• Discussion: Amending Policies to 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 5:30 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson.

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

Harney started the meeting by asking the Planning & Zoning Commission if there are any comments they want to make regarding the North Corridor. Planning and Zoning Chairperson Bob Saunders said the only comment he has is that they are asking for direction from the Board. He said for the first time they were given a copy of the 5-Year Road Plan and they don’t want the Planning & Zoning Commission to become a knee-jerk reaction Commission. He said they would like to have a vision that flows with the County vision, so they are asking where the Board is planning on putting the roads and what areas they would like to see the Commission use or not use. He said the Commission can then send that message out into the community. He said he is a member of the Homebuilder’s Association and although he doesn’t attend the meetings, he reads the literature and they’ve expressed support for the County to have a plan that they can follow and guide their clients as to what to do. Saunders said he doesn’t have a strong feeling of what must or must not be done, but they are looking for a planning tool to help them and in a sense help the public. Stutsman said they have basically reached an agreement on almost everything that had been proposed except the 2 issues; the phase in and the boundaries. She agreed that the Board needs to give the Planning & Zoning Commission direction. She said they are OK with incorporating the North Corridor Plan into the Land Use Plan and they just need to reach an agreement to either leave it as is or include adjustments.

Harney asked if the Commission currently bases their decisions on where the zoned ground is currently and road count issues. Saunders said there has always been an issue of how to stop the development that’s taking place all over the County. He said the Road Performance Standards were very important in giving the Commission guidance to take zoned ground and to give a solid reason for why it shouldn’t be zoned. He said that in the early meetings he had attended in the ‘80s, the Commission was approving anything and everything, nobody asked the question of whether or not it creates a problem for the County. He said at that point in time, the people on the Commission were so happy to have anyone building in the County that they didn’t care. He said that then they started to realize that they have to take care of what is built. He said the first phase of getting a road plan was a big help in dealing with the issue of zoning everywhere and steering the North Corridor to where they want to build. Saunders said the County Engineer has proposed some new roads although it is a long way from being approved. He said that even to get into an area to let zoning and platting occur, if the roads are not going to be developed, then the Commission needs to know that because some of the areas won’t become great areas for future building. Saunders said that is long range planning on behalf of the Board. He said in the past 2 or 3 years it’s become much easier to sit on the Planning and Zoning Commission and guide people because there’s a lot more to guide them on. He said he thinks the plans have been working very well. He said this is an attempt to ask the question of whether or not it has to be fine-tuned.

Neuzil said if they look at the road proposals that are tentative, a lot of those go into the phase 2 development area, which is from Jordan Creek north. Saunders replied that they are planned to go significantly into that area. Neuzil said that area is the North Corridor, which is why those roads are in the 5-Year Road Plan to get updated. He said that Newport Road is included in that list, but in this plan a section of the infrastructure on that road will be in place, but they would be discouraging growth and development in that area on from Highway 1 to that area. Neuzil said that doesn’t make a lot of sense to him to build the infrastructure and not allow for growth when it’s already been designated as the North Corridor. Thompson said she thought they were talking about allowing growth on roads that’s are newly built within some limits like entrances so far from a new road. Neuzil said that is already in place and most of the roads other than what will be updated are gravel and those gravel roads, they’re at capacity, so that won’t allow for growth to occur. He said the question is why tighten the plan if it’s not necessary. Saunders asked that assuming all the roads on the 5-Year Road Plan are going to happen, when would they happen. Neuzil responded that they would be built 6 to 10 years after the 5-Year Road Plan. He added that Newport Road will be constructed in 2 more years. Saunders clarified that the rest of the development of phases 2, 3 and 4 will be 5 to 10 years out. He added that the main roads that the Board will be improving are all in phase 2.

Lehman said that one of the biggest keys is the 5-Year Road Plan in conjunction with the Planning & Zoning plan because the phases are the 5-Year Road Plan. He said they try to do a project every other year, which will open up more development. He asked if the County needs another plan that would almost be redundant because the limiting factor will be the 5-Year Road Plan. He said that will let the County progress slowly. Lehman said what the Commission might be looking for is these types of restraints so that they can tell people when what isn’t allowed now, will be allowed. He added that the Board has a 2 year window where they allow zonings and plattings if it’s at least on the 2nd year of the 5-Year Road Plan because by the time it gets to that point, they know there will be funding. He said that 3rd, 4th, and 5th year are still subject to change because they have to be approved by the DOT. Saunders said it doesn’t take long to figure out that there are certain parts of the tail that wag the dog. He said that if they have followed the development in West Des Moines of the new mall, according to the Des Moines Register 4 well-organized development companies bought 1,000 acres around the area, so the 1,000 acres around the mall has changed dramatically. He said that same thing will happen when the Board upgrades the roads on the 5-Year Road Plan, the developers will begin the negotiation process with whoever has land on those new roads. He said in a sense that is what they should be doing, because they should be steering people into the areas where they have the appropriate roads and then go build on it.

Stutsman said the roads are just part of the issue. She said they have another issue with water in those areas. She said that the number of homes that are on private wells and private wastewater systems blows her away. To her that has become more of an issue than the roads. She said they keep adding to what isn’t a good situation to begin with. She said people argue that it isn’t a problem, but they will see the day when it is a major problem and the County doesn’t have that infrastructure in place or even planned for it. She asked why they keep adding to the problem when they haven’t thought through the consequences that will be decades down the road. Thompson said it is very important to have the North Corridor Plan incorporated into the Land Use Plan. Stutsman said they've already agreed to that. Lehman said that they haven’t agreed what form it will be in. Stutsman said she thought that was the issue. Thompson said it's good for the 5-Year Road Plan to go together. Harney asked how it’s fair to the people south of town who want to develop to put more restriction on their development than on people located in the North Corridor. Thompson responded that the North Corridor is the area of the County where they want to encourage growth because it’s the most amenable to growth. It’s the corridor between Iowa City and Cedar Rapids, it’s the least productive farmland and it’s the place where people seem to want to live, she said. She added that the Board needs to manage the growth in that area and the proposed amendment help them do that.

Neuzil said that in that case the proposal made by the Secondary Roads Department is not in correspondence with this plan. Thompson said she doesn't see that because the roads in question will be developed far enough into the future. Neuzil asked why the County would develop roads in the Phase 2 area against development. Thompson replied that once those roads are developed, the area will be in the first phase. Neuzil responded the Newport will be finished in 2 years and Sugar Bottom in 6 years and both are included in Phase 2 in this plan. Thompson said they are thinking of adjusting the plan to include Newport Road. Neuzil said he hasn’t heard that today. He said the future plans of the Secondary Roads Department is almost entirely inside the Phase 2 area. Thompson disagreed. Neuzil asked when Thompson thought the roads would be developed. Thompson said the Secondary Roads plan begins with Prairie DuChien, which is not even in either area. Neuzil said he is talking about the roads in the planning stage beyond the 5-Year Road Plan including Sugar Bottom, Jordan Creek and Racine, which are all in the Phase 2 section. Stutsman said that the Board hasn’t committed to a time frame on those roads past the 5-Year Road Plan. She said they are still very much a concept. Neuzil replied that Sugar Bottom in scheduled for 2008. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore said that Sugar Bottom is the border. He asked if one side of the road is developable and the other isn’t then. Saunders said that is up for discussion. He added in past meetings they had discussed a 1/4 mile deep from the border rule because it doesn’t make sense to have a nice road and then not be able to build. Neuzil said they have designated the North Corridor as an area of growth, and limit that growth by the Road Performance Standards that are in place, and so once a road is upgraded to cement or asphalt then they would allow growth to occur in a zoned area. He’s asked why this plan is even necessary if the Board is already controlling growth. He said he knows there is a 5 year growth moratorium, but he’s afraid once policy has been set it is extremely difficult to change. He said the Board found that out in regards to some choices that were made before the current Board was elected and they are now finding that policy is extremely hard to change. Neuzil said once the moratorium is in place, he is guaranteeing it will be more than 5 years and he doesn’t believe it’s necessary. He commented that the North Corridor plan is working as it is and if the Board wants to incorporate it into the Land Use Plan, he’d support it because it saves staff time. Planning and Zoning Commission Member Evelyn Bollinger said it is interesting to her that Neuzil is raising that point and said the Board saw the plan first and sent it to the Planning & Zoning Commission. She asked why if they felt that way then why did they send it to the Commission in the first place. Neuzil said he was not supportive of sending the plan to the Commission in the first place. Planning and Zoning Commission Member Al Carr that 4 other members were.

Saunders said that there maybe be more options than they’ve even thought about. He said the Secondary Roads proposal creates a road structure in the lower phase 2 area, but not in the upper phase 2 area. He suggested putting the plan into 3 phases with the northern half of the Phase 2 area becoming the Phase 3 area, which might not take place for another 20 years. He said the Board can put a 5 to 10 year limit on the Phase 2 area and as those roads are built in that time period, then it triggers those areas as becoming developable. He said that way the Board can watch what happens and avoid getting the cart in front of the horse, but as the roads are done then those areas become developable. Saunders said that Neuzil is right that when the County builds the roads, people will want to live on them. Neuzil said he doesn’t necessarily agree with the proposal given by the Secondary Roads Department either, but that is the proposal that’s available. Stutsman asked Neuzil if he would be willing to compromise on a 1,2,3 type plan. Neuzil said it would make no difference. Stutsman said she’s been on the Board long enough and was a part of the process where there were no guidelines, and she agrees that the public would like to know guidelines. She added that if they have a plan that clearly defines where development will go in the next few years, then it will be a service to the public. Neuzil said he wouldn’t disagree with that, but the Land Use Plan already does that. He explained that the Plan says that if people want to build in Johnson County, they must build in the North Corridor, near a city or in a village unless there is a farmstead split. Stutsman said that includes the top area in Phase 2. Neuzil said it does, but again development can’t take place there due to the Road Performance Standard Ordinance that says people can’t.

Carr said that is as long as everybody is in agreement that they keep the Road Performance Standards as it is. Neuzil replied that regarding gravel roads there is not much of a difference on the Board. Carr said as soon as the Board varies from that, then the Road Performance Standards, which is the Planning & Zoning Commission’s guideline, the Commission is really in trouble. Saunders asked if the whole Board agrees on the philosophy of the Road Performance Standards. Harney said the Board has had a large discussion regarding the Standards recently and they are considering slight modifications to the Standards. Neuzil said on gravel roads too many cars are extremely unsafe, but for chip seal roads he thinks 996 vehicles on a chip seal road is ridiculously low. Stutsman said that there aren't 3 votes that agree with that. Lehman said there isn’t agreement for a blanket absolving of that standard. Neuzil said that is why the Board is compromising on some of the chip seal standards. Carr said that if the Standards were changed, then this plan would give the Commission another method to control growth. Lehman said if the Board is going to leave the Road Performance Standards as they are then there isn’t a lot of need for this plan. Carr said that the Commission is talking about a major change to the North Corridor plan, but if the Board isn’t talking about a major tweak then it will leave something that’s pretty solid. Neuzil said it’s to infill. Carr said that other than Newport Road everything is more than 5 years out. He said the proposal the Commission has submitted to the Board is for 5 years. He doesn't see what the problem is because either the Board likes it or doesn’t and will vote accordingly. He said if the Board isn’t sure, the Commission has proposed it and reduced it to a 5 year proposal with a review. He said as with anything else, if Secondary Roads decides to move up a road like 180th Street or Jordan Creek, then the Board can always make modifications to this plan. He said if they don’t change the plan, they can also make the modifications, but this would be a tool for the Commission. He said they will still show up at their meetings and they will do their best regardless. He added that it would be nice to have better tools.

Neuzil said if the Board adopts this as a 5-year plan, then they need to keep in mind that the Secondary Roads Department wants to know 5 years ahead of time. He said that for example, there is a 5 year moratorium and he is unsure if they will allow it after the 5 years, but the Board has to give direction to the Secondary Roads Department to go beyond the 5 years. Carr said that ultimately the plan is reviewed every year. Neuzil said that the Board has learned a valuable lesson about the Secondary Roads Department in that once the Board has committed to 5 years out, they want a firm commitment to the plan. Carr clarified that the Board updates the program every year. Stutsman said that the Board has made changes. Harney said that what Neuzil is referring to is the amount of planning, surveying and laying out the Secondary Roads Department does, so if the Board pulls a road off the plan, then Secondary Roads has wasted a lot of time, effort and dollars. Neuzil said if the Board puts Sugar Bottom 6 years out, but the North Corridor Plan has designated the County as not to grow at that time, then should the Secondary Roads Department continue that research. He asked what would happen if the Board sticks with the plan and keeps the moratorium for 10 years. He said now all of a sudden the Board has taken a road off the 5-Year Road Plan, which is something that the Secondary Roads Department had a very difficult time with last time. Stutsman said that the Board is the policy makers. Neuzil commented that it cost thousands of tax dollars too. Stutsman said it wasn’t totally wasted because a lot of the things won’t change and they can be applied if and when the Board decides to put the road back on the plan.

Harney said that the big issue he has with the plan is that growth is pretty well controlled by the road counts as is. He said he isn’t sure why the Board would want to make changes to the phases of the plan other than to incorporate it into the Land Use Plan. He asked why they don’t let it sit there because it’s pretty well controlled by the zoning and Road Performance Standards. Stutsman said she hears the same arguments from Carr saying why not. She said this is just solidifying what they are already doing, except it is spelling it out more clearly so that people have a better understanding what the Board’s plans are for this area. Lehman said that developers follow the 5-Year Road Plan as much as the residents and he doesn’t know if they need any update because they know the timing. Stutsman said regarding the northern part of the North Corridor, anybody could come in with an application today and they would fuss with whether they should go ahead. She said that the Board has no plans to put roads there, but it still would be on the table. She said with 3 votes it would pass and then the Board would be putting the cart before the horse as they’ve done in the past by approving zonings where the Board has no intention of improving the roads. Neuzil asked when the Board has done that and added that they haven’t while he’s been on the Board. He said they haven't because they have the Land Use Plan and the North Corridor Plan already in place. Stutsman added that they’re following it, but she’s been on a Board where they didn’t follow those policies. She said there wasn’t an application that didn’t have merits and it wasn’t until the Board said they needed some guidelines that they can follow so that they can be consistent as far as zoning and planning for the County. Neuzil said he couldn’t agree more, but since 1998 the Board of Supervisors has been following the Land Use Plan and the North Corridor Plan that’s in place. He said it has not been a problem since then, so why is it suddenly a problem. Stutsman said that the potential is there because it’s razor thin on this Board as to whether they will continue with their planful approach to development in the North Corridor or whether they will go back to approving everything. She said that the Board then has to pick up the pieces of providing infrastructure for people who are furious because they live on a gravel road that’s been developed and created a problem that they don’t want to deal with. She said that’s her personal experience and where she’s coming from with her experience on the Board.

Saunders agreed with Neuzil in that it’s not perceived to be a problem. He said that when they started the conversation, they didn’t have the Secondary Roads information on where they wanted to improve roads. He said they just looked at what happened since they started the Plan. He said the 5 year effect is that the Phase 1 areas were receiving a lot of growth and the Phase 2 areas were not. He said given the fact that, although the roads are not certain, any road improvements in that area will spur development. He said that Thompson and Stutsman are right that the reason the County doesn’t develop south of town is due to the high quality farmland. He said they have supported that effort. He said Johnson County is also seeing influx from Cedar Rapids coming into Johnson County because there isn’t ground like this available. He said the Commission looked at the plan as a 5 year review and asked if they needed to make any changes. He said they asked if they should put in a phase in process since nobody wants to be out there anyway. He agrees that the southern Phase 2 area will become very popular if the road structure is improved if the Board allows for a 1/4 mile depth. He added that a 1/4 mile depth allows for a lot of houses to be built. He said that Iowa City annexed the 164 acres and the first 96 acres will have 640 houses in it. Neuzil commented that there will be a lot of 40 acres on each side of that road. Saunders said that it will take a lot of time to develop those areas. He said if the Board doesn’t want to implement the changes, then the Commission will just keep going like they have been.

Harney said the other argument he has regarding this topic is many parts of the Phase 2 area roads are already filled with houses. Stutsman said that it’s only a matter of time before people from Buchmayer Bend are demanding that the Board upgrade that road. Carr said that at previous meetings they discussed putting the area south of Newport into the Phase One area because that’s an earlier plan for change than anything else. He said that he wouldn’t see that as being a problem for them, but the farther north the more of an issue it becomes. Neuzil said that one could argue that the area north of Solon, that the development really will be 20 years out at least, yet at the same time if development is lost at the top it will seep into the bottom. He asked if there is talk about expanding the North Corridor to the south and reducing it to the north. Thompson said that there isn’t, it’s only phasing it in so that the top part of Phase 2 gets developed last. Neuzil commented that that will happen no matter what.

Tom Carsner said it is difficult to say if the North Corridor plan is working or not because the 2 factors that have allowed Planning & Zoning and the Board to give the guidance that they have aren’t included in the North Corridor Plan. He said they are talking about the infill part of the Land Use Plan and the Road Performance Standards, which are both crucial, but neither of which are found in the North Corridor Plan. He said the North Corridor Plan has great language. Carsner said the first statement in the North Corridor Plan is that the Board will preserve the scenic rural nature of the area, which above all is what the North Corridor Plan is all about. He said that something Stutsman is trying to emphasize, is the Board has to make a commitment to the Road Performance Standards as they are. He said he’s uneasy to hear them talking about tweaking the Road Performance Standards because he’s assuming that they aren’t going to lower the standards. He said if they really wants to say that what they are currently doing is working, then they have to have 100% commitment to the Road Performance Standards and the infill element of the Land Use Plan. He added that what’s in the Land Use Plan is a broader and better definition than what’s in the proposal of the new North Corridor Plan. He said that again it’s really not the accurate question to ask whether or not the North Corridor Plan is currently working. He said the accurate question is whether or not they are currently committed to the Road Performance Standards and the infill standards.

Janet Coster said that she is shocked that 3 people could make a decision about what’s going to happen with development and roads in the County. She said she’s shocked at what’s happened on Buchmayer Bend and she doesn’t know when or how that came into being. She said she’s wondering how it is that they can keep the rural nature. She added that it seems like anybody with money that’s a developer can come in, buy up land and build thousands of houses. She said she was shocked and upset when Timber Ridge was developed. She said she when she grew up here Turkey Creek Lane had no houses on it and in 1996 she was shocked to see what had become of the area. She said she doesn’t understand why when there are so many houses on the market, more have to be built in rural areas.

George McCune said he brought up the notion of the road use study regarding Fringe Area A the last time he spoke to the Board. He said Fringe Area A is within the 2 mile limit of Iowa City. He said that not only does Johnson County have jurisdiction there, but the City of Iowa City also has jurisdiction. He said that anybody has to go through the Board and the City Council to get joint approval for anything developed. He said the road use study in regards to where he lives between Oakdale Boulevard to Highway 1 and to the river, will all take place during the same time frame the Board is talking about. He said that he has met with JCCOG Executive Planner Davidson he showed him approximately where they plan to put in the intersection with Scott Boulevard and Highway 1. He said that it’s up to them to decide where it goes from there. He said the Dubuque side has already been chosen too. He said there’s just a chunk that’s missing. He said that will also make a difference as to the County’s overall zoning comes into play. He said the County will get into areas where according to the Fringe Area Agreement, they want the cluster housing with the Sensitive Areas Ordinances that must be in effect. He said that at this point the Board of Supervisors has to get together with the City of Iowa City to become a joint effort to shape how the area is developed, otherwise the 2 entities will over-rule each other. He said there is a procedure in effect where the City and County can get together, form a committee and use that if there are disagreements. He said that currently anybody that’s a developer has to go through the hoops with both entities. He said the road issue will become a major problem later on because whether or not those are going to become an issue. He said they are working on choosing the avenues now, but until those avenues are selected at least on paper, it will change the way the whole area is going to be developed. He said that there will be a major artery going through the Fringe Area A and connect it together with 2 major intersections. He said to him they’re going backwards on this because it should be a joint policy between the City and the County. He added that a lot of these have been in the works, but not worked out. He said all those things should be considered in the road study that should be resolved in that next 6 months to Highway 1 because the Board doesn’t really have an idea of where it will be in the future. He said the more everyone knows about the infrastructure that will be in place now or 5 years from now as far as the road use study and traffic patterns will make a big difference as to where that development will occur along the corridor district.

Pat Cancilla said he is a little reluctant to address the Board because what he is going to say is that the Board hasn’t done any planning. He said that what they have talked about is road, but what the County has is 4 townships, each are 36 square miles, which makes 144 square miles that are present in the North Corridor. He said that the Board is talking about the ability to build 2 miles of one road every year and call it infrastructure. He said there is no plan that he can see for the North Corridor. He said what the Board has been talking about is sprawl. He added that they have not planned for infrastructure, although they seem to equate roads to infrastructure. He said that Stutsman mentioned that the County needs to look at water. He asked where the plans are for solid waste. He asked if the County would hook into the new Iowa City water plant or bring in rural water. He asked where they are going to put the sewage treatment plant for the North Corridor. He said he hasn’t heard one word about schools or the impact on schools. He said they haven't said a word about ambulance service, fire departments, or police protection. He said that all infrastructure seems to be is if the County builds a road, then the infrastructure is in place. He asked when the Board is going to come up with a North Corridor Plan. He asked where the Board will put the other things that create a community. He asked where the area will be that will be in essence a town center. He asked where schools will be built or where shopping centers will be located in such a huge area. He said then if one looks at 144 square miles of land and beyond Highway 1, which makes it even more, then the Board is talking about an area that’s the size of Iowa City and Coralville combined. He said when the Board talks of infrastructure it’s a single road that can be in place in 5 years. He said he would like to challenge the Board to put together a committee to come up with a plan because it’s more than to connect Prairie DuChien to Newport Road. He asked where the collaterals will be for those roads. He asked where the developments will be. He asked if the Board will have 150 to 200 openings onto a collector road. He said when he hears the Board spending so much time talking about this great North Corridor Plan, to him it's a terribly short-sighted discussion.

Harney said the question he has is if there are 3 Board members that want to change the North Corridor Plan from what it already is. Neuzil clarified that by changing he means other than putting it in the Land Use Plan. Stutsman said that she thought there was something else they had agreed on. Harney said that the only other suggestion they had heard at this meeting was to include the area south of Newport Road in the first phase. Thompson said that they had also agreed that for every new road that’s built the other side would also be included. Neuzil asked if the 1/4 mile rule is already in place. Thompson replied that it isn’t. Lehman said that the 1,000 foot cul-de-sac criteria limits some of it unless there’s 2 accesses. Planning and Zoning Commission Member Maynard Hebl said the way it is now, one side of the road couldn’t be built on at all. Thompson said that if they add 1,000 feet then it would give 300 extra feet to build a house at the end of the cul-de-sac.

Neuzil said that step one is to ask if there are 3 votes on the Board of Supervisors to say the North Corridor Plan as it is, is currently working and beyond incorporating it into the Land Use Plan, there should be no changes. Neuzil, Lehman and Harney said they would support that. Thompson and Stutsman disagreed. Thompson commented that it means a lot to her to get the centralized waste water system, into the plan. Harney said that in new developments, the Board is already encouraging central water. Neuzil asked if in the Land Use Plan that is already encouraged. Carr said that they follow the language, which says strongly encourage. Harney said that the same wording is used in 2.3. Neuzil asked if the North Corridor Plan is incorporated into the Land Use Plan, wouldn’t they use the regulations or guidelines set by the Land Use Plan. Thompson said that the proposed language says that the Public Health Department will set regulatory language, which goes beyond what is currently in place in some really important ways. Neuzil asked if the staff agreed that it is different than what is in the Land Use Plan currently. Moore said that currently it says encourage, but this was taking it a little further because the Health Department is working on language to still have encourage, but include some incentives that will get them to buy into the shared wastewater and wells. Neuzil said it’s hard to argue that, so the question is whether or not they will put that into the North Corridor Plan or is it something that the staff plans to put into the Land Use Plan when it’s updated this year. Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak said that he isn’t sure how to answer that question. Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell said that they can get to where they need to be assuming they get to the discussion of what the Board wants. Dvorak said they reference places in the Land Use Plan to the North Corridor Plan. Neuzil said he agrees with Thompson that this is good language it just probably needs to be in the Land Use Plan anyway. He said if that’s the case, the Public Health Department doesn’t have that all done yet. Stutsman said they haven’t been given the direction to work on it, which is what this would do. Neuzil asked if the Board doesn’t want that for every place in the whole County and not just the North Corridor. Harney said that he would say so. Neuzil asked if the Board does want it in every place in the County, then shouldn’t the Board just amend the Land Use Plan. Moore said it’s in the Land Use Plan. Neuzil asked why they need to add it then. Thompson said that all it says now is that they will encourage, but this plan says the Board will tell the Health Department to establish regulatory language. Harney suggested rewriting this into the Land Use Plan. Thompson said that would be all right. Neuzil asked when the Land Use Plan comes up for review. Dvorak said that they could make the changes now.

Thompson said that item 2.2 says that they will utilize the 5-Year Road Plan and the Road Performance Standards to create a roads capital improvement plan in the North Corridor. Neuzil said that he doesn’t know what that means. Moore said that it is a financial plan, where the Board will designate monies to go along with road improvement. Neuzil said to him that would need to be something that would be incorporated for all of the County and not just the North Corridor, which could be updated in the Land Use Plan. He said that it seems like the Board is coming up with standards just for the North Corridor, when they’re really talking about something for every place in the County. Thompson said that it is more important in the North Corridor because they have greater densities. Neuzil said that he could argue that Frytown is pretty dense too. Stutsman said that when the Iowa City water plant comes online and they start drawing all the water from the aquifer, it will be eye-opening to see what impact it has. Harney commented that they already know that it will drop. Stutsman said that it will happen, but the Board isn’t responding to it. Neuzil said they are responding and said that they signed up for a study on the aquifer. He said they’re taking a proactive approach to it because the Board is, along with JCCOG, responding to that issue.

Stutsman asked where they are at. Thompson asked if the Board is divided on part one of the proposed plan. Stutsman said there aren’t 3 votes to make any changes to the lines, so that is off the table. Thompson said that all the language in section 2 should stay, which has to do with preserving the scenic and rural nature, the roads capital improvement plan, the centralized water and waste, the soil erosion plan and the infill. Lehman said that he didn’t feel they were ready to add that. Neuzil said that they are all important parts, but they all belong more in the Land Use Plan than the North Corridor Plan. Stutsman said that this would be part of the Land Use Plan. Moore said that by adopting this it would get rid of the North Corridor Plan as a stand alone plan. He said if the Board didn’t adopt these, then they would have to do something with the current North Corridor Plan, either by adopting a resolution to update it as is because it is under a 5-Year Road Plan review. Neuzil asked when the Board says they want to incorporate it into the Land Use Plan, then what does it do for the Land Use Plan. Moore said that they can do both as part of the 5-Year Road Plan review of the Land Use Plan. Neuzil clarified that they can incorporate the things they’re discussing inside the Land Use Plan. Moore said that they would just take the Land Use Plan and beef up the policies. Neuzil said for instance, encourage the use of clustering to preserve open space in sensitive areas, which is 2.1. He asked if the Board currently says that inside the Land Use Plan. He said he thought they did and if they don’t then they should so it could be incorporated at that time.

Dvorak said that there is consensus to create a resolution saying that the Board feels that the North Corridor plan is fine and then the staff would address the rest of the issue in the review of the Land Use Plan. Neuzil said to include this plan into the Land Use Plan minus item one and 2.5. Moore said that staff is hearing that staff will take up the 5-year review of the Land Use Plan and as part of that, take the current North Corridor Plan and incorporate it into the Land Use Plan. Neuzil said that it is the direction the Board seems to be heading. Harney said there were not 3 votes to incorporate the boundary changes. Moore said that he is just talking about incorporating the ’96 North Corridor Plan and not any of the proposed plan. Neuzil clarified that he is saying that they will leave the North Corridor Plan as is, but incorporate it into the Land Use Plan. Thompson said that the current North Corridor Plan is so ambiguous that it’s not suitable to be incorporated into the Land Use Plan. Moore said that the staff would try to add some of the proposal in. Thompson said that the language in the proposal is so much better and that if she were a developer she could understand it. Neuzil said that staff could also include 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 into the Land Use Plan. Dvorak commented that the Board can go back to the formal session to vote if the Board has a decision or there can be another work session. He said that they’re close enough to go back to the formal to deny it. Stutsman added that they could give direction to review it as part of the Land Use Plan. Thompson said she would still like to have some sort of phasing if they could agree on it to include the northern part of the proposed Phase 2. Stutsman said that she would be supportive of that. Neuzil said that when the Board gets to the Land Use Plan phase if there’s some concession of some of the areas to the south, then that could be justified.

Chappell said that in case he’s asked to review the agenda, he wants to make sure he understands what’s happened. He clarified that there is a proposal that was first put forth in November, debated and brought into the joint meeting. He said now what he’s hearing is the consensus will be to do nothing with the proposal other than to say that they don’t want adopt the changes. He said other than that there appears to be a commitment to bring up the same issues during the Board’s review of the Land Use Plan. He clarified that other than that there is no other proposals that should be brought before the Board or have any other published changes. He said that if some of the proposals are something the Board wants then that’s something the staff has to take a look at to see how it’s logistically incorporated into the Land Use Plan. He said that this was the staff’s attempt to take the most relevant parts of the North Corridor Plan and incorporate it into specific sections of the Land Use Plan by changing portions that deal specifically with the North Corridor. He said to take the North Corridor Plan as a whole and incorporate it into the Land Use Plan, is more difficult logistically than just incorporating the Plan. He asked the Board if they really want their staff to put a proposal before them or that they don’t want to adopt the proposals, but they like some of the ideas, so they will review them with the Land Use Plan. Stutsman said that the Board is far from having this resolved. She said she doesn’t see the need to apply it to the whole County because there isn’t the pressure for development in the southern part of the County, especially since the Board has agreed on it’s commitment to that area. She said the Board needs to do a better job in the North area of the County. She said that she agrees with what Cancilla has said because the Board hasn’t planned for that area because they have created a city in the area and they don’t have anything there to support it other than a few hard surface roads. She said it's not responsible and she can’t understand why the Board wants to continue to add to that without having a thoughtful plan in place. She said that the Board may be at the point where they need the Comprehensive Land Use Plan they had discussed years ago, which would include human services and economic development and everything that isn’t included now.

Lehman also asked the question regarding where these families would send their children to school and if the Board needs to look at creating a commercial center. He said that there are a lot of holes in the plan and Chappell is asking if they even want to put anything in the Land Use Plan if it’s not done. Harney said that even if the Board had agree to adopt the proposal then it would have been in conflict with the current Land Use Plan. Chappell said that the way it’s worded says revise page 17, section 2 of the 1998 Johnson County Land Use Plan. He said that they would be replacing that language with the language that is the staff attempt to incorporate the salient portions of the North Corridor Plan it into the Land Use Plan by amending it. Harney said that he heard Chappell say that it couldn’t be incorporated into it. Chappell said that this proposal was the staff’s attempt to incorporate the parts they want of the North Corridor Plan into the Land Use Plan. He said there was also general discussion stating that there isn’t a consensus to move forward on the whole proposal, but instead incorporate the North Corridor Plan into the Land Use Plan. He said that he isn’t saying that it can’t be done, but it will be more difficult. Stutsman said they need another work session. Dvorak asked if the Zoning Commission will be needed. Stutsman said it should just be the Board. Thompson said that she would be willing to accept the proposal as it’s written and that staff did a great job because they got the highlights of the North Corridor Plan. She said it is baby steps, but that’s better than nothing. She said that having it in the Land Use Plan is important enough to her that she’s willing to compromise. Neuzil said that the 3 members of the Board have said that they don’t want to see any changes in the current proposal other then they’d like to see the North Corridor Plan incorporated into the Land Use Plan, which staff can start to work on when the Land Use Plan comes up for review. Dvorak said that the motion at a future formal Board meeting will be to reject the changes.

Adjourned at 6:35 p.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary