MINUTES OF THE JOINT INFORMAL MEETING OF JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND JOHNSON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
FEBRUARY 9, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chairperson Neuzil called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 4:32 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Planning and Zoning Commission members present were: Robert Conrad, Terry Dahms, Maynard Hebl, Robert J. Saunders, and Kae Wild. Staff members present were: Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore, and Assistant Planner Josh Busard.
Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore said the updated Land Use Plan was adopted in May of 2008. An implementation schedule was also adopted at that time. The first item on the implementation schedule was a review of the current North Corridor. Planning and Zoning held work sessions with the Board of Supervisors and jointly, they decided that Planning and Zoning would prepare a proposal to reduce the current North Corridor. Moore directed the audience to the PowerPoint map projected on the screen and identified Phase 1 of the plan, an immediate nonagricultural growth area which is determined by historical growth and zoning in the Corridor.
Moore pointed to the Phase 2 area which is largely un-zoned areas in the old Phase 1. The new proposal combines Phase 1 and 2 into a North Corridor Development Area. This proposal was presented at the January 2009 Planning and Zoning meeting. This meeting included a lot of public discussion and input and afterwards, the Planning and Zoning Commission decided they wanted another Commission meeting - including the full Commission - to deal with the subject and they also requested more guidance from the Board.
Moore said currently there are three proposals for maps identifying the Corridor: the current map already in place, the first map as Phase 1 and 2 reduced, and, the third as an area identified as the North Corridor growth area. The Commission can recommend changes to the map before it sends it to the Board. Once the Board receives the map they can accept it, change it, or send it back to Planning and Zoning for more consideration.
Sullivan said he received a lot of questions about the review process. He said he tells the public that the Board is required to review the Land Use Plan every five years. Moore said they could review the maps more frequently. If the opportunity arose within the five year review of the Land Use Plan, Planning and Zoning could start the process again. Sullivan clarified at a minimum the Land Use Plan is reviewed every five years. Moore said yes, when the Board adopted the plan, a five year review was stipulated.
Neuzil asked if the existing Phases of the North Corridor were mapped in 2002. Moore responded 2003. Neuzil said it is time to review the map. He said he received many questions about why the Board is making changes to the phasing. Now they know the process has been consistent and it is time to review the size and scope of the map. Neuzil said he wants to hear from the Planning and Zoning Commission members about their thoughts regarding the proposal.
Planning and Zoning Commission Chairperson Bob Saunders said the revision takes Phase 2 out and extends it to the out process. He asked how much activity occurred in that area over the last five years. Moore said Planning and Zoning has seen a little bit of growth in Buchmayer Bend and there are currently two applications in the process for that area. There have also been a few applications off of Newport Road but when they happened during Phase 1, they met the policies for that. A few requests came in for North of Newport Road but the Board and the Commission have denied those requests because those were in Phase 2 and they were not ready for Phase 2. Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak said the road performance standards were in place that restricted the amount of growth off of Newport Road, Prairie du Chien, Sugar Bottom Road, and others in the area. Recently the Board changed the policy from 1,000 vehicle trips per day maximum to 2,000 trips per day. That has increased the inquiries into the possibility of developing.
Saunders asked if the activity spurt in the area was a quick reaction to the conversations around the County that there might be change. Moore said that was his understanding. He said he reviews rezoning requests by considering the rules that have been adopted by the Board. Any requests are officially reviews by the policies in place at that time. Planning and Zoning Commission member Terry Dahms asked if all of the roads in the North Corridor are chip sealed. Moore said no, a number of roads are not chip sealed such as Quincy Road and Turkey Creek. The main chip sealed roads are Newport Road, Sugar Bottom Road, Prairie du Chien, and Anchorage Road. Referring to the designated area on the map, Dvorak said more land is involved than just this area. Sullivan said there are hard surface roads like Dubuque Street.
Moore encouraged Commission members to ask any questions of the Board now, before tonight's Planning and Zoning meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission member Robert Conrad asked what is the percentage of undeveloped ground in Phase 1. Assistant Planner Josh Busard said 51% is currently zoned residential, there are 3,540 platted lots and 961 are left. Busard said about 73% of platted lots in the North Corridor have been developed. The remaining 49% is zoned agricultural. Sullivan asked if they are referring to the current or proposed Phase 1. Moore said currently they are discussing the proposed zoning. Busard said there are 4,864 acres that can be rezoned.
Dahms said the proposed change was initiated by the Board of Supervisors and then went to Planning and Zoning. He said it first showed up on the Planning and Zoning Commission agenda last month and that caught him by surprise. He asked the Board for justification for making a significant change to how development is approached in the North Corridor. Moore said when the Land Use Plan was adopted the Board also adopted the supplementary implementation schedule. The schedule is the key to this plan and it directs the Board. The Land Use Plan itself directed the Board to re-evaluate current North Corridor Phase 1 and 2 concepts. Sullivan said the Land Use Plan has been an issue for a long time, at lease since he first ran for the Board. Moore agreed, adding that in 2009 when the Corridor was changed from a growth area to phasing, it was because of previous reviews from the 1998 plan. At that time, staff broached the idea of a phasing concept to try to concentrate growth outward rather than have spotty growth.
Harney said he does not want to make any changes; he has had no requests to change the map and he feels the plan has been working well. He said many of the lots are unbuildable or owned by one individual who does not want to develop. The area is also regulated by the Road Performance Standards which stipulates the number of homes allowed on any particular road due to traffic volume. A change in the plan affects more than only the North Corridor. Harney said there have been requests from farmers anticipating subdividing for their families in the future. This has been their planned retirement and when they bought ground they had a certain expectation to build their own retirement plan. The Board needs to make decisions on each application on its own merits and he hasn't seen a good argument for change.
Sullivan disagreed with Harney. He said the land on the current map in Phase 2 west of Highway 1 is all farmland. He said the Board needs to preserve the farmland, and allow farmers to farm unimpeded by houses that do not belong in agricultural areas. Harney said the difference is the area is in Phase 2, which is not the preferred initial growth area until Phase 1 is complete. Stutsman said she thought there used to be three phases.
Moore said when the plan was first proposed in 2002, there were three phases. He said Phase 1 was the immediate growth area, Phase 2 the next growth area, and Phase 3 the area north of Solon. When the phasing map was created Planning and Zoning was willing to reduce the Corridor even more, but they faced resistance from the public unwilling to change the traditional definition of the Corridor. He said people wanted to keep the traditional definition and idea of the Corridor. He said the phasing concept kept the traditional definition in place but as Sullivan suggested, if there is a strong Land Use Planning Board they would not get into Phase 2 until they were ready. He said, since the phasing has been created, they have stayed out of Phase Two. Moore said Sullivan's points are valid; they do not want conflicts with agricultural users by citing residential uses.
Saunders asked if land previously zoned becomes non-zoned land, what differences will exist in six months. Moore said the unzoned area becomes a rural agricultural area where they won't consider any development now or in the future unless the Board adopts a new map. Saunders summarized that if the Commission were to recommend approval to the Board, they would essentially be modifying the original document to prevent development in Phase 2.
Moore said exactly. He added they have had a number of property owners tell Planning and Zoning staff that they bought land in the old Phase 2 with an expectation of development in the future. If they change the Land Use Plan now, then for the next five years, there is no chance of review. Meyers said a proposal could come forward that could be evaluated on its own merits. If something came along that looked too good to pass up, they could reassess the plan in one year. Moore said yes. Dvorak said that in theory the Board should revisit the Land Use Plan before decisions are made about something outside of the defined growth area. Moore said, if a proposal is received from an area outside the growth area, the Board would go back through the Planning and Zoning review process. Meyers responded that a few months ago, the Board reviewed a request for commercial ground near Oxford that was outside of any commercial area. They brought it forward and the Board discussed it. Stutsman said they denied it.
Meyers said a consequence of keeping things the same is the need for the County to provide more and more services, particularly road service, that the County is not prepared to deal with. In the spring many complaints about road conditions in the rural areas will flood the office and the County is facing significant annual increases in road expenses with limited funds. It is not responsible to let people build when it is not clear whether there will be resources to maintain the roads.
Harney counter argued saying that people who obtain a building permit will build wherever they like. He said with the current economic situation in the United States, and particularly Johnson County, this is not the time to shut off development. He said any development is an asset to supporting County and local governments. Sullivan said the numbers would show that not every development is helpful. He said he recalls that a couple years ago, Moore said that a residential home built in the unincorporated area had to be valued in the upper $200,000 to pay its own way otherwise is was a tax drain. Moore said Sullivan is referring to the University of Iowa study on the cost of residential development. He said the study determined that every dollar in tax revenue generated from a residential structure cost's the County $1.08. The numbers were skewed a bit by housing costs because the higher end housing was on the positive side of revenue.
Saunders asked if they want to send the message that the long range development area will be very long range and will not be considered for 10 to 40 years. The plan as it is written has been working because there has been no growth in Phase 2. Phase 2 sends a generic message saying that there will be growth "someday." The Commission has never voted based on an individual's financial situation. While the Commission sympathizes with personal finance troubles, they do not make rezoning decisions based on financial hardships. He questioned what part of the current plan isn't working but could find none; it seems to be functioning well.
Neuzil said he was the "no" vote on the phasing because there isn't much of a change from the current plan. In the initial proceedings he said he asked how long it will take to fill in Phase 1 before they get to Phase 2. The answer they came up with was 75 years and Neuzil said it is ridiculous to propose a phasing plan 75 years out. It does not seem like good planning. The current proposal tries to repair the 1960 mistakes of zoning the entire North Corridor. The County is trying to deal with a glut of proposed developed residential land from 1960, and also put the infrastructure in place. The Board has taken short-term measures by changing the Road Performance Standards. It has also unsuccessfully sought ways to upgrade Prairie du Chien Road and Newport Road. He said the Board could not find a compromise with the engineers for those upgrades and has been stuck ever sense. He said the one significant area of change is the current Phase 1 area south of Newport Road that follows Highway 1. He would like to hear from Planning and Zoning Commission members and the public about that area.
Moore said Neuzil hit a couple of points that have created issues for Planning and Zoning over the years. He said the 1960 zoning is the largest problem. Johnson County approved a zoning in 1960 instead of adopting a Land Use map showing future land use. It would have been helpful if the area was presented as only an area considered for development.
Moore said the phasing was meant to get the Board to concentrate resources in Phase 1 for roads. He said there was resistance from residents who felt the roads could not sustain more traffic. The Road Performance Standards were adopted to give direction on when to fix roads. Then there was resistance over the type of roads repair. The concept of phasing is a sound historical planning technique to concentrate resources. Reducing the Corridor as proposed is a similar concept where resources are concentrated in an identified growth area regardless of whether it’s named Phase 1 or the North Corridor Development Area. The process will result in the Commission making a recommendation that may be one of the three maps or something different. Dvorak asked other Board members share their opinion.
Planning and Zoning Commission member Maynard Hebl asked what the Corn Suitability Rating (CSR) is in Phase 2. Moore said they did not generate data for that rating, but it can be done. He thinks it is above 65. Dvorak said the area below Highway 382 down to Iowa City was marginal. The topography lends itself to more woodlands than agriculture land. Sullivan said the rating is better north of Solon than it is south. Hebl said his primary purpose for serving on the Commission is to preserve as much agricultural land as possible for farming. Meyers said the conversation focuses on the area immediately west of Highway 1 and south of Solon. There is a lot of ground on both sides of the river. On the west side of the river off of Dubuque Street and North Liberty Road, and between Coralville and North Liberty, there is a lot of open ground that if developed would be much more likely to receive City services for streets, water, and sewage, which is a more desirable end product. Moore said a representative from the Scanlon Farm came a few years ago to discuss developing some of their land. He said he suggested the Scanlon’s discuss development with the cities.
Harney said he agrees with Hebl that the CSR north of Solon is good farming ground. The Newport Road area has a lesser CSR value making it a good area for development. He agrees with Hebl, but he did not hear one Supervisor object to Iowa City developing 170 acres of prime farm land east of the City. Sullivan said Iowa City had to go industrial somewhere and that was the area they identified. He said the best ground in Johnson County is under cement just west of North Liberty with a 95% CSR. Neuzil said they get requests from cities all the time. He said the Board has learned that the State City Development Board has never once sided with the County anytime they’ve objected.
Saunders said he would like to see the area by Newport Road left in Phase 1, because it has short term (15 to 20 years) potential. Sullivan asked if the land on the west side of the river could be serviced by Coralville or North Liberty at some point. Moore said yes. Sullivan asked what is the future of the rest of the area. Moore said the City of Iowa City has grown that direction and according to the identified growth in that area, they will probably have to do lift stations. Moore said he has two applications on the table and has heard from Iowa City staff that they are concerned about protecting their ability to grow. The fringe area agreement with the City of Iowa City two miles north, would be considered for residential development in the Land Use Plan under the current maps and policies. Neuzil said the area by Newport Road is the significant change to the map and is close to the Oakdale Boulevard Extension.
Moore said the Oakdale Extension goes through the Fuhrmeister Farm south of Rapid Creek and north of the Steindler Clinic area. Meyers asked if there is a specific corridor marked from where Oakdale is going to end on Dubuque Street. Moore said they have an identified corridor and Iowa City Planning and Community Development Director Jeff Davison said he would work with anybody proposing development to tie down the road corridor. Dvorak said the exact location is not planned but there is a map available on the website that shows approximate locations. Neuzil said the Board went back and forth on the issue and they did not come to any significant compromise. Moore said staff proposed including the Buckmayer Bend area to be included in the are that was in Phase 1, west of Highway 1 and east of Prairie du Chien and Newport Roads going north to Newport's intersection with Highway 1. The majority of the Board did not want to put the whole thing back at that point so the plan fell apart.
Stutsman asked if they are going to have discussion from the public at this time. Neuzil said they can, but the purpose of this meeting is to have a conversation between the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board about the issues. Dvorak said Planning and Zoning will have time for public discussion in tonight’s meeting and whatever decisions are made then will be presented in a public hearing next month. He said Planning and Zoning will move forward with the Board's recommendation to identify specific’s to be approved next month. Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell said he agrees with the process and once the proposal is ready, they will prepare the best public notice possible, so that anyone can read and understand the specifics.
Neuzil asked if Commission members had any questions for the Board of Supervisors. He said in a couple of months the Board will get the map back from the Planning and Zoning Commission with suggested changes. Then the Board will have a public hearing, and likely vote on the plan the following month. State Trooper Robert Conrad said if Phase 2 was moved into the un-zoned area how much extra time would it take to review a request. He asked if the time limit will delay a project for a long time. Moore said he does not know if the time frame would be longer. Under the current mapping, if someone in Phase 2 asked Planning and Zoning to do something the current policy say they have to deny. He said they can ask for an amendment to the Land Use Plan and the map. A more favorable amendment to the Land Use Plan and map by staff would be considered in Phase 2 as opposed to being un-zoned. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of Supervisors are strongly committed to the land use policy, which helps Planning and Zoning staff guide applicants and land owners. It would be riskier for people to get land in the un-zoned area as opposed to a Phase 2 area. They have to officially amend the Land Use Plan first and then consider rezoning requests. If the Land Use Plan is changed to accommodate the request then the Board could hear and act on that the request.
Saunders said the theme from talking with people opposed to the changes was that the language "Phase 2" gives it immediacy and they felt that something was going to be taken away from them in the near future. In reality Phase 2 is far in the future whether they call it un-zoned or Phase 2. The big fear was calling it un-zoned meant people would never be able to develop. The verbiage may be different, but in reality, nothing much changes.
Harney asked whether people can request rezonings on Dingleberry Road, Rapid Creek Road, or Fox Lane if the Board adopts the map; he says he is hearing that it will preclude that. Harney said those can be reviewed individually and still approved or disapproved under the zoning ordinance. Saunders said the process will take longer and will be complicated. If this area becomes un-zoned, since the area is not in a designated development area, it may add to the time process, but it does not automatically mean no. Saunders said people were thinking if they changed the map to un-zoned instead of Phase 2, that they would never be able to do anything out there, and that is just not correct. Saunders emphasized that this land use map will be revisited perpetually continuing to clean up the mess that occurred in 1960 when nobody had a vision or thought of how this would work. The last 40 years have been spent undoing that mess.
Stutsman said if they follow the Land Use Plan then they are going to deny the applications not in Phase 1. She said they have been consistent with Boards and Planning and Zoning Commissions. Saunders repeated that people were thinking if they changed the map, that they could never do anything out there, and that is just not correct. Stutsman said people want to know where they stand. Saunders said, if the plan changes as proposed, he will not vote for it. He said the five members of the Planning and Zoning Commission wondered what was not working with the current plan and he asked the Board to tell them what is not working with the plan. Sullivan said it would be helpful to get information from each of the Planning and Zoning Commission members on how and why they voted. Dvorak said they can refer to the minutes for that information.
Moore said a Land Use Plan with approved growth areas does not dissuade anyone from asking for rezoning anywhere in the County; they just have a process to deal with it. Neuzil said the Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing process in February and March, 2009, and forward a map to the Board of Supervisors. He said the public will then have an opportunity to participate in the process once the Board receives the map. Hebl said, if the situation is cut and dry and the Board will reject any request, there is no reason for him to be present. Moore said no, following the Land Use Plan and being consistent with it is only fair to the public. The Commission has flexibility to review the plan and if they disagree they can vote accordingly. Hebl said the Commission can still vote no. Moore said absolutely.
Adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2009
By Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on July 6, 2009 at 1:30 p.m..