate Credit Union
Tim Reck
2355 Landon Rd
North Liberty, IA 52317
Requested Action: Rezone from Commercial Office Zone (CO-1)
to Community Commercial Zone with a
Planned Overlay Development (OPD/CC-2)
and Low-Density Multi-Family Residential
Zone with a Planned Overlay Development
(OPD/RM-12).
Purpose:
To construct a mixed-use development
consisting of a coffee shop, neighborhood
commercial, and residential
Location:
South corner of N. Dodge St and N. Scott
Blvd.
Location Map:
2
Size: 3.87 Acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant Land, Commercial Office Zone (CO-1)
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Rural Residential (RR-1), Low
Density Single-Family Residential
Zone with a Planned Development
Overlay (OPD/RS-5)
South: Low Density Single-Family
Residential Zone with a Planned
Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5)
East: Neighborhood Public Zone (P-1),
Research Development Park (RDP)
West: Neighborhood Public Zone (P-1)
Comprehensive Plan:
Public/Private Open Space
District Plan:
Northeast Planning District, but not included in
the Northeast District Future Land Use Map
Neighborhood Open Space District:
C8
Public Meeting Notification: Properties within 500’ of the subject property
received notification of the Planning and
Zoning Commission public meeting. A
rezoning sign was posted on the property on
December 20, 2022.
File Date: December 14, 2022
45 Day Limitation Period:
January 27, 2023
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Mark Holtkamp (A Latte Buzzness), has requested a rezoning from Commercial
Office Zone (CO-1) to Community Commercial Zone with a Planned Development Overlay
(OPD/CC-2) for approximately 2.04 acres and Low-Density Multi-Family Residential Zone with a
Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) for approximately 1.83 acres located south of N
Dodge St. and west of N Scott Blvd. The Preliminary Planned Development Overlay and Sensitive
Areas Development Plan is provided in Attachment 3. The proposed development would allow a
restaurant, a mixed-use building with 8 dwelling units, and 9 townhouses. The plan also shows
two drive-throughs, which would require special exceptions to be approved by the Board of
Adjustment. The applicant has conveyed to staff that the priority is to develop a coffee shop on the
site with an associated drive-through. The other drive-through proposed is for an ATM.
The subject property was previously rezoned in 2008 from Research Development Park (RDP) to
Commercial Office Zone (CO-1) with the plans to construct an office building and a bank. The
rezoning was approved with the following conditions:
a) Substantial compliance with the Concept Plan (Attachment 4) dated July 21, 2008,
attached and incorporated herein, with regard to the location of the building and parking
lot. Any substantial deviation from the Concept Plan regarding building and parking
placement shall require approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. All other
changes shall be approved by City Staff.
3
b) The vehicular access point shall be located as shown on the attached Concept Plan.
c) Owner shall install and maintain landscaping to the S2 Standard, as described in the Iowa
city code of Ordinances 14-5F-6, as amended, along the length of the Dodge Street
frontage.
d) The Dodge Street building elevations shall demonstrate appropriate articulation and
fenestration suitable for this important entranceway into Iowa City, which shall include the
use of a brick veneer with limestone base, sills, and banding to break up the façade and
windows on at least 30% of the façade.
Due to a new plan accompanying the proposed rezoning, staff has not included the previous
conditions as part of the rezoning. Condition “b” will be satisfied through approval of the
Preliminary OPD Plan, which is part of the rezoning (Attachment 3). Per 14-8D-7E any
substantive changes to the Preliminary OPD Plan, will require another rezoning and require
review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Additionally, the screening
condition will be satisfied through the current City Code requirements.
The subject property also contains sensitive areas and the Preliminary Sensitive Areas
Development Plan (Attachment 3) proposes removal of critical slopes in excess of what is allowed
per 14-5I-8E-4. Therefore, a Level II Sensitive Areas Review is required, which requires review by
the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval by the City Council as part of the OPD
rezoning process.
The applicant held a Good Neighbor meeting on October 6, 2022. A summary of the meeting is
included in Attachment 5.
ANALYSIS:
Current Zoning:
The property is currently zoned Commercial Office Zone (CO-1). The purpose of CO-1 is to
provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain
public and semipublic uses may be developed in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The
CO-1 zone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or
industrial areas. Additionally, only drive-throughs accessory to financial institutions are allowed
within the CO-1 zone.
Proposed Zoning:
The proposed zoning, Community Commercial Zone (CC-2), is intended for major business
districts to serve a significant segment of the total community population. In addition to a variety
of retail goods and services, these centers may typically feature several large traffic generators
requiring access from major thoroughfares. While these centers are usually characterized by
indoor operations, uses may have limited outdoor activities; provided, that outdoor operations
are screened or buffered to remain compatible with surrounding uses. Unlike the current CO-1
zoning, the CC-2 zone allows drive-throughs associated with any use subject to the special
exception process.
The Low Density Multi-Family Residential Zone (RM-12) is to provide for the development of
high density, single-family housing and low density, multi-family housing. This zone is intended
to provide a diverse variety of housing options in neighborhoods throughout the city. Careful
attention to site and building design is important to ensure that the various housing types in any
one location are compatible with one another.
The planned development overlay zone (OPD) is established to permit flexibility in the use and
design of structures and land in situations where conventional development may be
inappropriate and where modification to requirements of the underlying zone will not be contrary
to the intent and purpose of this title, inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, as amended, or
4
harmful to the surrounding neighborhood. A Preliminary OPD Plan is also required with the OPD
rezoning, which shows a layout of proposed uses, parking, and landscaping. Future
development must substantially comply with this plan. Any significant changes to land uses,
street locations, or character of the development will require another OPD rezoning.
General Planned Development Approval Criteria: Applications for Planned Development
rezonings are reviewed for compliance with the following standards according to Article 14-3A of
the Iowa City Zoning Code.
1. The density and design of the Planned Development will be compatible with and/or
complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and
scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout.
Density – The applicant is requesting a rezoning to OPD/CC-2 and OPD/RM-12, with each zone
allowing a density of 15 dwelling units per acre of net land (total land minus street rights-of-way).
The proposed development includes a total of 17 dwelling units, 8 being part of a mixed use
development on the portion of the property zoned OPD/CC-2, and 9 being attached single family
units on the portion of the property zoned. OPD/RM-12. The proposed density for the 17 units on
approximately 3.87 acres is 4.39 dwelling units per acre, which complies with the density standards
of 14-3A-4D of the City Code.
Land Uses Proposed – The applicant is proposing a mix of commercial, mixed use, attached
single family residential units, and an outlot on the subject property. The commercial use at the
corner of N Dodge St. and N Scott Blvd. is proposed to be a coffee shop. South of the coffee
shop is a proposed 8 unit mixed use building with ground floor commercial uses along N Scott
Blvd., which transitions into 9 attached single family units abutting existing residential zoned
OPD/RS-5. There is also Outlot A, which is to be used for stormwater retention.
Additional surrounding land uses include multi-family townhouse style development to the north,
City of Iowa City Fire Station 4 to the east, the Iowa City Community School District
Administration to the west, and as previously mentioned, existing single-family residential to the
south of the subject property. In summary, the proposed development is anticipated to provide
commercial development located along two arterial streets and a main Iowa City entranceway,
as well as provide a mix of housing types compatible with the surrounding uses.
Mass, Scale, and General Layout – The commercial uses proposed are located nearest to the N
Dodge Street and N Scott Blvd intersection, with the proposed coffee shop being located on the
corner of these streets. The mixed use building will be larger in scale with ground floor retail and
upper story residential, not to exceed 35’ or approximately 3 stories as required by the City
Code. However, all proposed development will be setback a minimum of 40’ along arterial
streets and the parking areas will be screened to at least the S2 screening requirement. Parking
for the commercial uses will be located in the rear behind the principal buildings and be subject
to additional landscaping requirements aimed to promote a more attractive streetscape. The
proposed development transitions to attached single-family uses at the southern end of the site.
The attached single-family will have a separate access point and parking will be located in the
rear via a shared private alley. Standards relating to mass, scale, and layout will be reviewed at
the site plan and building permitting stages to ensure full compliance with these requirements.
Open Space – The proposed development will need to comply with the private open space
standards outlined in section 14-2A-4E of the City Code. The proposed mixed use development
will be required to accommodate 10 square feet of private open space per bedroom, with a
minimum of 400 square feet and no dimension less than 20 feet. The attached single family
units will need to provide a minimum 150 square feet of private open space with no dimension
less than 10 feet. According to 14-2A-4E-3b, for attached single family uses, rooftop or upper
5
floor open air terraces or rear yard-facing porches, including screened-in porches (non-habitable
space only) may count toward the open space requirement.
Traffic Circulation – The proposed development would include two curb cuts to provide access
from N Scott Blvd. Staff is recommending a condition that no vehicular access shall be allowed
off of N. Dodge Street due to the potential safety hazards of adding access at the intersection of
Dodge St/Highway 1 and Scott St. Additionally, the traffic study recommended that the site
access points be constructed and located as shown in the preliminary OPD plan, which the
traffic study considered to be “optimally located, spaced, and sized”. The study also noted that
if development was constructed as proposed, “the existing signal on Dodge Street and Scott
Blvd could continue to operate acceptably”. Access to the commercial lots and the attached
single family units will be separated with their own access points off of N Scott Blvd. The
attached single family lots will have private rear alley access and the commercial lots will be
accessed through parking located behind the principal buildings.
2. The development will not overburden existing streets or utilties.
The subject property is an infill parcel that is surrounding by existing development. It can be
serviced by both sanitary sewer and water. Public Works staff has indicated that both sanitary
sewer and water mains have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development.
Transportation Planning staff requested that the applicant submit a traffic impact study, which
examined how proposed development would impact traffic along N Dodge Street and N Scott
Blvd. The traffic study found that approximately 154 AM Peak Hour trips and 81 PM Peak Hour
trips would be generated due to development. The study notes “not all of these trips will likely be
newly generated trips. For a coffee shop, the majority of patrons to the site will be pass-by trips.
Pass-by trips are satisfied by vehicles already in the traffic stream on the adjacent roadway prior
to development but elect to stop in for coffee on the way to their original destination”. The study
states that approximately 80% of the trips generated will be pass-by trips for the coffee shop
and 20% of the trips will be new. The non-pass-by trips generated by the site are 52 AM trips
and 51 PM trips. The proposed development would provide an acceptable level of service of B
and C during peak hours.
The traffic study recommended installation of a southeast-bound right-turn lane. Staff agreed
and the preliminary OPD plan shows the addition of a right turn lane on N Scott Blvd. as part of
access to the commercial lots. Staff is also recommending the addition of a right turn lane as a
condition of the rezoning.
Additionally, the traffic study recommends the installation of a pedestrian facility with a refuge
island across Scott Blvd at Dubuque Rd, which allows pedestrians to cross fewer lanes of traffic,
provides a more direct route to the sidewalk along Dubuque Road, and provides a larger refuge
area for pedestrians in the middle of Scott Blvd. Staff agrees with the need for this and
recommends that is be placed on the southern end of N. Dubuque Rd. This facility is shown on
the preliminary OPD plan and staff is also recommending this improvement be added as a
condition of the rezoning. Staff also recommends the condition of the dedication of a public
access easement over any pedestrian facilities along the Scott Blvd public right-of-way that
provide connectivity to public sidewalks and adjacent neighborhoods that are located on private
property. Staff typically tries to secure additional right-of-way in order to provide for sidewalks;
however, staff finds the public access easement accessible since securing public right-of-way
could further impact the sensitive areas on the site.
The traffic study determined that the construction of the proposed development, including the
recommended right turn lane and pedestrian crossing on N Scott Blvd., would not increase
traffic to the point of overburdening the existing street system. Staff has reviewed the traffic
6
study and concurs with the analysis.
The construction of the proposed right turn lane along N Scott Blvd. and the proposed location
for the attached single family access will remove existing trees within the right-of-way. These
trees were recently planted by the City in order to create an inviting streetscape and also shade
for those utilizing the wide pedestrian sidewalk and bike path. Per the City Forester, staff
recommends that as a condition of the rezoning any trees removed from the right of way shall
be replaced as part of a landscaping plan to be approved by the City Forester.
3.The development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and
privacy of neighboring properties any more than would conventional development.
The nearest neighbors to the north and to the east of the subject property will be separated by
N Dodge St. and N Scott Blvd. In addition to this separation, the proposed commercial uses,
mixed use development, and attached single family will be required to meet the 40’ setback
along arterials. To the west, the subject properties will remain separated through remaining
woodlands and Outlot A. The attached single family units will provide a transition from the
existing single family residential to the south and the mixed use and commercial uses on the
subject property. For these reasons staff finds that this development will not impact neighboring
residents and property owners more than a conventional development.
4.The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the
underlying zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public
interest, in harmony with the purpose of this Title, and with other building
regulations of the City.
The subject development does not propose any waivers from the underlying zoning code.
However, the applicant does propose two drive through uses, one for the coffee shop and one for
an ATM, and also proposes multi-family uses in a CC-2 zone, all of which will require their own
special exception for approval and will be required to meet all of the special exception approval
criteria. If any or all special exceptions were denied, the site would still be able to accommodate
land uses allowed by right or provisionally in a CC-2 zone as long as the changes did not result in
substantive changes to the preliminary OPD plan. The Preliminary OPD incorporates attached
single family, mixed use multi family, and commercial uses. The combination of land uses
provides a diversity of housing options and would provide additional commercial and retail
services to serve the surrounding residents and travelers along one of the main entryways of the
City.
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.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the
subject property as suitable for public/private open space. Although the IC2030 Future Land
Use Map (FLUM) identifies this area as public/private open space, the FLUM notes, “the land
use map is intended to be a general guide for persons making decisions regarding the
development of land in within Iowa City”. The Plan goes on to state “in addition to the District
Plans, the neighborhood design principals should be considered when interpreting the land use
map. For example, if property is located at the intersection of a collector and an arterial, the
neighborhood design concepts indicate that alternatives to single family development, i.e.
neighborhood commercial or multi-family development, may be appropriate”. The neighborhood
design principles are intended to create and sustain healthy neighborhoods and may be used to
7
determine if an alternative property use not identified on the FLUM may be appropriate. Staff
found the following neighborhood design principles to be supported by the proposed rezoning
as an alternative option from public/private open space:
Compatible Infill Development –Quality infill development plays an important role in
neighborhood reinvestment. Additionally, development of infill sites should add to the diversity of
housing options without compromising neighborhood character or overburdening infrastructure.
The subject property is currently a vacant lot with sensitive area constraints such as slopes and
is surrounding by existing development. The Comprehensive Plan further encourages the
identification of properties appropriate for infill development, in particular on small lots to
discourage sprawl. Additionally, when considering infill development, one of the Comprehensive
Plan goals is to “ensure development is compatible and complementary to the surrounding
neighborhood”. The proposed development would provide more diverse housing options to the
area such as attached single family dwellings and mixed use multi-family. Development also
proposes a coffee shop and ground floor retail services as part of the mixed use building. The
commercial uses would complement the area by providing services to surrounding residents,
employees, and travelers along a major City entryway, while also providing a transitional buffer
of uses through the inclusion of attached single family dwellings. As previously mentioned in the
report, a traffic study was done that ensured the proposed development would not overburden
existing infrastructure, provided the recommended right run lane be provided to facilitate safe
traffic flow to the property.
Diversity of Housing Types – A mix of housing types within a neighborhood provides residential
opportunities for a variety of people, including singles, couples, families with children, and
elderly persons. A mix of housing within a neighborhood may include single-family homes,
townhouses, duplexes, small apartment buildings, as well as apartments in mixed use buildings
located in neighborhood commercial areas. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan further
encourages the diversity of housing options through its goals, specifically, “ensure a mix of
housing types within each neighborhood to provide options for households of all types and
people of all incomes” The proposed mixed use multi-family development and attached single
family, or townhomes, provide a mix of housing options to the area to complement the existing
single family homes and townhomes. The proposed development would also provide a
transition of housing options from the existing single family along Hickory Heights Ln off of N
Scott Blvd, moving north to the proposed attached single family units, and the mixed use multi-
family development located on the proposed commercial lots. The commercial area aspect of
the development would be able to support residents new and old.
Affordable Housing – Although there is no code requirement for income-restricted affordable
housing that applies to the proposed development, by allowing a mix of housing types,
moderately priced housing can be incorporated into a neighborhood, rather than segregated in
one or two areas of the community. Small multi-family buildings can be incorporated on corner
lots adjacent to arterial streets, and townhomes can be mixed with single-family homes within a
neighborhood. Apartments located above commercial businesses provide needed housing while
increasing the local customer base for commercial establishments. Specific goals to achieve
this vision include providing housing options for people of all incomes and developing smaller
lots to conserve land and allow for more affordable options. The proposed development would
provide attached single family and mixed use multi-family dwellings with ground floor retail
services that would increase the variety of housing options and price points in the
neighborhood.
Neighborhood Commercial Areas – Neighborhood commercial areas can provide a focal point
and gathering place for a neighborhood. The businesses within a neighborhood commercial
center should provide shopping opportunities within convenient walking distance for residents in
the immediate area. The design of neighborhood commercial centers should have pedestrian
8
orientation with stores placed close to the street and parking located in the rear. It is also
encouraged to incorporate apartments above shops. The proposed development includes a
coffee shop and a mixed use multi-family building with 8 units intended to have ground floor
retail services and 9 attached single family units. The development incorporates pedestrian
connections to the property at the intersection of N Dodge St and Scott Blvd., as well as
proposes a pedestrian crossing along Scott Blvd. to connect to the site. Additionally, the
sidewalk along the rear alley of the attached single family units will extend to the commercial
lots, providing a connection for the residents. Development would provide a commercial area
that would be incorporated into the existing neighborhood and support residents and travelers in
the area, Fire Station 4, the Iowa City Community School District, and the ACT Campus.
Pedestrian/Bicyclist Connections – Important neighborhood destinations, such as shopping
centers should be readily accessible for pedestrians and bicyclists. It is also important to have a
pleasant streetscape and appropriate building setbacks that creates an environment that is safe
and appealing. The Comprehensive Plan also encourages “pedestrian-oriented development
and attractive and functional streetscapes that make it safe, convenient, and comfortable to
walk”. The proposed development shows the addition of pedestrian connections at the corner of
N Dodge St and N Scott Blvd., connecting to the existing sidewalk system and providing
pedestrians access to the coffee shop. Additionally, a sidewalk is located along the attached
single family alley that connects residents to the commercial lots, as well as a connection to N
Scott Blvd. Due to the proposed construction of the right turn lane to access the commercial
lots, the sidewalk connection will be removed and reconstructed further west, still providing a
continuous path along N Scott Blvd. The applicant also proposes landscaping such as shrubs
and trees along N Dodge St and Scott Blvd. The buildings will also be setback 40’ along the
arterial streets, ensuring that development will not dominate the streetscape.
There are several other comprehensive plan goals and strategies that are supported by this
proposed rezoning:
1. Land Use Goals & Strategies:
a. Encourage compact, efficient development that is contiguous and connected to
existing neighborhoods to reduce the cost of extending infrastructure and
services and to preserve farmland and open space at the edge of the city.
b. Ensure that infill development is compatible and complementary to the
surrounding neighborhood.
c. Plan for commercial development in defined commercial nodes, including small-
scale neighborhood commercial centers.
d. Provide appropriate transitions between high and low-density development and
between commercial areas and residential zones.
2. Housing Goals & Strategies:
a. Encourage a diversity of housing options in all neighborhoods.
b. Ensure a mix of housing types within each neighborhood, to provide options for
households of all types (singles, families, retires, etc.) and people of all incomes.
c. Identify and support infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas
where services and infrastructure are already in place.
3. Transportation Goals & Strategies:
a. Accommodate all modes of transportation on the street system.
b. Encourage walking & bicycling.
c. Encourage pedestrian-oriented development and attractive and functional
streetscapes that make it safe, convenient and comfortable to walk.
4. Environmental Goals & Strategies:
a. Encourage compact, efficient development that reduces the cost of extending
and maintaining infrastructure and services.
b. Discourage sprawl by promoting small-lot and infill development.
9
Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The subject property contains steep slopes and critical
slopes. The applicant has submitted a Preliminary and Sensitive Areas Development Plan as
part of the OPD rezoning. Due to the proposed disturbance of more than 35% of critical slopes,
a Level II Sensitive Areas Review is required.
Regulated Slopes: The subject property contains steep and critical slopes. The impacts to these
slopes are outlined in Table 1. Approximately 75% of the critical slopes are proposed to be
impacted, which exceeds the 35% threshold of critical slopes allowed.
Table 1 – Summary of Regulated Slopes
Slopes Disturbed Preserved Total
Square
Feet
Percent Square
Feet
Percent Square
Feet
Percent
Steep 47,983 68% 22,629 32% 70,612 100%
Critical 16,430 75% 5,622 25% 22,052 100%
Neighborhood Open Space: According to section 14-5K of the City code, dedication of public
open space or fee in lieu of land dedication is addressed at the time of final platting for residential
subdivisions, commercial subdivisions containing residential uses, and planned developments.
Based on approximately 3.87 acres, the applicant is required to dedicate 0.25 acres of open
space or pay a fee in lieu. The applicant has requested that they plan to pay a fee in-lieu of land
dedication.
Storm Water Management: The applicant intends to provide stormwater detention for the
development within Outlot A. Public Works must approve a stormwater management plan as part
of the platting process.
Sanitary Sewer: There are existing sanitary sewer easements and infrastructure on this site. The
current plan shows the buildings are located too close to these existing easements. Public Works
is working with the applicant to resolve the proximity to the sanitary sewer easement issue of the
proposed attached single family on lots 3-7. This issue was noted on the plans and will need to be
worked out prior to the approval of a site plan or issuance of a building permit.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, a public hearing will be
scheduled for consideration by the City Council.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of REZ22-0016, a proposal to rezone approximately 2.04 acres
located south of the N Dodge St and N Scott Blvd. intersection from Commercial Office Zone (CO-
1) to Community Commercial Zone with a Planned Overlay Development (OPD/CC-2) and
approximately 1.83 acres from CO-1 to Low-Density Multi-Family Residential Zone with a Planned
Overlay Development (OPD/RM-12) subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of building permit, Owner shall:
a. Obtain approval of a landscape plan by the City Forester which includes the N.
Dodge St and Scott Blvd public right-of-way. Any trees within the public right-of-
way that are removed due to construction shall be replanted and located according
to the approved landscape plan.
b. Dedicate a public access easement over any pedestrian facilities adjacent to the
Scott Blvd public right-of-way that provide connectivity to public sidewalks. .
2. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Owner shall:
a. Install a right turn lane along Scott Blvd, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
b. Install a pedestrian crossing with a refuge island on the southside of Dubuque Rd
10
and Scott Blvd, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
3. No vehicular access shall be allowed onto N. Dodge Street.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Rezoning Exhibit
3. Preliminary OPD/SADP
4. 2008 Concept Plan Approved with CO-1 Rezoning
5. Good Neighbor Meeting Summary
6. Traffic Impact Study
7. Applicant’s Statement
Approved by: _________________________________________________
Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
ACTCIR
N
D
U
B
U
Q
U
E
R
D
ACT
D
R
N
S
C
O
T
T
B
L
V
DHICKORY
H
EI GH TS
L
N
N DOD G E
S
T
N
D
O
D
G
E
S
T
N DUBUQUE RD
An application submitted by Mark Holtkamp of A Latte Buzzness
for approval of a rezoning of approximately 2.04 acres from Commercial Office Zone
(CO-1) to Community Commercial Zone with a Planned Overlay Development(OPD/
CC-2) and approximately 1.83 acres to Low Density Multi-Family Residential Zone
with a Planned Overlay Development(OPD/RM-12).
µREZ22-0016
N. Dodge and Scott Blvd.
Prepared By: Emani Brinkman
Date Prepared: November 2022
0 0.05 0.10.03 Miles
Attachment 1
0 50 100
HIGH
W
AY 1 /
N
D
O
D
GE STN SCOTT BLVDSHEET NUMBER:SHEET NAME:DRAWING LOGENGINEER:REVDATEDESCRIPTION OF CHANGESPROJECT NAME:CLIENT NAME:WWW.AXIOM-CON.COM | (319) 519-6220 Nov 16, 2022 - 2:39pm S:\PROJECTS\2021\210216\05 Design\Civil-Survey\Plats\210216 - Rezoning Exhibit.dwg PROJECT NO.:DESIGN PROFESSIONAL:1 OF 1 A LATTE BUZZNESSREZONING EXHIBITTIMBER VALLEY RUN1899 N DODGE STIOWA CITY, IANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION210216 DECKER
ZONING INFORMATION:
CURRENT ZONING: COMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONE (CO-1) - 3.87 AC
PROPOSED ZONING: OPD/CC-2 - 2.04 AC
(PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY/
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONE)
OPD/RM-12 - 1.83 AC
(PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY/
LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE)
REZONING EXHIBIT
TIMBER VALLEY RUN
IOWA CITY, IOWA
PROJECT LOCATION MAP:
(NOT TO SCALE)
PROJECT
LOCATION
2008 N DUBUQUE ST
ZONING: P1
2041 N DUBUQUE ST
ZONING: RDP
1851 N DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RR1
1725 N DODGE ST
ZONING: P1
HICKORY HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION
ZONING: RS5/OPD
1888 N DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RS5/OPD
1804 N DODGE ST
ZONING: RS5
PARCEL ID: 1002401005
ZONING: ID-RS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:1730 N DODGE STZONING: RS51720 N DODGE STZONING: RS51852 N
DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RS5
1820 N DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RS5
PARCEL ID: 1002126001
ZONING: RR1
2101 ACT CIR
ZONING: CO1
2030 N DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RR1
2040 N DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RR1
2150 N DUBUQUE RD
ZONING: RR1
PARCEL ID:
1002176003
ZONING: RR1
N DUBUQUE RD
N DUBUQUE RD
HICKORY HEIGHTS LNPOINT OF
BEGINNING
APPLICANT INFORMATION:
PREPARED BY:
AXIOM CONSULTANTS, LLC
C/O BRIAN BOELK
60 E. COURT STREET, UNIT 3
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240
319-519-6220
BBOELK@AXIOM-CON.COM
APPLICANT:
A LATTE BUZZNESS
C/O MARK HOLTKAMP
4611 TIMBERLAND CT NE
SOLON, IA 52333
319-594-1062
MARKHOLTKAMP@YAHOO.COM
OPD/CC-2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PRESS-CITIZEN ADDITION LOT 2 PARCEL, THENCE ALONG THE
EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 76.26 FEET ALONG A 573.00 RADIUS CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY (CHORD BEARING
S43°40'46”E, 76.20 FEET); THENCE S33°41'27”E, 2.27 FEET; THENCE 154.96 FEET ALONG A 690.00 RADIUS
CONCAVE WESTERLY (CHORD BEARING S21°33'48”E, 110.91 FEET); THENCE S13°06'19”E, 177.06 FEET; THENCE
S76°49'58”W, 250.00 FEET; THENCE N13°06'20”W, 321.35 FEET; THENCE N55°03'40”E, 208.04 FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
DESCRIBED AREA CONTAINS 2.04 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
OPD/RM-12 LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PRESS-CITIZEN ADDITION LOT 2 PARCEL, THENCE ALONG THE
EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 76.26 FEET ALONG A 573.00 RADIUS CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY (CHORD BEARING
S43°40'46”E, 76.20 FEET); THENCE S33°41'27”E, 2.27 FEET; THENCE 154.96 FEET ALONG A 690.00 RADIUS
CONCAVE WESTERLY (CHORD BEARING S21°33'48”E, 110.91 FEET); THENCE S13°06'19”E, 446.86 FEET; THENCE
S55°10'06”W, 269.12 FEET; THENCE N13°06'20”W, 369.15 FEET; THENCE N76°49'58”E, 250.00 FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
DESCRIBED AREA CONTAINS 1.83 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
OWNER:
GREENSTATE CREDIT UNION
C/O TIM RECK
2355 LANDON RD
NORTH LIBERTY, IA 52317
319-899-3431
TIMRECK@GREENSTATE.ORG
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
TOTAL STEEP SLOPES: 20,283 SF
DISTURBED SLOPES= 6,960 SF = 34%
TOTAL CRITICAL SLOPES: 56,256 SF
DISTURBED CRITICAL SLOPES: 13,580 SF = 24%
6,200 SQ FT/FL (SOUTH WING) + 5,065 SQ FT/FL (NORTH WING) =
11,265 SF/FL X 3 = 33,795 SQ FT.
PARKING REQUIREMENT:
33,795 SF OFFICE@ 1 PARKING SPACE/300 SF= 113
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES = 113
PARKING SPACES SHOWN = 113
-·- ·-. ___ •0::----_STACKING SPACES SHOWN= 19 -' ---......
'Q9L • ---
RDP
A 1 �,�?.,�U, N. Dodge & Scott Blvd./
/ /
,./··
o·25'
./•'
,/··
-✓--
\ \
50' 100' -------
SCALE
\
Attachment 4: 2008 Concept approved with
CO-1 rezoning
Attachment 5
Scooter’s Coffee Iowa City
Corner of Scott Blvd and Dodge Street
Iowa City, Iowa
Traffic Impact Study
September 9th, 2022
Prepared for: Brian Boelk, P.E., Owner, Axiom Consultants
Prepared By: Anderson-Bogert Engineers and Surveyors, Inc.
Jacob M. Sprengeler, P.E., ENV SP
ABES Project Number: 222041
QA/QC: Jeffrey C. Morrow, P.E.
Attachment 6
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This study was completed in order to determine the traffic impacts resulting from a
proposed mixed-use commercial, coffee shop, and residential development on the
southwest quadrant of the intersection on Dodge Street at Scott Boulevard. The
proposed development was assumed to be completed by 2023. For analysis purposes,
the entire site will be occupied and operational upon opening day in 2023. The existing
land is undeveloped vacant space. As such, rezoning will be required.
The proposed development contains the following features and ITE Land Uses:
· 220: Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) – 10 Townhouse Dwellings
· 231: Mid-Rise Residential with 1st-Floor Commercial – 8 Dwelling Units
· Various Commercial Uncategorized – 2,900sf 1st-Floor commercial
· 937: Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window – 30 Seats, 1,900sf
The study area does not exhibit a statistically significant crash rate since 2017. Most
crashes observed were property damage only. The majority of crashes involved vehicles
traveling in the same direction (rear-end and sideswipe), which has helped to limit injury
and fatality crashes at this location.
The development will generate an estimated 154 trips during the AM peak, and 81 during
the PM peak. Of these, about 20% will be newly generated trips. The remaining 80% will
likely be existing pass-by trips from commuters going from one place to another.
Generally, the intersection on Dodge Street at Scott Boulevard operates at acceptable
Level of Service during the peak hours. On opening day, the intersection will experience
an overall delay increase of a few seconds. Larger changes may be felt for particular
movements upon signal optimization. All will continue to operate acceptably upon
opening day.
The proposed site driveways intersections appear to be placed and spaced adequately
per current engineering practice. We recommend installation of a southeastbound-right -
turn bay be considered on opening day in response to existing traffic crash history in the
area.
The proposed site contains some multimodal deficiencies which should be addressed.
Internal pedestrian facilities, accessible routes, and ADA parking should be refined.
4
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY
This study was prepared to evaluate possible impacts resulting from a proposed mixed-
use development on the southwest quadrant of the intersection on N Dodge Street
(Highway 1) at Scott Boulevard (the development, site). This report assumes that design
and construction will be completed in 2023, and fully occupied. Based on input from the
governing traffic authority (MPOJC), the report generally includes the following:
· Summary and analysis of existing conditions, including capacity analysis at the
following locations:
o Intersection of Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard
o Intersection of Scott Boulevard and N Dubuque Road (includes signal
warrant analysis)
o Any other proposed site access points
· Determination of Appropriate Zoning and Zoning Land Use
· Determination of appropriate ITE Trip Generation Land Use Code
· Determination of development trip generation
· Trip distribution and assignment
· Summary and analysis of proposed opening day (2023) conditions, including
capacity analysis and signal warrant analysis as denoted above under existing
conditions
· Review of overall site plan, access points, and general multimodal considerations
· Recommendation on adjustments and/or mitigation strategies for the proposed
development and adjacent roadway network
Anderson-Bogert previously completed a traffic study for the MPOJC along Dodge Street.
This report will utilize this previous data, analysis, and assumptions for this previous
project to help maintain a sense of analytical consistency for MPOJC. Counts for 2018 were
provided by MPOJC to the client from 2018. The previous study had counts on Dodge
Street from 2021, and were utilized in order to maintain consistency with previous work.
5
PROJECT DETAILS
The project owner has planned a new development at the southwest corner of N Dodge
Street (Highway 1) and Scott Boulevard in Iowa City, Iowa. The site contains both
commercial and residential components. The proposed development consists of the
following features:
· 10 Townhouse Dwelling Units (ITE Land Use 220: Multifamily Housing [Low Rise]
· 8 Dwelling Units above 1st Floor Commercial (ITE Land Use 231: Mid-Rise
Residential with 1st-Floor Commercial)
· 2,900 square-feet of mixed commercial use 1st Floor – Various possible tenants –
unknown by project owner at the current time.
· A commercial coffee shop containing 1,900 square-feet and 30 customer
occupancy (ITE Land Use 937: Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window)
A plan view of the proposed development is provided below in Figure 1. The development
will be slated for construction and completion in 2023, and will be assumed to be fully
occupied at the time for the purposes of this study.
Figure 1 - Proposed Development
6
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND CRASH HISTORY
The site is currently vacant and undeveloped land. Figure 2 below shows an aerial image
of the existing site. Located directly across Scott Boulevard is an active city fire station. As
of August 2022, the property is zoned CO1: Commercial Office. The proposed retail and
residential use does not appear to be consistent with the existing zoning. A change in
zoning will be required. This proposed change in zoning has been provided on the attached
site plan at the end of this report. The developer suggests splitting the property into
multiple zones based on the anticipated uses. CC-2 (Commercial Office Zone), MU
(Mixed Use), and RM-20 (Medium Density Multi-Family Residential) zonings have been
provided for this development. According to the current Iowa City Code, these zonings
appear consistent with the proposed land uses.
The peak hour parameters for the area are as follows:
· AM Peak: 7:15 – 8:15
o PHF: 0.87
o Heavy Vehicles: 5%
· PM Peak” 4:30 – 5:30
o PHF: 0.95
o Heavy Vehicles: 3%
A summary of the street network adjacent to the proposed development is provided below
in Table 1.
Figure 2 - Existing Site
7
The Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) maintains an online database of reported
crash data throughout the State of Iowa. Using this Iowa Crash Analysis Tool (ICAT), the
development area was queried from 2017 to present day. A summary of crashes within the
project area is provided in Table 2.
One estimate of intersection safety is intersection crash rate. An intersection crash rate
measures number of crashes per million entering vehicles (MEV). The IDOT has published
statewide crash statistics over the past decade or two. They have also published an
average intersection crash rate report from a previous comprehensive study completed in
the mid-1980’s. It suggests that the average intersection crash rate in the State of Iowa is
around 0.9 crashes/MEV for an intersection between primary arterial and city street. The
statistical 95% confidence interval was 1.8. A statistically significant crash rate is thus 2.7
crashes/MEV.
49 of these total crashes occurred within the signalized intersection of N Dodge Street and
Scott Boulevard. Using the average Dodge Street AADT and Scott Boulevard AADT
provided in Table 1, the intersection crash rate is calculated as 0.88. This rate is still well
below that of statistical significance. Out of all crashes, none resulted in serious injury or
Major Road Minor Road Control Type Operation
N Dodge Street
(Highway 1)
Scott
Boulevard Signalized Uncoordinated
Scott Boulevard N Dubuque
Street TWSC N/A
Table 1 - Adjacent Roadway Network
Street Name Location
Fed
Classification Appx Width No. of Lanes
Posted
Speed
Curb
and
Gutter
Surface Condition 2018 AADT
On-
Street
Parking
N Dodge Street
(Highway 1)North of Site Principal Arterial 66' B-B
Varies @ Signal
2 NEB
1 Left-Turn+Median
1 SWB
45 mph Yes
PCC - Good,
Limited Cracking
West of Site -
12,800
East of Site -
22,000
No
Scott Boulevard East of Site Minor Arterial 54' B-B
Varies
2 SB
Median
2 NB
35 mph Yes
PCC - Good,
Limited Cracking 13,100 No
N Dubuque Road East of Site Local 37' B-B
Varies
2 WB
1 EB
Not
Posted Yes
PCC - Good, Mid-
Panel Cracking
Evident
Unknown No
Total Crashes Fatal Crashes
Serious
Injury
Crashes
Minor, Possible, or
Unknown Injuries Property Damage Only Crashes
60 0 0 7 53
Day (Night)
Crashes
Weather
Contributing
Crashes
Followed
Too Close
Improper/Irratic Lane
Change Other
47 (13) 3 13 10 18
Ran Signal Animal
Reckless
Driving Lost Control Unknown or Not Specified
3 3 4 3 6
Table 2 - Crash Analysis Summary – Scott Boulevard at Dodge Street and Dubuque Road
8
fatalities. About 11% of crashes resulted in minor or unknown injuries. The predominant
manner of crashes for the study area were sideswipe and rear-end. The ICAT crash
characteristics report is provided at the end of this document. The largest fraction of
crashes occurs in the PM peak between 4 PM and 6 PM, evenly distributed throughout the
weekdays. 75 percent of the crashes occurred in dry conditions, under clear or cloudy
weather.
South of the intersection on Scott Boulevard between N Dodge Street and N Dubuque
Road, the predominant mode of crash is a same-direction sideswipe. This likely can be
attributed to the fact that the inner southeastbound lane terminates with a left-turn lane
onto N Dubuque Street. During a previous corridor study by Anderson-Bogert in 2021, it
was noted that the majority of southwestbound left-turn traffic queues in the interior of the
two southwestbound left-turn bays on Dodge Street. The few vehicles that choose to enter
the exterior left-turn bay were often observed heavily accelerating through the intersection
in an attempt to merge into the second receiving southeastbound through lane on Scott
Boulevard. This reckless driving, combined with the second lane termination contribute to
an increase in sideswipe/rear-end crashes in this location between Dodge Street and
Dubuque Road.
9
PROPOSED CONDITIONS, TRIP GENERATION, AND
ASSIGNMENT
Trip Generation
The proposed land use requires the use of 3 separate ITE land use codes:
· 220: Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) - 10 Townhouse Units
· 231: Mid-Rise Residential with 1st-Floor Commercial – 8 Apartment Units above
commercial development
· Uncategorized: commercial space for future commercial development – 2,900
GFA
· 937: Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window – 1,900 GFA
The following trip generation table is shown in Table 3.
Based on the characteristic of this coffee shop proposal, using an assumed 30 seats
appeared to be the most reasonable estimator when compared with other methods such
as floor area. The 1st Level commercial area had no specific tenants at the time of this
report. Several land use categories including things such as restaurants, apparel stores,
health/fitness club, value (dollar) store, and drinking establishment were referenced. In an
attempt to better represent any given tenant, average generation rates around 2.7
trips/1,000 square-feet and 8 trip-ends/1,000 square-feet for commercial were assumed.
In total, the site could generate about 154 AM trip-ends and 81 PM trip-ends.
It is important to note that not all of these trips will likely be newly generated trips. For a
coffee shop, the majority of patrons to the site will be pass-by trips. Pass-by trips are
satisfied by vehicles already in the traffic stream on the adjacent roadway prior to
development, but elect to stop in for coffee on the way to their original destination. The Trip
Land Use Code Units Quantity In Out In Out
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)220 Units 10.0 1 4 5 3
Mid-Rise Residential with 1st-Floor
Commercial 231 *See Above 2.9/8 4 9 9 4
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-
Through Window 937 Seats 30.0 67 61 16 20
1st Level Commercial N/A 1000SF 2.9 5 3 13 10
Total 77 77 43 37
Estimated Site Trip Generation
Scooter's Coffee Iowa City
Scooter's Coffee, Townhouses, Commercial 1st Floor with Apartments Above
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street
AM Peak PM Peak
(VPH)(VPH)
*Mid-rise with Commercial: Combined Eq:
(2.65xKSF)+(0.03*Units)+5.2
ITE 10th Edition Trip Generation Estimates
154 81
Table 3 - ITE Trip Generation
1 0
Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition published by ITE provides data and relationships on
pass-by trips. Appendix E shows that up to 85%-90% of coffee shop trip-ends are pass-by
trips. As a result, these trip-ends are not additive to the existing traffic stream. The
Appendix E data was based on coffee shops without indoor seating. This study
conservatively assumes that 80% of generated trips for the coffee shop will be pass-by,
and 20% of generated trips will be new. The non-pass-by trip-ends generated by the site
are 52 AM trip-ends and 51 PM trip-ends.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Generally, the trips were distributed according to the surrounding roadway network and
density of commercial and residential development in the area. The majority of traffic will
access the site via Highway 1 to the north of the site. Vehicles will generally originate or be
destined for Iowa City (via southbound Dodge Street/Highway 1) and Coralville/Cedar
Rapids via I-80 and I-380 (via northbound Dodge Street). A small portion of traffic will
access the site from Scott Boulevard to the south or from N Dubuque Street to the east.
The majority of the generated trips will likely be pass-by trips already on the network. The
distributions for pass-by trips and newly generated trips are assigned separately. The
resulting trip distributions are provided in Figures 3 and 4. The resulting trip assignment is
provided in Figure 5. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the trips between
the residential portion and commercial portion of the development will be negligible. Due
to the quantity of anticipated residential trips generated, it is also assumed that trips from
the residential portion to N Dubuque Road will be negligible.
1 4
TRAFFIC COUNTS AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The current standard of representing the operating conditions for a roadway or
intersection is the Level of Service (LOS). Per the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), the
following descriptions are given for various LOS.
Table 4 - LOS
Level of Service General Operating Conditions
A Free Flow
B Reasonably Free Flow
C Stable Flow
D Approaching Unstable Flow
E Unstable Flow
F Forced or Breakdown Flow
Typical standards of design depend on roadway classification. Typically, acceptable LOS
is LOS D and above for long-term design. LOS F is considered unacceptable under current
or future conditions.
Analysis of Existing Conditions
Existing traffic counts were collected by MPOJC and provided to Anderson-Bogert.
Existing data on Dodge Street was from 2021 whereas Scott Boulevard at Dubuque Road
was from 2018. The counts from 2021 were assumed to be more reflective of current daily
conditions. The existing counts at Scott Boulevard and N Dubuque Roadway were adjusted
to balance with previous studies at Scott Boulevard and Dodge Street. For the purposes of
this study, an observed or projected traffic movement was rounded up to a minimum of 5
vehicles per hour. Existing analysis geometrics and volumes are provided below in Figures
6 and 7.
1 5
Figure 6 - Existing Scenario Geometrics
1 7
Under existing conditions, the signalized intersection on Dodge Street at Scott Boulevard
operates at LOS (Level of Service) B during the AM peak, and C during the PM peak. The
most critical movements appear to be the northeast through and the southwest left-turn
movements, which directly conflict. It was noted that the southwest left dual turning lanes
are not equally utilized. Because the inner southbound lane on Scott Boulevard
immediately terminates in a left-only onto Dubuque Road, the majority of traffic uses the
outer southbound left lane. A few vehicles use the inner lane, and end up “racing” or
needing to make a merging maneuver once through the intersection. This was discussed
previously within the crash analysis section.
Table 5 - Existing Signalized Capacity Analysis at Scott Blvd and Dodge Street
During the AM peak, all movements except the southwest-bound leg experience 95
percentile queues below 100 feet. The southwestbound leg sees extended queues several
hundred feet for both the left and through movements. In the PM peak, queues are typically
longer, at or below about 125 feet for all legs except the southwestbound-left movement
which is just over a hundred feet shorter than the AM peak.
Under existing conditions, the intersection of N Dubuque Road and Scott Boulevard
operates as a 3-way unsignalized intersection with stop control on the Dubuque Road
approach. From the existing counts, the nearby ACT commercial facility to the east
appears to contribute a large portion of traffic during both peak hours. The ACT trips in for
the AM peak, and trips out for the PM peak are evident in the observed traffic counts.
VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE (FT)LOS VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE (FT)LOS
SOUTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 20 20.4 24 C 15 31.9 26 C
T - 1 9 15.9 16 B 10 26 23 C
R 5 5
NORTHWESTBOUND
L 53 79
T - 1 7 22.8 55 C 13 42 99 D
R - 1 425 3.1 46 A 544 11.2 264 B
NORTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 5 32 15 C 5 27.6 10 C
T - 2 175 17.6 85 B 430 30.9 193 C
R 63 94
SOUTHWESTBOUND
L - 2 432 43.6 #571 D 467 27.3 #428 C
T - 1 383 10.6 293 B 293 11.9 235 B
R - 1 8 0 A 22 0 A
OVERALL 19.3 B 22 C
AM PM
m = metered by upstream signal
# = queue may exceed distance shown and available storage
Dodge Street (HWY1) AT SCOTT BOULEVARD
Synchro Signalized Control Analysis - Existing Conditions
Scott Boulevard
Dodge Street
1 8
Overall, the intersection operates at good LOS during both peak hours. The westbound leg
experiences between 10-20 seconds of delay, but queues less than one vehicle in length.
Based on the existing hourly volumes, the intersection at Dubuque Road and Scott
Boulevard satisfies criteria for a signal warrant during the PM peak hour for warrants 1, 2,
and 3. However, satisfying criteria for 1 hour is not enough alone to fully satisfy a signal
warrant. Furthermore, the signal at Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard is in very close
proximity, and helps to meter traffic at the Dubuque Road intersection to an extent.
Table 6 - TWSC Capacity Analysis at Dubuque Road and Scott Boulevard
VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE
(VEH)
LOS VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE
(VEH)
LOS
SOUTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 170 9.5 0.7 A 24 8.5 0.1 A
T - 1 334 0 0 A 547 0 0 A
NORTHWESTBOUND
T - 2 479 0 0 A 471 0 0 A
R 5 0 0 A 5 0 0 A
SOUTHWESTBOUND
L - 1 5 35.2 0.1 E 5 0.1 23.1 C
R - 1 6 10.1 0 B 165 0.9 11.3 B
OVERALL 1.9 A 1.8 A
Dubuque Road
Synchro Unsignalized TWSC Control Analysis - Existing Conditions
Scott Boulevard at N Dubuque Road and Commercial Entrance
AM PM
m = metered by upstream signal
# = queue may exceed distance shown and available storage
Scott Boulevard
1 9
Proposed Conditions Analysis
The proposed roadway network is pictured below in Figure 8, and analysis volumes in
Figure 9.
Figure 8 - Proposed Network
2 1
DODGE STREET AND SCOTT BOULEVARD
Under opening day conditions and optimized timing, the intersection at Dodge Street and
Scott Boulevard operates at acceptable LOS B and C during the peak hours. The proposed
signal timing will continue to operate as actuated-uncoordinated. The maximum splits
were maintained as less than the required pedestrian interval for several movements.
Typically, maximums should accommodate pedestrian intervals. However, the low
amount of pedestrian traffic and excessive delay caused by increasing the cycle length or
taking time from the critical movements is enough to merit shorter splits.
The traffic model provides that 95th percentile queues will be around 100 feet on
northbound Scott Boulevard at Dodge Street. Since the Dubuque Road intersection and
proposed commercial drive are over 300 feet from the signal, queues extending
southward to this intersection are not expected to be a regular occurrence. Queueing
through the fire station driveway is also not anticipated. With the proposed traffic, we find
that the existing signal will generally continue to operate similarly to existing conditions
provided timings are reoptimized.
Table 7 - Opening Day Signalized Analysis
VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE (FT)LOS VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE (FT)LOS
SOUTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 20 29.8 34 C 15 31.9 26 C
T - 1 9 23.7 23 C 10 26 23 C
R 5 5
NORTHWESTBOUND
L 61 84
T - 1 7 32.7 88 C 13 42.3 104 D
R - 1 437 4.7 93 A 554 11.6 227 B
NORTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 5 45.4 19 D 5 28 10 C
T - 2 175 29.8 132 C 430 30.8 198 C
R 66 104
SOUTHWESTBOUND
L - 2 445 29.3 415 C 479 28.8 #454 C
T - 1 383 9.7 272 A 293 12.1 238 B
R - 1 8 0 A 22 0 A
OVERALL 18.1 B 22.5 C
m = metered by upstream signal
# = queue may exceed distance shown and available storage
Synchro Signalized Control Analysis - Opening Day Conditions
Dodge Street (HWY1) AT SCOTT BOULEVARD
AM PM
Scott Boulevard
Dodge Street
2 2
SCOTT BOULEVARD AND N DUBUQUE ROAD / PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE
Under opening day conditions, the intersection of Scott Boulevard at N Dubuque Road will
become a 4-leg intersection. As discussed below, the intersection was analyzed including
a southeastbound-right turn bay into the site. Scott Boulevard will operate freely, while the
proposed site entrance and Dubuque Road legs will be stop controlled. The intersection
continues to satisfy criteria for signal warrants 1,2, and 3 during the PM peak, and also
satisfies criteria for warrant 1B during the AM peak. No right-turning volume auxiliary lane
warrant criteria are satisfied for Scott Boulevard. Exhibit 1 below shows the right-turn bay
volume warrants.
We feel that this intersection does warrant auxiliary lane treatment from a safety and
operational perspective. Separating slower moving right-turn traffic from the faster
through-movements where sideswipe and rear-end (speed differential) collisions are
observed would help to reduce any additional speed differentials which may be created by
right-turning traffic.
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
35
593
24
OUTPUT
Value
111
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadw ay
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Right-Turn Volume, veh/hMajor-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
35
520
42
OUTPUT
Value
178
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadway
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Right-Turn Volume, veh/hMajor-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Exhibit 1 - Southeastbound-Right Volume Warrants (AM Above, PM Below)
2 3
Northwestbound left turning bay volume warrants are provided in Exhibit 2. At this
location, it was assumed that Scott Boulevard should be treated like a 2-lane roadway
based on the roadway and lane configurations.
The northeastbound-left movement falls near the warrant line for both peak hours. We feel
that the additional northeastbound lane developed at this location provides an opportunity
for through traffic to bypass vehicles slowing to make a left turn into the site. Since it is
developed immediately south of this location, it essentially acts a bypass lane without
creating risks of additional sideswipe/lane change conflict points. Striping the inner lane to
be an exclusive left lane also has negative impacts on the LOS of movements within the
intersection, particularly those on both the commercial entrance and Dubuque Road.
Thus, we do not feel that striping and exclusive left turn lane is merited upon opening day.
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
35
4%
593
482
OUTPUT
Value
548
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (VO), veh/h:
Variable
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Opposing Volume (VO), veh/hAdvancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
35
7%
494
350
OUTPUT
Value
484
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (VO), veh/h:
Variable
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Opposing Volume (VO), veh/hAdvancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Exhibit 2 - Northwestbound Left Volume Warrant
2 4
The proposed commercial site entrance in the AM peak, operates at LOS E. This is very
common for unsignalized driveways on busy street. Although the delay is around 40
seconds per vehicle, the queue for these movements will typically remain below 2 vehicles
at any given time. With about 80 vehicles exiting the site during the AM, this amounts to
just over one vehicle a minute waiting to exit the site, therefore internal site queuing will not
be a concern. Similarly, the Dubuque Road left and through movement operates at LOS F
during the AM peak. No demand for this movement was observed during the peak hour,
and the volume was set at 5 vehicles for analysis purposes. We don’t anticipate the
proposed development generating additional demand for either movement. Outside the
AM peak hour, the movements will operate LOS E or above.
The HCM LOS methodology is unable to account for platoons in the southbound traffic
stream at the adjacent signal at Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard. This signal operates as
a meter, creating more acceptable gaps for vehicles to exit the proposed site and Dubuque
Road. We anticipate the site commercial driveway and Dubuque Street approach will
operate better than predicted in the HCM model. Thus, the LOS for the movements and
intersection shown in Table 8 appear to be acceptable.
Generally, this location satisfied criteria for signal warrants during the PM peak hour under
existing conditions. In the proposed condition, the same criteria are satisfied during the PM
peak, and criteria for signal warrant 1B is met in the AM peak hour. Warrant analysis tables
have not been provided in the report, as the signal on Dodge Street at Scott Boulevard is
located in the immediate vicinity. This location is not recommended for signalization as a
result.
Table 8 - Unsignalized HCM 6th TWSC Opening Day Analysis
VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE
(VEH)
LOS VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE
(VEH)
LOS
SOUTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 170 9.3 0.7 A 24 8.5 0.1 A
T - 1 308 0 0 A 545 0 0 A
R - 1 42 0 0 A 24 0 0 A
NORTHWESTBOUND
L 34 8.3 0.1 A 14 8.8 0 A
T - 2 455 0.2 0 A 466 0.1 0 A
R 5 0 0 A 2 0 0 A
NORTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 41 43.6 1.4 E 21 28.7 0.4 D
T - 1 5 5
R 32 14.9 0.3 C 13 16.1 0.2 C
SOUTHWESTBOUND
L - 1 5 53.5 0.2 F 5 31.1 0.1 D
T - 1 5 5
R 6 24.4 0.2 C 165 12.1 1 B
OVERALL 4.4 A 2.7 A
Dubuque Road
Synchro Unsignalized TWSC Control Analysis - Opening Day Conditions
Scott Boulevard at N Dubuque Road and Commercial Entrance
AM PM
m = metered by upstream signal
# = queue may exceed distance shown and available storage
Scott Boulevard
2 5
SCOTT BOULEVARD AND PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ENTRANCE
On opening day, the new intersection created on Scott Boulevard at the proposed
residential entrance will operate at good LOS during both peak hours. Queues are not
anticipated to occur within the residential site. Table 9 below summarizes the HCM
capacity analysis.
Table 9 - Opening Day TWSC Analysis at Scott Boulevard and Residential Entrance
VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE (FT)LOS VOLUME
(VEH)
DELAY
(SEC/VEH)
95TH-%
QUEUE (FT)LOS
NORTHEASTBOUND
L - 1 5 14.6 0.1 B 5 16.8 0.1 C
R 5 5
NORTHWESTBOUND
L 5 8.1 0 A 5 8.7 0 A
T - 1 487 0 0 A 477 0 0 A
SOUTHEASTBOUND
T 340 0 0 A 558 0 0 A
R 5 0 0 A 5 0 0 A
OVERALL 0.2 A 0.2 A
Residential Entrance
Scott Boulevard
Synchro Unsignalized TWSC Control Analysis - Opening Day Conditions
Scott Boulevard at Residential Entrance
AM PM
2 6
SITE GEOMETRIC REVIEW
SUDAS design manual sections 5L-3 and 5L-4 provide current design standards for
entrance/access design. The proposed entrances are about 400 feet apart as provided by
the owner in Figure 1. This exceeds the minimum spacing criteria provided in the design
guide. Furthermore, both entrances are less than 40 feet from back-to-back. This also
meets current SUDAS standards. Both driveways are spaced greater than 170’ from the
nearest intersection, or are aligned directly with the existing Dubuque Road intersection.
The anticipated queues from the nearby signalized intersection to the north is not expected
to extend to this intersection. Thus, we find the proposed driveway locations to be generally
compliant with current engineering practice, in terms of location. Intersection sigh distance
shold not be an issue, but should be checked by the designer when the grades are known.
Upon inspection of Figure 1, the entrances generally appear to conform with the
international fire code for required width, paving surface, and truck turnaround facilities.
The owner should confirm with the fire marshal with jurisdiction in the area. The owner
should also ensure access points/lanes around structures are also acceptable since these
are not detailed on the provide site plan. Appropriate pavement markings and signage
should be provided in the designated fire lanes.
MULTIMODAL REVIEW
The site contains an existing sidewalk along Scott Boulevard. It was not evaluated in this
study for conformance to current ADA standards. The driveway crossings should be
designed and constructed such that the running and cross slopes are compliant with
current PROWAG and SUDAS guidance. Any disturbance of existing facilities will require
replacement with compliant facilities.
2 7
There are several locations where sidewalks appear to terminate at curbs into the parking
lot, with no designated receiving ramp, or pedestrian path in general. One such instance is
shown in Figure 10. Alternative options should be considered to improve pedestrian paths
which intersect the traveled way. Additional consideration should also be given to providing
sidewalk access to Scott Boulevard along the commercial entrance drive.
The site plan shows a proposed new mid-block pedestrian crossing on Scott Boulevard,
along the northern side of Dubuque Road. Currently, the through sidewalk to ACT is on the
south side of Dubuque Road. Furthermore, the sidewalk on the south side of Scott
Boulevard is wider and generally more accommodating to multiple types of non-motorized
use. If necessary, the developer should consider relocating the proposed midblock
crossing to the south side of Dubuque Road. This alternate location will require pedestrians
to cross fewer lanes of traffic, provide a more direct route for the new sidewalk running on
the south side of Dubuque Road, and provide a larger refuge area for pedestrians in the
middle of Scott Boulevard. No pedestrians were observed during the existing peak hours.
Based on surrounding land uses, the proposed development is not anticipated to generate
noticeable pedestrian traffic on opening day. As a result, a new crossing may not be
warranted by the proposed development. A preferred and safer crossing location is at the
existing signalized crosswalk along Dodge Street.
If a new uncontrolled pedestrian crossing is provided, additional safety improvements
should be considered to improve pedestrian safety at the location. Table 1 presented in
NCHRP Synthesis 498 Application of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments for Streets and
Highways suggests that adding a marked crosswalk in the given Scott Boulevard
conditions may not be adequate alone for improved pedestrian safety. The current and
anticipated site pedestrian traffic volume is below warrants for a hybrid beacon as
described in Chapter 4F of the MUTCD.
Figure 10 - Proposed ADA Facilities
2 8
Another accessibility concern is regarding ADA compliant parking and accessible routes.
The number of anticipated accessible dwellings was not provided to Anderson-Bogert.
However, based on Section 8C-1 and Table 8C-1.02 of the SUDAS Design Manual, the site
may require additional compliant parking spaces than the lone spot provided on the
proposed site plan.
The ADA compliant spot shown in Figure 11 does not appear to be ideally located for access
to either the Scooter’s Coffee structure or the proposed 1st Floor commercial space. It also
does not appear to contain the required access lane adjacent to the parking spot. Per
PROWAG, this spot should be placed as close as feasible to the structures it serves. On a
newly developed site, this is typically closer and more direct. We could not tell from the site
plan that there was an ADA compliant accessible route from the ADA parking stall to any
of the commercial structures. At this stage, the site plan does not show anticipated
accessible routes and ramp facilities which connect the parking lot and structures.
The site generally appears to accommodate bike traffic. The sidewalk along Scott
Boulevard is wider than a typical pedestrian sidewalk, about 8 feet. The sidewalk is not as
wide as the minimum typical width of 10 feet for shared-use path design. Bikes will not
likely desire to ride on Dodge Street, but could traverse the intersection by riding with
traffic. Scott Boulevard to the south becomes a 2-lane roadway with minimal width
outside the traveled way, including curbs. Bikes may choose to ride the wide existing
sidewalk instead of riding with traffic. The site can accommodate access for bikes to
either.
At the time of this report, Iowa City Transit operates a transit route along Scott Boulevard
and Dodge Street adjacent to the site. There is a designated stop on Dodge Street
northeast bound just prior to entering the signalized intersection (see Figure 12). The
transit stop at this location is no ADA compliant. The site design generally appears to
provide an accessible path from the structures to the existing public sidewalk required to
access this transit stop.
Figure 11 - ADA Compliant Parking
2 9
Figure 12 - Transit Route
3 0
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Dodge Street at Scott Boulevard
In general, we found that the existing signal on Dodge Street at Scott Boulevard could
continue to operate acceptably on opening day if the development is constructed as
proposed herein. At the time of this report, the developer did not have specific plans or
tenants for the 1st Floor Commercial development. As such, trip generation, distribution,
and assignment were assumed based on a combination of possible land uses.
Site Access Intersections
We recommend that the site access points be constructed and located as shown within
the figures provided in this report. As drawn by the developer, driveways appear to be
optimally located, spaced, and sized. We recommend that the development be
constructed with a southeastbound-right turn bay. Should a bay not be included on
opening day, we would recommend a larger curb-return radius to allow faster entry into
the site, but also recommend the site be configured such that a right-turn bay could be
easily added.
There does not appear to be a possibility for further development within the project site
which would contribute additional demand on the commercial driveway. It is not
anticipated that future volumes on the commercial site access will change from those
anticipated on opening day.
Multimodal and Internal Site
We recommend that the site be reviewed and modified to better accommodate all modes
of traffic. The proposed site plan appears to have several sidewalks and pedestrian
crossings which are not located ideally. The designer should limit the pedestrian-vehicle
conflict points and crossing distances as much as feasible. As shown, the proposed
pedestrian routes may be confusing to both pedestrians and drivers.
We recommend that the site be reviewed in regards to accessible parking and accessible
routes to/from structures. Since a portion of the commercial space is unknown, the site
will likely require additional accessible spaces. The space shown on the provided plan does
not appear to have a required access lane and direct path to the structures it serves.
The proposed site will primarily generate vehicular trips as opposed to pedestrian trips
based on surrounding land uses. A new crossing may not be warranted by the proposed
site alone. The need, location, warrant, and safety devices for this crossing should be
reevaluated by MPOJC.
6
7
8
5
1
0.85 AC
36,858 SF
S33° 41' 27"E 2.27'
80.46
'N55° 03' 40"E 208.04'76.26'
2
1.19 AC
51,873 SFS76° 49' 58"W 90.69'S13°
1
0
'
0
2
"
E
7
9
.
7
8
'S76° 49' 58"W 154.71'80.46
'
74.49'
2
3
4
1
8
0.19 AC
8,375 SF
S13°
0
6
'
1
9
"
E
1
7
7
.
0
6
'
6
0.19 AC
8,375 SF
11
0.39 AC
17,011 SF
9
0.13 AC
5,875 SF 10
0.13 AC
5,875 SF
7
0.31 AC
13,291 SF
3
0.21 AC
9,318 SF 5
0.13 AC
5,875 SF
4
0.13 AC
5,875 SF 250'177'
37'
24'
24'
34'
53'
34'
24'
24'
18'250'24'
24'
34'
53'
34'
24'
24'
37'
178'
144'250'269'250'250'250'250'250'250'0 20 40
SITE INFORMATION
LOT SIZE
168,425 SF (3.87 ACRES)
EXISTING ZONING
COMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONE (CO-1)
PROPOSED ZONING
LOT 1:COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONE (CC-2)
LOT 2:MIXED USE (MU)
LOTS 3-11:LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RM-12)
SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
CC-2 MU RM-12
FRONT:40'40'15'
SIDE:0'5'+2*0/10'
REAR:0'5'+2*20'
*MIN SETBACK IS 5' FOR THE FIRST TWO STORIES PLUS 2' FOR EACH ADDITIONAL STORY
HIGHWAY 1 (NORTH DODGE)SCO
T
T
B
L
V
D
5
12
GSCU
KIOSK
PROPOSED
RETAINING WALL
12
SCOOTERS
MONUMENT SIGN
20' R
E
A
R
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
(
R
M
-
1
2
/
2
0
)10' SIDE SETBACK (RM-20)ORDER
BOARD
SCOOTERS
COFFEE
10
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
MULTI-FAMILY USES 2 SPACES / DWELLING
RESTAURANT USE 1 STALL / 150 GFA*
*OR 1
3 OF OCCUPANT LOAD OF SEATING AREA
TOWNHOUSES 8 UNITS
REQUIRED PARKING 16 STALLS
PROVIDED PARKING 26 STALLS
INCL GARAGES
STACKED FLATS (3 BED)8 UNITS
REQUIRED PARKING 16 STALLS
PROVIDED PARKING 16 STALLS
SCOOTERS MAX OCCUPANCY 30 PERSONS
REQUIRED PARKING 10 STALLS
PROVIDED PARKING 11 STALLS
TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING 46 STALLS
TOTAL PROVIDED PARKING 58 STALLS
BIOS
W
A
L
E
/
D
E
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
PATIO
10'
SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
BERM FOR
SCREENING
20' SANITARY
SEWER
EASEMENT
20' SANITARY
SEWER EASEMENT
20' SANITARY
SEWER
EASEMENT15' UTILITY EASEMENT24'
26.98'
34'
34'
34'
34'
47'
TYP.
18'
18'
PROPOSED
RETAINING WALL
BIOS
W
A
L
E
/
D
E
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
23.5' TYP.
SHEET NUMBER:SHEET NAME:DRAWING LOGENGINEER:REVDATEDESCRIPTION OF CHANGESPROJECT NAME:CLIENT NAME:WWW.AXIOM-CON.COM | (319) 519-6220 Aug 19, 2022 - 10:51am S:\PROJECTS\2021\210216\05 Design\Civil-Survey\Concepts\210216 - Concept I.dwg PROJECT NO.:DESIGN PROFESSIONAL:1 OF 1CONCEPT ISCOOTERS ICIOWA CITY, IANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION210216DECKER18'
18'
40' A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
40'
DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
Crash Severity
Fatal Crash 0
Suspected Serious Injury Crash 0
Suspected Minor Injury Crash 2
Possible/Unknown Injury Crash 5
Property Damage Only 53
60 Injury Status Summary
Fatalities 0
Suspected serious/incapacitating 0
Suspected minor/non-incapacitating 2
Possible (complaint of pain/injury)5
Unknown 1
8
Property Damage Total (dollars):246,312.00
Average (per crash dollars):4,105.20
Total Vehicles:121.00
Average (per crash):2.02
Total Occupants:159.00
Average (per crash):2.65
Property/Vehicles/Occupants
Fatalities/Fatal Crash:0.00
Fatalities/Crash:0.00
Injuries/Crash:0.12
Major Injuries/Crash:0.00
Minor Injuries/Crash:0.03
Possible/Unknown Injuries/Crash:0.08
Average Severity
08/30/2022 1 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Time of Day/Day of Week
Day of Week
12 AM
to
2 AM
2 AM
to 4
AM
4 AM
to 6
AM
6 AM
to 8
AM
8 AM
to
10 AM
10 AM
to
Noon
Noon
to 2
PM
2 PM
to 4
PM
4 PM
to 6
PM
6 PM
to 8
PM
8 PM
to
10 PM
10 PM
to
12 AM
Not
reporte
d Total
Sunday 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
Monday 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 11
Tuesday 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 5 0 2 0 0 12
Wednesday 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 7
Thursday 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 4 2 0 0 0 10
Friday 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 2 1 0 0 12
Saturday 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 5
Total 0 0 1 6 2 7 8 9 16 7 4 0 0 60
Month
January 9
February 5
March 5
April 6
May 6
June 5
July 3
August 3
September 3
October 6
November 2
December 7
Not reported 0
60 Contributing Circumstance - Environment
None apparent 55
Weather conditions 3
Visual obstruction 0
Non-motorist action 0
Glare 0
Animal in roadway 0
Severe crosswind 0
Not reported 2
Other 0
Unknown 0
60
Light Condition
Daylight 46
Dusk 3
Dawn 0
Dark - roadway lighted 9
Dark - roadway not lighted 1
Dark - unknown roadway lighting 0
Unknown 0
Not reported 1
60
Lighting
Daylight 47
Darkness 9
Morning Twilight (dawn 30 minutes after sunri...2
Evening Twilight (dusk 30 minutes before suns...2
Unknown 0
60
Weather Conditions
Clear 33
Cloudy 16
Fog, smoke, smog 0
Freezing rain/drizzle 0
Rain 5
Sleet, hail 0
Snow 3
Blowing snow 0
Severe winds 1
Blowing sand, soil, dirt 0
Not reported 1
Other 0
Unknown 1
60 Surface Conditions
Dry 45
Wet 10
Ice/frost 0
Snow 4
Slush 0
Mud, dirt 0
Water (standing or moving)0
Sand 0
Oil 0
Gravel 0
Not reported 1
Other 0
Unknown 0
60
08/30/2022 2 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Major Cause
Animal 3
Ran stop sign 0
FTYROW: At uncontrolled intersection 0
FTYROW: From stop sign 1
FTYROW: Making left turn 0
FTYROW: From parked position 0
FTYROW: Other 0
Disregarded RR Signal 0
Crossed median (divided)0
Aggressive driving/road rage 0
Exceeded authorized speed 0
Operating vehicle in an reckless, erratic, ca...4
Passing: On wrong side 0
Passing: With insufficient distance/inadequa...0
Passing: Other passing 0
Driver Distraction: Manual operation of an e...0
Driver Distraction: Talking on a hands free ...0
Driver Distraction: Other electronic device ...0
Driver Distraction: Unrestrained animal 0
Driver Distraction: Inattentive/lost in thou...0
Driver Distraction: Exterior distraction 1
Ran off road - straight 0
Lost control 3
Over correcting/over steering 0
Failure to signal intentions 0
Vehicle stopped on railroad tracks 0
Other: Improper operation 0
Other: Disregarded signs/road markings 1
Downhill runaway 0
Towing improperly 0
Equipment failure 0
Other: Getting off/out of vehicle 0
Improper backing 0
Illegally parked/unattended 0
Operator inexperience 1
Unknown 6
Other: No improper action 0
Ran traffic signal 3
Failed to yield to emergency vehicle 0
FTYROW: Making right turn on red signal 0
FTYROW: From yield sign 0
FTYROW: From driveway 0
FTYROW: To pedestrian 0
Drove around RR grade crossing gates 0
Crossed centerline (undivided)0
Traveling wrong way or on wrong side of road 0
Driving too fast for conditions 2
Improper or erratic lane changing 10
Followed too close 13
Passing: Where prohibited by signs/markings 0
Passing: Through/around barrier 0
Made improper turn 1
Driver Distraction: Talking on a hand-held d...0
Driver Distraction: Adjusting devices (radio...0
Driver Distraction: Passenger 0
Driver Distraction: Reaching for object(s)/f...0
Driver Distraction: Other interior distracti...1
Ran off road - right 1
Ran off road - left 0
Swerving/Evasive Action 0
Failed to keep in proper lane 0
Traveling on prohibited traffic way 0
Other: Vision obstructed 0
Other: Disregarded warning sign 0
Other: Illegal off-road driving 0
Separation of units 0
Cargo/equipment loss or shift 0
Oversized load/vehicle 0
Failure to dim lights/have lights on 0
Improper starting 0
Driving less than the posted speed limit 0
Other 5
Not reported 0
56
08/30/2022 3 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Manner of Crash Collision
Non-collision (single vehicle)5
Head-on (front to front)0
Rear-end (front to rear)29
Angle, oncoming left turn 1
Broadside (front to side)4
Sideswipe, same direction 20
Sideswipe, opposite direction 0
Rear to rear 0
Rear to side 0
Not reported 1
Other 0
Unknown 0
60 Location of First Harmful Event
On roadway 58
Shoulder 0
Median 0
Roadside 1
Gore 0
Outside trafficway 0
In parking lane/zone 0
Continuous left turn lane 0
Separator 0
Not reported 0
Other 0
Unknown 1
60
Event Summary - Non-Collision
Sequence
First
Harmful
Most
Harmful 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
0 0 0 0 0 0 Overturn/rollover
0 0 0 0 0 0 Jackknife
0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-contact vehicle (phantom)
0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle went airborne
0 0 0 0 0 0 Fell/jumped from vehicle
Total Vehicles: 121
08/30/2022 4 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Event Summary - Collision With
Sequence
First
Harmful
Most
Harmful 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
0 0 0 0 0 0 Thrown or falling object
3 2 2 0 0 0 Animal
1 1 1 0 0 0 Non-motorist (see non-motorist section - NOT ...
53 107 109 5 1 0 Vehicle in traffic
0 0 0 0 0 0 Re-entering roadway
0 0 0 0 0 0 Parked motor vehicle
0 0 0 0 0 0 Work zone maintenance equipment
0 0 0 0 0 0 Railway vehicle/train
0 0 0 0 0 0 Struck/struck by object/cargo/person from oth...
0 0 0 0 0 0 Other non-fixed object
Total Vehicles: 121
Event Summary - Collision With Fixed Object
Sequence
First
Harmful
Most
Harmful 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
0 0 0 0 0 0 Bridge overhead structure
0 0 0 0 0 0 Bridge pier or support
0 0 0 0 0 0 Bridge/bridge rail parapet
1 0 0 1 0 0 Curb/island/raised median
0 0 0 0 0 0 Ditch
0 0 0 0 0 0 Embankment
0 0 0 0 0 0 Ground
0 0 0 0 0 0 Culvert/pipe opening
0 0 0 0 0 0 Guardrail - face
0 0 0 0 0 0 Guardrail - end
0 0 0 0 0 0 Concrete traffic barrier (median or right sid...
0 0 0 0 0 0 Other traffic barrier
0 0 0 0 0 0 Cable barrier
0 0 0 0 0 0 Impact attenuator/crash cushion
0 0 0 0 0 0 Utility pole/light support
0 1 0 0 1 0 Traffic sign support
0 0 0 0 0 0 Traffic signal support
0 0 0 0 0 0 Other post/pole/support
0 0 0 0 0 0 Fire hydrant
0 0 0 0 0 0 Mailbox
0 0 0 0 0 0 Tree
0 0 0 0 0 0 Landscape/shrubbery
0 0 0 0 0 0 Snow bank
0 0 0 0 0 0 Fence
0 0 0 0 0 0 Wall
0 0 0 0 0 0 Building
0 0 0 0 0 1 Other fixed object
Total Vehicles: 121
08/30/2022 5 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Event Summary - Miscellaneous Events
Sequence
First
Harmful
Most
Harmful 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
0 0 0 0 0 0 Fire/explosion
0 0 0 0 0 0 Immersion
0 2 0 6 0 0 Hit and run
0 0 0 0 0 0 Eluding law enforcement
0 0 0 0 0 0 Gas inhalation/asphyxiation
0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle out of gear/rolled
Total Vehicles: 121
Fixed Object Struck
Bridge overhead structure 0
Bridge/bridge rail parapet 0
Ditch 0
Ground 0
Guardrail - face 0
Concrete traffic barrier (median or right sid...0
Cable barrier 0
Utility pole/light support 0
Traffic signal support 0
Fire hydrant 0
Tree 0
Snow bank 0
Wall 0
Other fixed object 0
Bridge pier or support 0
Curb/island/raised median 0
Embankment 0
Culvert/pipe opening 0
Guardrail - end 0
Other traffic barrier 0
Impact attenuator/crash cushion 0
Traffic sign support 1
Other post/pole/support 0
Mailbox 0
Landscape/shrubbery 0
Fence 0
Building 0
None (no fixed object struck)120
121
Drug/Alcohol Related
Drug 0
Alcohol (< Statutory)0
Alcohol (Statutory)1
Drug and Alcohol (< Statutory)0
Drug and Alcohol (Statutory)0
Refused 0
Under Influence of Alcohol/Drugs/Medications 0
None Indicated 59
60 Non-Motorist Type
Pedestrian 0
Pedalcyclist (bicycle/tricycle/unicycle/pedal...1
Pedalcycle passenger 0
In or on building 0
Horse and buggy 0
Skater, personal conveyance, wheelchair 0
Not reported 0
Other non-motorist 0
Unknown 0
1
08/30/2022 6 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Road Classifiction
Interstate 0
US Route 0
Iowa Route 38
Secondary Road 0
Municipal Road 17
Institutional Road 0
Other 0
Unknown 5
60 Intersection Classification
Interstate - Interstate 0
Interstate - US Route 0
Interstate - IA Route 0
Interstate - Secondary 0
Interstate - Municipal 0
Interstate - Institutions 0
US Route - US Route 0
US Route - IA Route 0
US Route - Secondary 0
US Route - Municipal 0
US Route - Institutions 0
IA Route - IA Route 0
IA Route - Secondary 0
IA Route - Municipal 28
IA Route - Institutions 0
Secondary - Secondary 0
Secondary - Municipal 0
Secondary - Institutions 0
Municipal - Municipal 3
Municipal - Institutions 0
Institutions - Institutions 0
Not Indicated as an Intersection 29
Unlocated or Unknown 0
60
Work Zone Type
Lane closure 0
Lane switch/crossover 0
Work on shoulder or median 0
Intermittent or moving work 0
Not reported 0
Other 0
Unknown 0
0
Work Zone Location
Before work zone warning sign 0
Advance warning area 0
Transition area 0
Within or adjacent to work activity 0
Termination area 0
Not reported 0
Other 0
Unknown 0
0
Contributing Circumstance - Road
None apparent 52
Surface condition (e.g., wet, icy)4
Debris 0
Ruts/holes/bumps 0
Work Zone (roadway-related)0
Slippery, loose, or worn surface 1
Obstruction in roadway 0
Traffic control obscured 0
Shoulders (none, low, soft, high)0
Non-highway work 0
Traffic backup, prior crash 0
Traffic backup, regular congestion 1
Traffic backup, prior non-recurring incident 0
Disabled vehicle 0
Not reported 2
Other 0
Unknown 0
60
Work Zone Activity
Construction 0
Maintenance 0
Utility 0
Not reported 0
Other 0
Unknown 0
0
Workers Present
Workers only 0
No workers present 0
Workers and officer present 0
Law enforcement only 0
No one present 0
Not reported 0
Other 0
Unknown 0
0
Work Zone Related
Yes 0
No 0
Unknown 0
Not reported 0
0
08/30/2022 7 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Crash Severity - Annual
Crash Year Fatal Crash
Suspected Serious
Injury Crash
Suspected Minor
Injury Crash
Possible/Unknown
Injury Crash
Property Damage
Only Total
2012 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 0 0 0 0 0 0
2014 0 0 0 0 0 0
2015 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016 0 0 0 0 0 0
2017 0 0 0 2 6 8
2018 0 0 1 1 14 16
2019 0 0 1 1 12 14
2020 0 0 0 0 8 8
2021 0 0 0 1 8 9
2022 0 0 0 0 5 5
Total 0 0 2 5 53 60
Severity/Year
08/30/2022 8 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Injury Status - Annual
Crash Year Fatalities
Suspected
serious/incapac
itating
Suspected
minor/non-
incapacitating
Possible
(complaint of
pain/injury)Unknown Total
2012 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 0 0 0 0 0 0
2014 0 0 0 0 0 0
2015 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016 0 0 0 0 0 0
2017 0 0 0 2 0 2
2018 0 0 1 2 0 3
2019 0 0 1 0 1 2
2020 0 0 0 0 0 0
2021 0 0 0 1 0 1
2022 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 0 2 5 1 8
Injury Status/Year
08/30/2022 9 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
Jurisdiction: Statewide
Year: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022
Map Selection: Yes
Filter: None
Meeting the following criteria
Analyst Information
08/30/2022 10 of 10
Iowa Crash Analysis Tool
Crash Characteristics
2017-2022
CIVIL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL SURVEY SPECIALTY
60 East Court Street #3, Iowa City, IA 52240 | 319.519.6220 www.axiom-con.com
1901 16th Ave. SW #3, Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 | 319.519.6220
November 15, 2022
APPLICANT’S STATEMENT FOR REZONING
The proposed development area consists of a Parcel #1002153001, located at the southwest corner of N Dodge Street
(Hwy 1) and N Scott Boulevard in Iowa City. Refer to the Rezoning Exhibit included with the Rezoning Application for
additional information and detail. The current zoning classification is CO-1, Commercial Office Zone. The Applicant is
seeking to rezone property to OPD/CC-2, Community Commercial, and OPD/RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family.
The applicant is proposing to comply with all setbacks and area regulations with the CC-2 and RM-12 zone. The proposed
commercial is intended and anticipated to consist of a Scooter’s Coffee, as a sit-down establishment as well as consisting
of a drive-through. Additionally, within the CC-2 zoning, a Mixed Use building is anticipated which would consist of
neighborhood commercial on the ground floor and residential living above. A drive-through ATM kiosk is also proposed to
be within the CC-2 zoning limits. The proposed RM-12 zoning limits is to consist of residential townhomes as depicted in
the preliminary Site Plan.
Based on field survey and topographic data, it is projected that this development will impact critical and steep slopes as
defined by the City of Iowa City Sensitive Areas Ordinance. No protected slopes are identified or intended to be disturbed.
There is city water, storm sewer, and sanitary sewer adjacent to the area being re-zoned. Existing easements are in place
within the parcel and have been identified and discussed with City staff. Storm water management is anticipated to be
incorporated into the development plan based on City of Iowa Design Standards.
Discussion has taken place with City staff in terms of traffic impacts on Scott Boulevard and North Dodge, and a Traffic
Impact Study report was completed and provided to the City of Iowa City as requested. Any and all requirements determined
from that report have been taken into consideration and incorporated into the current preliminary Site Plan. The total area
being re-zoned is 3.87 acres.
Sincerely,
Brian A. Boelk, PE
PRINCIPAL/OWNER
Attachment 7
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JANUARY 4, 2023 – 6:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron (via
zoom), Mark Signs, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Anne Russett, Parker Walsh
OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Boelk, Mike Welch, Paula Swygard, Kenneth Rew
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 3-4 (Craig, Padron, Signs and Townsend dissenting) the Commission does not
recommend approval of REZ22-0015, a proposal to rezone approximately 3.52 acres of property
near the intersection of W. Benton Street and Orchard Street/Court from Low Density Single-
Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) and Riverfront Crossing -
Orchard (RFC-O) to Riverfront Crossing - Orchard (RFC-O), subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to site plan approval for any development on the property, Owner shall:
a. Enter into an agreement with the City providing for the construction of public
improvements or the provision of an improvements escrow prior to issuance of a
building permit. In all cases, however, the public improvements shall be
constructed prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy. The public
improvements shall include, but not be limited to:
i. 6' wide sidewalk along the W. Benton Street frontage of the subject
property in a location approved by the City Engineer.
ii. ii 5' wide sidewalk along the Orchard Street/Court frontage of the subject
property in a location approved by the City Engineer.
iii. Traffic signalization at the corner of W. Benton and Orchard Streets, and
associated intersection improvements, which may include turn lanes, as
approved by the City Engineer.
iv. Reconstruction of Orchard Street/Court in a manner approved by the City
Engineer.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any development on the property, Owner shall
dedicate:
a. A 30' wide public access easement over the span of the pedestrian street and
dedicate right-of-way to the City, without compensation, along W. Benton Street
and Orchard Street/Court. The area to be dedicated shall be up to 15' wide,
depending on the design of the traffic signalization and is subject to approval by
the City Engineer.
b. Any additional easements necessary to comply with the City's subdivision design
standards
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 2 of 14
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NO. REZ22-0015:
Location: North of W. Benton Street and west of Orchard Street
An application for a rezoning of approximately 3.52 acres of land from Low Density Single Family
Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) and Riverfront Crossing
- Orchard (RFC-O) to Riverfront Crossing - Orchard (RFC-O).
Russett noted the Commission deferred this item to today's meeting at the applicants request
which was due to concerns with the original conditions that staff was proposing for the rezoning.
Staff has revised the conditions and believes that the applicant is agreeable to them and
therefore are ready to proceed.
Russett began the staff report with a map of the proposed rezoning area noting the area is
already developed with a mix of housing types. There's single family, duplexes, and fourplexes in
this area with a total of approximately 24 dwelling units within the proposed rezoning area.
Currently a portion of the area, the portion to the south, is already zoned Riverfront Crossings -
Orchard, and that was rezoned back in 2018, and to the north within the subject area is zoned
Single Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay.
In terms of background this area was included into the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown
Master Plan in 2016 when the Master Plan was amended to create the Orchard District and add
it to the Riverfront Crossings District and in 2017 the Riverfront Crossings form-based code was
amended to include Orchard District standards. In 2018 a portion of the subject property was
rezoned to Riverfront Crossings - Orchard, subject to several conditions. Russett reminded the
Commission that at the last meeting they discussed the proposed pedestrian improvements for
the area along South Riverside Drive underneath the Iowa Interstate Railroad and the plan is for
that to start in May of 2023. The public works department plans to request bids this winter and
hopefully start construction in the spring.
The applicant has held two good neighbor meetings for the proposed rezoning, the first was in
September 2022 where they presented a concept that did not align with the Master Plan or the
form-base code. Based on feedback from staff and members of the public, the applicant revised
their concept and held a second good neighbor meeting in November 2022. Russett showed the
Commission the concept that was shared at that meeting, the applicant is proposing three
separate multifamily buildings. She noted there is a pedestrian street that is required as part of
the regulating plan that would be part of any development within this area but there's nothing in
the rezoning that would tie the developer to this particular concept. She showed the proposed
elevations but again noted the rezoning doesn't tie the developer to these elevations or this
concept.
In terms of the proposed zoning, the Riverfront Crossings - Orchard zone is a form-based zone
that regulates scale and form but there is no maximum density. It allows multifamily development
with a maximum height of three stories and unlike some of the other Riverfront Crossings zones,
this zone does not allow any bonus height, so the max is three stories. The zone does require a
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 3 of 14
10-foot setback above the second story and a 30-foot setback from any adjacent single family.
The pedestrian street runs north and south and helps to ensures smaller scale buildings as it
would require the buildings to be broken up.
In terms of rezoning approval criteria, Russett stated they look at two criteria, first is consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan and second is compatibility with the existing neighborhood. In
terms of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the guiding policy document for this area is
the Riverfront Crossings Master Plan that the guiding policy direction anticipates that this area
will be redeveloped and will be rezone to Riverfront Crossings - Orchard zone. Some of the
objectives are redevelopment that is complimentary in mass and scale to the adjacent single
family and to provide the transition between the larger buildings along South Riverside Drive and
the single family further west. In terms of compatibility with the existing neighborhood, the
standards within the Riverfront Crossings - Orchard zone help to ensure neighborhood
compatibility as there's the three-story height max, the 10-foot setback above the second story,
the increased separation from adjacent residential as well as the pedestrian street to help reduce
the scale. Staff is recommending a condition that a 30-foot public access easement be placed
over that pedestrian street to ensure that it is open to the public and all pedestrians in the area.
In terms of transportation and access, there was a traffic study that was completed in 2018 as
part of that rezoning that looked at the intersection of Benton Street and Riverside Drive as well
as the intersection of Orchard Street and Benton Street. Based on that traffic study it was
determined that the Benton Street and Riverside Drive intersection would operate at an
acceptable level of service. However, the Orchard Street and Benton Street intersection would
operate at an unacceptable level of service during peak hours (morning hours and afternoon
hours) and the 2018 rezoning estimated an additional 20 to 30 trips during peak hours. Since this
proposed rezoning includes approximately 65 more residential units it would result in
substantially more traffic generation than the 20 to 30 trips that were looked at in that 2018 study.
Therefore, due to the traffic impacts that would be caused by the proposed rezoning, staff is
recommending several conditions to address those impacts. The first is signalization of the
Benton Street and Orchard Street intersection, which would likely also require some intersection
improvements such as turn lanes. Additionally, staff is recommending construction of a six-foot-
wide sidewalk along West Benton Street and a five-foot-wide sidewalk along Orchard Street,
dedication of additional right-of-way along West Benton and Orchard Street and also the
reconstruction of Orchard Street north of West Benton. Staff has had previously recommended a
condition that would require the owner to re-subdivide this area through the final platting process
but have removed that condition. However, staff wanted to continue to ensure that the public
improvements such as the traffic signalization were installed prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy so that would remain one of the recommended conditions.
Staff received five pieces of correspondence related to this application which were included in
the agenda packet. To summarize, some of the main concerns in the letters were related to
traffic, cut-through traffic, and parking.
Staff recommends approval of REZ22-0015, a proposal to rezone approximately 3.52 acres of
property near the intersection of W. Benton Street and Orchard Street/Court from Low Density
Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) and Riverfront
Crossing - Orchard (RFC-O) to Riverfront Crossing - Orchard (RFC-O), subject to the following
conditions:
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 4 of 14
1. Prior to site plan approval for any development on the property, Owner shall:
c. Enter into an agreement with the City providing for the construction of public
improvements or the provision of an improvements escrow prior to issuance of a
building permit. In all cases, however, the public improvements shall be
constructed prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy. The public
improvements shall include, but not be limited to:
i. 6' wide sidewalk along the W. Benton Street frontage of the subject
property in a location approved by the City Engineer.
ii. ii 5' wide sidewalk along the Orchard Street/Court frontage of the subject
property in a location approved by the City Engineer.
iii. Traffic signalization at the corner of W. Benton and Orchard Streets, and
associated intersection improvements, which may include turn lanes, as
approved by the City Engineer.
iv. Reconstruction of Orchard Street/Court in a manner approved by the City
Engineer.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any development on the property, Owner shall
dedicate:
d. A 30' wide public access easement over the span of the pedestrian street and
dedicate right-of-way to the City, without compensation, along W. Benton Street
and Orchard Street/Court. The area to be dedicated shall be up to 15' wide,
depending on the design of the traffic signalization and is subject to approval by
the City Engineer.
e. Any additional easements necessary to comply with the City's subdivision design
standards
Upon recommendation from the Planning Commission, the public hearing will be scheduled for
consideration by the City Council with the anticipated timeline that Council would set the public
hearing on January 10 and hold the public hearing and first consideration on January 24.
Craig noted she thought they were weird looking buildings but realized they have open space
areas or atriums. She asked about where the parking would be. Russett replied the parking as
they're proposing it now is within the one building for all the units and they're proposing 189 units
but parking ratios are based on the number of beds that each of those units have and they're not
that far along in the design to know how many parking spaces would be required. The required
ratio is for an efficiency or a one bedroom, it's 0.75 spaces per unit, for a two bedroom, it's 1.5
spaces per unit and then three bedrooms are 2.5 spaces per unit. Any affordable units wouldn't
require parking.
Craig asked if there will be parking on the street. Russett replied yes but it will depend on the
width of Orchard Street when it is reconstructed, if it is a 28-foot width, it would allow parking on
both sides, if it's a 26-foot width, it would allow parking only on one side.
Craig also had a question about putting a light at that intersection as it was brough up in several
of the letters, she can envision people trying to come across Riverside Drive and having no place
to go because there's a red light at Orchard Street, what do the traffic people say about that.
Russett stated the public works and transportation planning staff have looked at this and they
believe that the signalization is the best way to improve traffic in this area as there's not that
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 5 of 14
many other options and it'll make it safer for people trying to get places, especially if they're
turning left along Orchard. Right now there is a lot of traffic in that area at peak hours and this is
going to add traffic. Craig agrees but still envisions people crossing Riverside going west and
are going to be in the middle of Riverside Drive because they traffic's backed up at the red light
at Orchard. Russett replied they will have the signalization function in a way so it is timed.
Elliott asked about the process, because they're reviewing the rezoning tonight, but then when
the concept comes back, is that an administrative review. Russett confirmed it would be
administrative and would need to go through design review and the form-base code committee
and they would need a site plan application as well as building permits which would all be
administrative. She did note the applicant may be proposing a vacation of public right-of-way
which would come back to this Commission.
Craig asked how many units are in that existing fairly new building that is accessed in and out
through Orchard Street. Russett was unsure.
Hensch noted in 2018 when they rezoned the south parcel to Riverfront Crossings – Orchard but
wondered if besides the rezoning and that vacation of public right-of-way have they discussed
this area very much because at the time there was a big concern about traffic and the drainage
area through there. Russett noted there is a City owned lot that collects water for stormwater
management in the area.
Wade had a question on the re-subdivide, initially was that a request and why now it got vetoed.
Russett explained staff was originally proposing that the applicant re-subdivide and replat this
through the final plat process and the main concern staff had was the public improvements
related to traffic signalization, turn lanes and reconstruction of Orchard Court. Although public
improvements don't have to come at platting, they can come at site plan review and staff’s main
concern was ensuring that those public improvements were in place before anyone is occupying
any new building in this area. Staff now feels they have address that with the condition related to
those improvements being installed and accepted by the City prior to certificate of occupancy.
Wade noted at the first public meeting this might have been one larger structure and now it has
been broken down into three structures. Russett confirmed that's correct. Wade asked then if
the zoning would be approved is there anything that requires it to remain three structures, versus
going back to a single larger structure. Russett stated the original concept also included other
properties along with the one larger structure but with this rezoning that would not be allowed.
Additionally, the pedestrian street is required by the zoning code and is going to have to be
installed even if they reconfigure the layout a little bit. The other thing that is a constraint for this
property is fire access and she doesn’t see how they're going to provide fire access to the rear of
these buildings. Russett reiterated this is a concept and they are not required to substantially
comply with this concept as part of the rezoning, but they're definitely going to have to have the
pedestrian street and ensure some type of fire access. Wade asked if there is anything that
limits that pedestrian access to where it is demonstrated on this concept or could it be shifted.
Russett confirmed it needs to stay there because it's on the regulating plan.
Townsend noted her concern is the fact that they're not going to have any affordable housing
and are going to pay the fee in lieu when this is an area where there is bus access and access to
all the things people need. Is there any way they could guarantee some affordable housing in
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 6 of 14
that area for this rezoning. Russett replied they are required to meet the affordable housing
requirements and the City’s affordable housing requirements do provide the option to pay a fee
in lieu of providing it on site. So if they don't provide them on site, they would need to pay a fee
to the City's affordable housing fund and it's her understanding that that's the route that they
would like to take.
Signs stated he believes that there was a City lot involved there and is there anything that would
prohibit an additional access street from being put over that lot. Russett noted that was
something that they had considered with the 2018 rezoning and with that rezoning they
recommended a condition of 30-foot-wide access easement that would be placed there. Also at
that time staff felt that if they received any future development proposals for this area that a
signal would be required at Benton and Orchard and now they're recommending the signal as
opposed to a secondary access as they would need to get permission from the City to either
acquire that lot or get an easement to provide that access. Additionally, there are some natural
features in the area, there's a stream corridor and some vegetation so any additional pavement
in the area would probably be more impactful to the neighbors. Staff feels the signalization is the
best way to deal with the increased traffic at this time.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Brian Boelk (Axiom Consultants) is representing the applicant Aptitude Development. Mike
Welch with Welch Design Development is also present but a representative from Aptitude was
not able to make it here tonight, but they do plan on being at the Council meeting. Boelk noted
they have been working with City staff diligently to try to continue to evolve this project. As
already noted, it started as one larger mass building and made quite an impact. They had a
really good dialogue in the first good neighbor meeting with a lot of the residents and neighbors,
a couple of which are here tonight, so that was very informative. They really took to heart the
discussion with staff as well and went back to the developer, applicant and the architect and did
a lot of revising over the past several months to one big large mass building into three smaller
buildings. Boelk noted there was actually a reduction of 60 units during those revisions and a
reduction of a little over 100 beds in that timeframe as well. Regarding the point of that second
access, there was a second access originally looked at with that larger one mass building in the
original concept but when they talked to City staff about that there was a lot of concern from the
neighbors with having another street out that close to those residences. Their team continued to
work with public works and traffic engineering, and they are confident in the traffic signalization
working, and there would be timing that would be interactive with the other signal at Benton
Street and Riverside Drive. There are ways to do that so that that timing is interconnected to
prevent queuing within the intersection. Turn lanes was the other item that has been discussed
and adding left turn lanes on Benton Street to the north and south from Orchard to help alleviate
traffic flow as well that is looking to turn in either direction and keep the through street going on
Benton Street. Regarding parking at the north building, it is really a parking ramp within that
north building and there are three levels and then they have liner units on the outside of that. So
there's a lower level parking, the second level is liner unit townhomes with parking around the
outside and then a third level is just residential, no parking on that level. There are courtyards in
between the buildings, those are not parking areas. While they don’t have exact numbers, Boelk
stated they are somewhere in 283 parking stalls area, which are accounting for what is within
that parking ramp itself but that will fluctuate and will be based on the final total number
bedrooms in the units, Regarding affordable housing, they're well aware of the requirement and
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 7 of 14
will fully meet that, they have not yet finally determined how that's going to be met, the fee in lieu
has been mentioned but they're still looking at options in terms of affordable housing within the
building itself too so they haven't totally taken it off the table. Finally, Boelk wanted to note they
totally acknowledge and accept all the conditions that have been placed on this by City staff.
Hensch asked about building structure with the liner units around the parking ramp and will that
look in appearance similar to the current structure that is on South Dubuque Street. Boelk
confirmed it would be similar to that and with those liner units on the outside they won’t know
there's a parking ramp within there.
Hensch asked regarding the question about parking, when will the determination be made on the
width of the street, will it be 26 feet wide or 28 feet wide because it's kind of important to know
with what parking options there will be. Boelk replied they’ve had some discussions with public
works and City staff but no final determination has been made on that. He doesn’t believe the
applicant or developer cares either way and they will certainly design and build that to what City
staff feels is necessary there.
Hensch stated a couple years ago the Commission rezone the property just north of there and
felt like a bait and switch occurred on that one on the rezoning based on concept presented and
final platting. He asked how strongly or closely they think at this time they’ll be here adhering to
this current concept. Boelk acknowledged he totally understands the concern and stated
Aptitude Development does multifamily housing geared towards student housing, so that is what
they are proposing here. They've done it all around the nation in a number of college towns, so
that is quite a bit of proof and evidence of their intent. The biggest change they've seen from
what they originally wanted was that one larger mass building and just wasn't going to work here
but they've been very good at continuing to downsize and reconfigure.
Hensch noted the 10 foot step back on stories above second story, is that step back just on
certain sides or all sides because people are rightfully always concerned about the height of a
building if there are adjacent single family homes and they need to understand what that step
back is and how it’s going to look much different than just a three story wall next-door. Russett
replied the step backs are required along the street frontages, so along Orchard and along
Benton, they will also be required to do it along the pedestrian street because that's considered a
street frontage, and it is also required along the residential side.
Hensch asked regarding fire department access to the back of the structure with the parking
ramp and the liner structures, how are they going to do that on the west side. Boelk stated they
have been working with the fire marshal, they’ve had two or three different meetings to discuss
what they're trying to do and likewise with fire hose length and fire truck access, so there might
be some additional modifications in terms of length and where that fire link goes to, but they’re
working together to come up with the best scenario. Also in terms of design and building code,
they will have all the proper sprinkler mode and standpipes and things like that within the building
itself to help facilitate that fire protection that they need.
Hensch noted the intersection of Orchard and Benton has been kind of a mess because there's
just no traffic controls there, so with the conditions the City has listed from an engineering
standpoint does Boelk agree it will improve what it there now. Boelk confirmed he agrees with
that, he has looked at some of the traffic counts that were from the previous traffic study and
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 8 of 14
sees this as an absolute improvement.
Hensch remembers in the 2018 rezoning there was a lot of concern from the neighbors about
that green area, the drainage area to the west side, and by adding more impervious surface will
that increase water load into that drainage area. Boelk replied that will certainly need to be
evaluated which they will do through the design review and the site plan process. He stated
they’ve actually had a number of conversations with property owners along there on that
stormwater management and how they are going to deal with stormwater underground so they
will look at that drainage area and get the City engineer to agree with the stormwater
management plan.
Townsend noted at a previous meeting the Commission talked about plugins for electric cars and
are they going provide such plugin as a part of these buildings. Boelk replied they’ve had some
discussions on that with the design team and architect and applicant but can’t confirm where
that's landed to date. He added within that same discussion there's been talks on solar panels
and things like that too on the roof.
Signs asked if this is the same developer that came before this Commission in 2018, and if not
has this developer developed any other properties in the Iowa City market. Boelk replied no, this
developer has not done anything in this market yet, however the architect was the same architect
that was part of the 700 South Dubuque project.
Craig wanted to discuss parking again, she just has a huge problem that there is only one way
out for all those cars and the parking won't be adequate. Will they assign the parking spaces to
specific units, for example if somebody gets off work at second shift at UIHC and they drive
home what if there's no place to park in that garage, where are they going to go. Boelk is unsure
how the developer has handled this in the past on other buildings they've done, they might have
assigned permanent parking per assigned stall, he can inquire on that. Craig noted it is less
important when there's more surface streets or more places to go to park.
Hensch agreed and noted his concern about the 28 versus 26 foot width for the road and the
availability of on-street parking for guests. Boelk acknowledged they had some parking
discussions at their meeting earlier this week with applicant and one of the things they talked
about was the need to meet City code, obviously, number one with number of parking stalls to
provide, but number two, that they don't want to do themselves a disservice, either with their own
tenants and rentals. If they can’t provide parking for their tenants, they are going to hear about it
and not going to have them renting again the next year. So, they fully acknowledge and
understand that and have enough projects under their belt to know and have a good feel for what
that parking requirement should be and obviously, again, needing to meet City code.
Hensch asked who makes the decision on the road widths, is that the City engineers, in
conjunction with the applicants. Boelk replied yes, it'd be the City engineer or public works.
Hensch asked what's the decision criteria.
Mike Welch (Welch Design Development) noted that’s a good question, there are the couple
options that they've already talked about like having parking at least on the west side of Orchard
Street is probably a good thing. Parking on the east side would require someone go into the Kum
and Go driveway and around the other building so his guess is that's the recommendation is
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 9 of 14
going to be that it's 28 feet wide with parking on the west side.
Elliott asked where does the bus stop, is it on Benton Street or Riverside Drive. Russett noted
where the bus stops on Benton Street before getting to Riverside Drive.
Wade noted people are now using Kum & Go as a cut through on a red light on Riverside Drive,
adding apartment structures will cause more of that, is there any thought to trying to mitigate that
cut through path. Boelk agreed that’s a good point, those are all private properties but if a
number of people are continuing to do that and they're hitting Riverside traffic, they're not getting
out any quicker so maybe they will learn that this isn't going to work well as a cut through.
Beyond that he doesn’t know if there's anything to help restrict that any further. Boelk noted the
signalization on Orchard will help a lot with that because that's a lot of why they're cutting
through now is because they can't get out onto Benton so hopefully that signal will give them
those windows to do so.
Paula Swygard (426 Douglass Street) stated first she doesn’t envy them as this is a very
complicated thing to look at, they're being asked to approve a rezoning that will have a
monumental impact on this area, and they really don't have much to go on except blind faith and
a list of conditional zoning agreements. Because its form-based they don't have the actual
concept that they're required to stick with, and they don't have exactly how the open space
requirement will be met. They do have the height, that's one good thing they know, but they don't
know exactly how many units this will be nor really a concept for the mass of the building.
Swygard noted one of the Commissioners just referred to this as a larger scale development, but
the zoning for this area is to be a lower density area, that in the Plan and in the Code. Swygard
could try to explain what it's actually like to live there and that there are times of the day when it
is a little difficult to turn onto Benton Street. When she used to work she had to make a turn to
the west off of Orchard. But, it works itself out, people learn to find an alternate route. There are
many times the day when the signalization will actually stop traffic that's flowing because there's
not that much traffic between say two and three in the afternoon but people will have to stop for
traffic light because it's all coordinated, unnecessary stops. Swygard also noted one thing that
has not been addressed and she’s been talking about it for years and knows all of the Plans, the
Southwest District Plan, the Miller Orchard Neighborhood Plan (yes they have their own plan that
was approved by City Council) and Riverfront Crossings is the impact of all of this traffic that will
be generated on Hudson and Miller Streets, those cut through streets that go from Benton over
to the highway. People are going to come out of this development, they're going to make a right-
hand turn, because they don't want to go through the highway to go over to Walmart and that's
going to increase the traffic there. They've had traffic studies done already in those areas, they're
old, but at that time they showed that the traffic was over what it should be, and they qualified for
traffic calming which was never put in place. Regarding the affordable housing, they've kind of
danced around that subject and this is taking out an affordable area of town to live in compared
to other areas. But again, as typically done in Iowa City, they remove that and replace it with high
rent housing. The traffic is going to be substantially more, it's going to be a lot. Also, they just
went through two years of reconstructing Orchard Street which was two years of extreme
inconvenience for their area. With regards to parking, it is not going to be enough, that's just the
way it is. So, Swygard asks if they're going to approve this is could they please consider
requiring an opaque fence or wall or S5 screening between residential properties and any
development that happens, they have a lot of people that walk-through yards all the time.
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 10 of 14
Kenneth Rew (302 W Benton Street) lives just to the west of the City lot right where the creek
runs through and while this may not mean a lot to anyone they bought that house 45 years ago
next week and their daughter lives right beside them and their son and his wife live across the
street so that's been their little piece of heaven since they moved there and his wife still talks
about how much she loves it every year. Other people said it was a nice starter home but they’re
finishing there no matter what. They’ve enjoyed the neighborhood, getting to know a few
neighbors and they've loved that creek that comes and wraps around right behind their backyard
and around their garage. Yes, Benton Street is busy but it's amazingly quieter back in their
backyard. They have a daughter in law that has mental problems, but she relaxes back there,
where she can just watch the creek, and it's just peaceful with all kinds of little wildlife and stuff.
So, when they were told that they were now going to, at one point, take those three other houses
and the empty lot and pave over the creek and all of that they were literally devastated. But then
this last meeting, they were told that, okay, the plan is not to take those houses or the empty lot,
so they do get to keep their little piece of heaven and he is hoping it stays like that. He does
agree with Commissioner Townsend regarding the affordable housing, and it always has been
affordable and is not rundown housing or falling down or trash, many have had different
improvements over the years, so it's true that they’re taking away affordable housing to put in
less affordable housing. Rew acknowledges he knows that big structure is still going to happen
but noted it really does feel like it totally changes the neighborhood to put that many more units
in and that much more traffic in their piece of heaven. The whole thing saddens him, but he
understands that's progress. He also agrees with Swygard on having a good barrier fence of
some kind, because people will just run right through that empty lot and those other yards to
come over to Benton Street if there's not actually a physical barrier of some kind.
Paula Swygard (426 Douglass Street) wanted to add about the on-street parking, there really
isn't any place to put on-street parking there, people are trying to get in and out of Kum and Go,
and on the west side there's a lot of curb cuts there that would disappear. She is not sure what
the current signage says about parking there but there's tons of parking tickets written there,
whenever she looks at the police log for her area, it's just constant constant constant.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Signs moved to recommend approval of REZ22-0015, a proposal to rezone approximately
3.52 acres of property near the intersection of W. Benton Street and Orchard Street/Court
from Low Density Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay
(OPD/RS-5) and Riverfront Crossing - Orchard (RFC-O) to Riverfront Crossing - Orchard
(RFC-O), subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to site plan approval for any development on the property, Owner shall:
a. Enter into an agreement with the City providing for the construction of
public improvements or the provision of an improvements escrow prior to
issuance of a building permit. In all cases, however, the public
improvements shall be constructed prior to issuance of any certificate of
occupancy. The public improvements shall include, but not be limited to:
i. 6' wide sidewalk along the W. Benton Street frontage of the subject
property in a location approved by the City Engineer.
ii. ii 5' wide sidewalk along the Orchard Street/Court frontage of the
subject property in a location approved by the City Engineer.
iii. Traffic signalization at the corner of W. Benton and Orchard Streets,
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 11 of 14
and associated intersection improvements, which may include turn
lanes, as approved by the City Engineer.
iv. Reconstruction of Orchard Street/Court in a manner approved by the
City Engineer.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any development on the property, Owner
shall dedicate:
a. A 30' wide public access easement over the span of the pedestrian street
and dedicate right-of-way to the City, without compensation, along W.
Benton Street and Orchard Street/Court. The area to be dedicated shall be
up to 15' wide, depending on the design of the traffic signalization and is
subject to approval by the City Engineer.
b. Any additional easements necessary to comply with the City's subdivision
design standards
Elliott seconded the motion.
Hensch asked about the waterway to the west and sees on the concept plan presented there's
vegetation on the south side of that one structure and the west side of the other, is that going to
be S3 standard. Boelk noted that is just representing proposed landscaping and screening but
obviously there'll be screening requirements based on City code. He noted they have talked
about fencing and some possible structural screening in addition to vegetation and have talked to
the applicant about that.
Hensch agrees that if they're next to a taller structure like that, screening would be nice, he’s not
a fan of fences and people are going to cut through because people do what they do but using
natural barriers with like S3 screening throughout that area is a pretty good idea. He is in favor
of this application and thinks the development this area has turned out really well when they
rezoned the south portion in 2018. This is just doing the same thing consistently with the north
and the traffic control measures will actually improve what's going on there because right now it
can be a mess at times. He admits he is personally guilty of cutting through Miller and Hudson to
get to the highway but does think this will help. The whole point of Riverfront Crossings is the
concept of improving density. He really liked the liner buildings, it's been a success as seen with
the structure on South Dubuque Street, so that concept has been proven to be successful and
it's an innovative way to deal with parking. He would like to see them add a condition of adding
screening to the areas that don't have natural vegetation that are on the areas next to single
family residential.
Signs is going to respectfully disagree with most of what Hensch just said and has several issues
with the project. He remembers back when they first looked at rezoning this Riverfront Crossings
and when they looked at the last development proposal, there's so much discussion about this
being a transition area. The 2018 proposal didn't include the large section to the north and it
didn't include as much on the south section either and it seems like all sections have grown
significantly to where this is a pretty massive project in his estimation. He also doesn’t see much
green there except trees on the streets, but there is not a lot of green space. What he sees is
189 units and the number of cars and stalls. He is familiar with the liner concept of the parking
garage and would agree that's much preferable to just a parking garage being visible. He
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 12 of 14
questions the language in the Riverfront Crossings zone talking about pedestrian friendly
streetscapes and street facing entries and he questions the number of street facing entries that
they're going to see on this project when it's finally developed. And as previously mentioned,
unfortunately this development is coming at a time when several of the Commissioners feel
recently burned about a proposal that turned out to be nothing like what they were sold at the
time of the rezoning so personally he’s much more cautious than he was two months ago. He is
also concerned about fire access because they hear so much about that also and here's another
project that really doesn't have in his mind adequate fire access, there is one way in and one
way out. He is very concerned about the traffic and a light here is going to be a disaster. He
travels this route almost daily coming down Riverside and oftentimes turning west onto Benton
and even now there are times when the traffic is basically backed up from Orchard Street to
Riverside if there's a big truck or something coming out of Orchard Street or turning into Orchard
Street. That backs up traffic from Orchard Street to Riverside, it’s very regularly backed up there
and putting another stoplight there leaves no place to go. The previous traffic study indicated that
this was a challenged area already and now they're going to add another 189 units coming out of
one place onto the same street. He is very concerned about traffic and traffic movement. They
also need to remind themselves they just saw proposal last time or time before for another huge
development on the north side of the tracks right in the same location, which is going to add
traffic pressure to that entire area, in addition to this one. He also feels maybe they need to have
a greater conversation about affordable housing and the loss of affordable housing. They are
seeing with the development north of the tracks, with this development, with many of the
developments in the Riverfront Crossings zone to be perfectly honest, a loss of what is currently
affordable housing being replaced by what's not going to be affordable housing and it feels like
they've all opted to pay a fee in lieu, and he’s not exactly sure where that money is being spent.
He hasn’t seen any significant number of affordable housing units being built, so as they look at
these large projects they have to respond to the community's desire for maintaining affordable
housing and this is one more example of a situation where that's not happening. He is inclined to
vote against this proposal at this time.
Hensch stated just refresh everybody's memory any fee in lieu of has to be spent in the
Riverfront Crossings area. Signs understand but asked then where is it going to happen, nobody
wants to do it. Hensch replied the City will have to do that because they're the ones collecting
money.
Craig stated she will not be supporting this, she has too many problems with it. She drove over
there again to really look at the area. The Comprehensive Plan says complimentary mass and
scale and she does not believe this is complimentary in mass and scale. If it was one small,
much smaller building, maybe larger in the back but the front had one story and some green
space, she could see that. Additionally, it's that single in and out with hundreds of cars and no
place for them to cut through to get anywhere except to Riverside Drive where they can't park.
She just cannot support this.
Elliott stated she is going to support it as she thinks it meets the rezoning criteria and she likes
many of the features, she likes the wrap around building, and thinks they can control who parks
in that facility.
Wade stated he likes the three-building layout and thinks that's feasible and in the spirit of the
Master Plan objectives. It’s definitely a much better option than the single large unit. The
Planning and Zoning Commission
January 4, 2023
Page 13 of 14
challenges with traffic flow, that's a challenge based on location, and he doesn’t see how any
developer would overcome that. Traffic signaling, due to lack of options, probably is the most
logical one. His reservations are similar to what has been expressed, this layout looks good
however upon approval, or potential approval, any changes to this layout makes him a little
cautious.
Padron expressed her issue with this project is that it seems just so dense and she’s having a
very hard time imagining how each unit will have enough light and enough windows, it seems
very dense. The close integration will cause a higher use of air conditioning in the summer and
things like that don't seem sustainable. She does like the parking underneath, but if it is only
going be under one of the buildings how is this going to be accessible for a person with
disabilities in living in another building, they will have to park on the farther north building and
then walk or take an accessible path to the other building. She is also concerned about traffic
and the access for the fire trucks. There is also the concern about taking away affordable
housing to build something that is not going to be affordable. Her main concern is it seems like
two different areas, and not a transitional area, it goes from single family to three very dense
buildings with no green space. Padron noted Mike Welch may know more about this because
he's LEED certified but she thinks that LEED recommends that when buildings are so dense,
and they have like a 1.54 FAR they recommend having like green roofs, but if they're thinking
about putting solar panels on the roof, that's not going to be an option either. Therefore, she
does not think she can support this project.
Hensch clarified one point, the North Building doesn't have parking underneath it, it's actually
going to be a parking ramp with liner buildings around it and on the top level there is no parking,
that is where there are the atriums to provide light into the units.
A vote was taken and the motion was defeated 3-4 (Craig, Padron, Signs and Townsend
dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: DECEMBER 7, 2022:
Elliott moved to approve the meeting minutes from December 7, 2022. Signs seconded the
motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: DECEMBER 21, 2022:
Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes from December 21, 2022. Signs seconded the
motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0-1 (Townsend abstained).
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Townsend moved to adjourn, Wade seconded, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2022-2023
7/6 8/3 9/7 10/19 11/2 11/16 12/7 12/21 1/4
CRAIG, SUSAN X X X X X X O/E X X
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE X X X X X X X X X
HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X
NOLTE, MARK O/E O/E O/E -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
PADRON, MARIA X X X X X O/E X X X
SIGNS, MARK X X X X O/E O/E X X X
TOWNSEND, BILLIE X X X X X X X O/E X
WADE, CHAD --- --- --- --- X O/E X X X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member