• Discussion: Amending Policies to the 1998 Johnson County Land Use Plan for the North Corridor

• Discussion from the Public

Chairperson Harney called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 5:32 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson.

Planning and Zoning Commission Members present were: Evelyn Bollinger, Alfred Carr, Maynard Hebl, Bob Saunders, and Harry Wolf.

Harney said the purpose of this meeting is discussion regarding amending the policies to the 1998 Johnson County Land Use Plan for the North Corridor. Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak introduced members of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore said that when the North Corridor Plan was adopted in 1996, it was adopted with a caveat that it would be reviewed and updated at least every 5 years. Over the past year, the Board of Supervisors directed Planning and Zoning staff to do an internal review of the North Corridor Plan, its policies and how staff felt the Board of Supervisors was doing in achieving those adopted goals. Moore said that last spring they presented the Board with that and the Board determined that staff should go to the Planning & Zoning Commission with those thoughts. Moore presented the same information to the Planning & Zoning Commission in June and then the Planning & Zoning Commission began holding work sessions before their regularly scheduled public hearings. In September the Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing and adopted amendments. Moore said the Board has not yet taken action on those proposed amendments. He said that at the last discussion the Board of Supervisors said they felt it was time to sit down with the Zoning Commission and see if some of the differences could be worked out. Moore said that the Commission that sent the document to the Board, with a recommendation for approval on a 4 to 1 vote, no longer has the member who cast the negative vote. Planning and Zoning Commission Member Harry Wolf has taken that former member’s place. Moore said it seems as if the Commission is OK with what they presented and some of the Board members are not.

Thompson said that when the Board of Supervisors started discussing it, they were stating things they would like to talk about. She said that they got so far afield from what they had that they felt they should come back and discuss this with the others’ thoughts. Stutsman said that the Board of Supervisors pretty much agrees with the North Corridor Plan, with the exception of 2 particular areas having to do with the in-fill and phasing-in. She suggested focusing their discussion on this. Thompson asked if everyone agrees that these are the 2 areas that the Board of Supervisors had questions about. Harney said he thinks there were more issues than just those 2. He said he personally has some issues with narrowing it as much as they are. He said that there is a lot of growth in the Fox Lane area and there is some to the east in the green area on the map that currently has a lot of development occurring. He said most of that is within a 2-mile radius where the City has some control over it. He said he would like to see it brought up to Solon or somewhere north of that area where it would still be included in that particular corridor. Dvorak said Supervisors also shared ideas about extending it south of 180th Street, between Mehaffey Bridge Road and 180th Street. Harney said that on the 180th Street that they just upgraded he thinks they would allow development along that particular area off of 180th Street. He said part of that is in the area covered by Solon. Dvorak said the first area they are talking about is from Newport south and then the new pavement on 180th Street. He said that since that is paved they might want to allow some development on that 1/4 of a mile. He said that most developments are not allowed to extend beyond 1,000 feet anymore, and 1/4 of a mile is 1,320 feet. He said that might be a reasonable number to include in that. He said the rest of the land along there has already been developed.

Thompson said that she was thinking along the same lines. She said that as far as the southern portion goes, she knows that staff had a careful rationale for what areas they included having to do with in-fill. She said that when they originally spoke about this, they talked about the area closest to Iowa City being the earliest to develop. She said it seemed like it might be wise to include a little more of that. She said she likes their idea of adding the territory along 180th Street. Thompson and Stutsman said they would like to hear from the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Planning and Zoning Commission Member Al Carr said there was discussion that it would be silly to pave the road and not develop it. He said he also can see the argument from staff’s view that every time an exception is made then someone else says that they should be allowed to do this or that. He said that his understanding of Newport Road is that it is on the 2-year plan to improve. Harney said it is out beyond 5 years. Carr said that when that is improved he could see that it should be included in that area, but he sees no reason to add it until then. He said one problem that the Zoning Commission has had is length of time for review on this. He said it’s a 20-year plan with 5-year increments. Moore said it was a 20-year phase, but the Land Use Plan has been subject to a 5-year review. Carr said it has been downgraded to match the 5-year review. Carr said that if it was 5 years out before Newport Road was paved then it would certainly fall within the 5-Year Road Plan. He said he doesn’t see any reason to include that area at this point, but he could be persuaded to go that route. He said it just seems like every time an exception is made, it will seem like there is another exception that also will seem appropriate, which is not having a plan. Stutsman asked if he means the area along Newport Road. Carr said yes, to the east and over to Highway One. Stutsman said she is OK with what is being proposed for 180th Street and agrees with leaving the green area as is, except for making the adjustments to 180th. Harney said part of the reason he thought it should go a little further north is because there is a lot of development occurring in Buckmeyer Bend. He said he would personally like to see it go from Newport Road south.

Stutsman said that she has supported manageable growth, having the infrastructure follow the development, rather than the development producing the roads. She said that for this reason it makes more sense to her to not encourage more development along there if it is not in the immediate future to upgrade the road. She said they are still debating about that. Harney said the road counts in the current plan covers that. Stutsman said they are far from a definite decision on what to do with that area. Stutsman said the minute the County upgrades a road, development occurs, such as along the 12th Avenue Extension. She said the Board needs to be very careful about what they put in place for their long term plans, since that is what they are going to be dealing with is development in that area. Neuzil said that with that philosophy there would be a lot in the gray area that would never have development because a lot of the gray area isn’t hard surface road. He said he thinks the current North Corridor Plan is working and there doesn’t need to be any change. Thompson asked if he is willing to incorporate it into the Land Use Plan the way it is. Neuzil said absolutely.

Lehman said he is torn because they have Road Performance Standards that limits where they have allowed development. He said he doesn’t see a lot improving out there if the roads aren’t there. He said he doesn’t see them having the money to put the roads out there otherwise. He said that there are a lot of standards and guidelines in place. Stutsman reminded the Board that there is a lot of serious discussion on the Board to do away with the Road Performance Standards, upgrading them and eliminating them. She said that she has been on the Board long enough that she has seen the gamete from a very loosely interpreted Land Use Plan to having more of these restrictions. She said that she thinks the direction of the Board is to have more guidelines in place. She said that it is a lot easier to make decisions as a Board Member when something can be referenced. She said that she has been supportive of the Board moving in the direction of having more guidelines rather than less. Lehman said he thinks there are a lot of places, like in the lower right green portion, that are suitable for development. He said he understands what Stutsman is saying about concentrating development. Thompson said there is the southern green part that is kind of a combination of development and ag. She said the northern part is still pretty much ag. She asked the Board if they feel differently about those 2. She said she thinks Phase II is cut and dry. She asked if they feel the north area would be what they want to include. Neuzil said it comes back to whether the roads are going to be there to sustain the growth. Thompson said she is thinking they won’t and that is why they should phase it. Neuzil said why even phase it since they currently have a North Corridor Plan that allows the Board to put the road in as development occurs. He said there isn’t need for any more roads in that area. Lehman said it goes along with what Stutsman said about keeping to the Road Performance Standards and figuring out what dollars they have and where to then put roads. Neuzil said he thinks it is a good technique to use.

Dvorak said they would probably be back to bring the Board up to date with the Road Performance Standards Review in 2-3 weeks. He said they have already had their staff meeting and they are working on a presentation.

Stutsman asked if there has been many applications in the northern part of Phase II, from 130th Street north. Moore said the Board hasn’t dealt with many but Planning & Zoning has. He said that they discourage the applicants, and then they don’t come before the Board. Dvorak said that developers want to know where to go, which is what a good planning document does, is directs developers. Moore said that in the presentation on the North Corridor Plan they thought they were doing a great job. He said their analysis of it was that since they adopted it in 1996, the Board of Supervisors that administered it had been doing a really great job. He said these proposals are purely on how they could do a little better to achieve some of the goals.

Thompson asked Moore to describe the criteria that is used to designate the green portion. Moore said what they did is looked at where the 1969 mass zoning was put in place. He said the yellow and pink on that map are the residential zonings that were mass zoned, or about 15,000 acres of land around Iowa City and north along the Iowa River. He said that they looked at that and found that the area in green, the Phase II has some spot zoning in it. He said that they have done a little bit of development in that area on occasion. He said mainly that spot is north of Newport Road and north of the Solon area. He said that it is still predominantly zoned agricultural in Phase I and is also used that way. He said that they took that information and then started trying to draw the lines to create the phases. He said that over the years they have learned from their Fringe Area Agreements to try to find a natural boundary, like a road or a river or a section line, to identify the lines and boundaries. He said that this is how they determined the 2 phases is by first looking at the first zoning and then the predominant use of the area. Thompson said the green area doesn’t have too many acres of that land that is zoned residential in 1969 and is predominantly ag then.

Dvorak said another thing the Board asked them to do in the last work session was to identify and locate lots that have not been built upon. He said that all of the areas highlighted in a bright yellow box per se would be a lot line. He said this shows how many lots are still not built on that were platted or buildable at one time. Stutsman asked how many there were out of 5,500 buildable. Dvorak said they call them vacant lots, since they are not for sale, but there are 1,059. Stutsman said her point about this is that they are vacant today but tomorrow they could be built on. Thompson asked if they are vacant in the whole North Corridor or in the Phase I part. Moore said the whole North Corridor. Planning and Zoning Commission Chairperson Bob Saunders said that the majority are not within Phase I and there are very few highlighted on that map.

Saunders said that when he first started on the Zoning Commission, the meetings lasted 5 hours because there was that much in the application files. He said the agendas were 2 pages long and every day was a new day of learning. He said that when zoning was created in the early 60’s, every farmer should have gone in and had some designation other than agricultural on his land. He said that there were enough astute farmers/business men living out there to realize that. He said that after a few meetings it was realized that this was a scary concept. He said there were literally thousands of acres that legally could have something done with them besides ag. He said that platting is a technical process, not a yes or no. He said that unless something technically was wrong, all of that ground could have been built on as soon as someone said that they wanted to. He said that there would have been a lot of houses and a lot of road problems. He said for a long time they asked for some standards as a guide and so the Road Performance Standards were created to take some of the problems away from the County. He said that because they had no process to stop the process of the already zoned ground, problems were being created that were significant problems for the County Engineer and his staff in terms of maintaining the roads and building roads in places that make sense. Saunders said there are incredibly interesting roads that never should have been used for housing, but they were, and so a situation was created that has to be dealt with. He said that now they aren’t seeing massive zonings, partly because the guidance was created that the developer wants. He said that there is almost no prezoned ground in Phase II at the moment. Saunders said that he thinks the process of adding these planned roads is appropriate and wishes it had happened in 1963. He said at some point someone has to think about how to move these people around. He said that Sugar Bottom is not a road to run 5,000-10,000 cars a day on. He said the issue is whether or not they want to create more Sugar Bottom type roads. He said that there would be real chaos without the different plans that the County has implemented. He said the roads are so much better now than they were 17 years ago when he started on the Zoning Commission.

Neuzil said Saunders points out that the current North Corridor Plan is working since they aren’t in meetings until midnight. He said the question is whether it needs to be more restrictive. He said that if it is currently working then what would be the purpose of that. Carr said it wouldn’t be working if they hadn’t already done that. He said it is a process and he doesn’t think anyone believes there won’t be a need to change it again because it works so great. He said it needs tweaking. Neuzil said this is a major change. Carr said it isn’t and that is what Saunders was trying to convey. Carr said there is no major change. He said that it could be reviewed in 2 years. He said the Board of Supervisors is here to say no and someone who replaces a Board member could come in and say yes. Carr said the point that the Commission is trying to get across is, here is a plan, take it or leave it or tweak it. He said it is not a forever plan.

Lehman added that one of the problems he has with Phase II is that they are actually putting more restrictions on it than they did on the flat farm ground around Lone Tree. Stutsman asked why there would be more restrictions on Phase II than what is already in place. Thompson answered that it is because they aren’t going to rezone. Carr said that no matter what the Zoning Commission presents to the Board, nothing is definite because the Board could say yes or no to the proposal and the public always has the opportunity to speak about the proposal and change the Board’s mind one way or another. He said that there are always good, positive exceptions. Saunders said that all the Zoning Commission is doing is coming up with ideas and plans and bringing them to the Board.

Thompson said that one thing that makes her feel especially comfortable with the north part is that until now they have been developing roads that orient towards Iowa City and Coralville. She said that now Cedar Rapids wants to annex a part of Johnson County. She said she doesn’t know if Johnson County has the ability to meet the demands for roads that bring people into Iowa City and also the ability to start meeting the demands for roads leading to Cedar Rapids. She said that this should be postponed.

Harney asked if there are other issues for discussion. Thompson and Stutsman both said the in-fill is something that needs to be discussed. Stutsman asked what is being done with the change in the borders and what happens next. Harney said that this is informal so they would make a decision later. Stutsman asked where they go from here with this though, to another work session or at the informal in the Board Meeting and see if there are 3 votes to vote it up or down. Dvorak asked Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell if they want to discuss all of the possible changes. Chappell said he doesn’t have a preference. He said that the impression he had from being at the earlier meeting is that there wasn’t a consensus from the Board of Supervisors to go along with what the Planning & Zoning Commission had recommended. He said that out of deference to both staff and the Commission, the Board decided to set up this meeting to just discuss what sort of changes, if any, they like in the North Corridor Plan. He said he doesn’t see any reason for them to feel constrained by any of the prior recommendations. He said that if there are other issues they would like to discuss, they are able to do so because the agenda is worded generally enough to allow that. Chappell said that as far as where it goes from here, if there is never a consensus to put any proposals back on the agenda, then it goes nowhere.

Dvorak asked if there are 3 Board Members interested in moving this forward with changes or not. Thompson said in her opinion, the important issue is to get the North Corridor Plan incorporated into the Land Use Plan. Dvorak said he doesn’t think that could be done if the existing North Corridor Plan document is put into the Land Use Plan. Thompson said she hopes that the Board continues to work on this until there is enough consensus that some version is put into the Land Use Plan. Stutsman said she thinks the 2 big issues are the phasing issues and the in-fill. She said she wants to spend more time talking about the phasing. She said she thinks it is appropriate to make some changes in what the current North Corridor Plan says. She said it has been on the table for 5 years, has worked, and now needs some modifications or changes. She said that there are some positive things that this called for and these 2 issues need to have consensus and be resolved. She said that if she remembers correctly, the Board was OK with all of the other points. Moore said that part of the explanation for basically terminating the North Corridor Plan as a stand alone plan and incorporating it into the Land Use Plan is because when the Land Use Plan was adopted in 1998, the Land Use Plan is what spoke about in-fill. He said then Planning & Zoning began pursuing the in-fill policy in January 1999. He said it was one of the policies that the Board of Supervisors adopted that gave the North Corridor Plan more teeth to enforce and achieve those goals. He said the Zoning Commission is telling the Board that there is a way to achieve something that all 5 Board of Supervisors could be on board with.

Thompson said that in looking at 2.5, she sees how it affects the purple or gray portion. She asked for explanation of how it affects the green portion of the map if they just left the area the same. Moore said then anything within that distance that didn’t meet that criteria wouldn’t be rezoned. Thompson said that there would be a lot of land that would meet that criteria because there wouldn’t be that many already zoned lots. Moore said they could rezone a lot. Thompson said that is what they are trying to avoid. Moore said one thing he has always tried to explain to whomever he is speaking with is, the primary goal of rural planning and the reason the State gave counties the ability to do zoning is the preservation of agricultural land. He said that this is the first and primary idea behind county zoning, the preservation of agricultural uses and operations. He said that this is the concept they have incorporated here for the Board. He said they could move the lines, though, if they wanted to. He said that there have been some good points raised.

Stutsman asked to hear the Zoning Commission’s thoughts. Carr said that the Zoning Commission has a limited amount of time to review every application, just as the Board does. He said the same application appears differently depending on the arguments. He said it is beneficial that it doesn’t just come before the Zoning Commission. In-fill is a serious issue, Carr said, and having it defined would quantify it, which is what the attempt is with the percentage. Thompson asked how they arrived at 30. Dvorak said that Assistant Planner Dan Swartzendruber did a study of the County on the vacancy rate for the County and it was 29.8%. He said they felt 30% was a comfortable number to start with. Planning and Zoning Commission Member Evelyn Bollinger said the main thing is guidelines. She said that they have talked and talked about whether this is hard and fast and realized that something has to be put in there as a guideline. Lehman said it is a policy, not an ordinance, so there are leeways. He said it is a guide, so people are going to come in and try to push it a little further and it is the Board’s prerogative to tell them no. Neuzil said the Land Use Plan is a guideline too, and this Board has stuck pretty close with that guideline. He said that once a policy is put in place, they don’t like to sway too much from that policy. He said policy is being decided right now, so if this Board chooses to use in-fill development, which he thinks is skewed completely because there are people that are never going to sell the lot next door to them. He said he thinks the in-fill is unnecessary.

Harney asked for other comments before moving to discussion from the public. Dvorak asked if they want to have one more work session together, or is there enough information tonight to go into an informal session. Stutsman said she thinks that it is helpful to meet with the Planning and Zoning Commission. The group decided to meet Monday, February 10th at 5:30 p.m.

George McCune said he was involved in the first Phase of the North Corridor project. He asked if the Supervisors have taken into consideration the Oakdale Boulevard extension that comes across through there and the effects that is going to have on Phase I of the North Corridor. Harney said the section from Prairie Du Chien is out possibly 20 years. He said they have just set the right-of-way aside and are not going to allow purchasing or building on that until a decision is made on when that is going to happen. Stutsman said McCune has a good point. She said she would like to see where that alignment is. McCune asked if there is a preliminary study going on within the Johnson County Council of Governments and the City about this. Lehman said this has been identified and someone needs to test it and see where it is going. Lehman said there could be a developer who knows a road is going in and just develops a bit of it. McCune said until the bridge goes across the River and they know where the road goes on the other side of the River and connects to Highway One, development is going through there whether it is liked or not. McCune said that at some point in time, the County, the City and the Johnson County Council of Governments is going to go to someone and say they own everything from the Reservoir, from Prairie Du Chien to the River. Harney said there is nothing that prevents someone from asking for a zoning up to that point, but the Board is going to make sure that the right-of-way is going to be open. McCune said they’ll know what can be done with that ground on either side of the road when that road comes across the River and connects with Highway One. He said until that is decided, that whole corridor in Phase I is undecided. Stutsman asked if he is asking for an alignment of that road. McCune said he isn’t asking for anything, but would like to see Johnson County, Iowa City and Coralville make the decision to plot that road and let the people that are going to be involved in it in the near future know where the road is going to go. He said that everyone along there is going to be affected. He said that it is going to be a major thoroughfare down the road. Thompson said that part is 20 years out, or so they are told. Lehman said that the bridge across the Iowa River could be the last thing done. McCune said that this affects everyone aligned with it. He said someone has to make a decision of where it is going to go. He said that if someone would just do the plotting, it would take the pressure off of everyone.

Allen Berger said his question is regarding both phases. He said it isn’t clear to him from the discussions what amount of land in Phase I is able to be developed based on the Road Performance Standards, or is growth to areas being targeted that in the next 5 years aren’t going to be developable. He said it seems like it would be more cost effective to develop land closer to Highway One, where there is already a backbone for the roadway infrastructure, and then postpone development closer to the Reservoir, which would be more of an urban sprawl. He said he would like to hear some estimates for what percentage of the area that is in gray can be developed. Moore said they don’t have that with them. Dvorak said to keep in mind that they obviously have to keep on improving those roads. He said that is why the standards talk about setting money aside to improve them. He said it isn’t something that would be done today, but would be a long-term plan.

Greater Iowa City Area Homebuilders Association Representative Dan Smith said the same type of policy that the County is discussing is also occurring with the Homebuilders. He said that they continue to listen to what is being said. He said one request that would be helpful is to have a list of the issues that need to be fixed. He said it would be easier to go back to their members and show them what the County needs to fix and the proposed solutions.

Adjourned at 6:35 p.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary