Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. It is six o'clock, but we're gonna wait another five minutes to get started to make sure that folks are able to get here. There's some congestion as the start of festival season gets going. So bear with us for another five minutes and then we'll get started.

What's that?

Okay, good evening. Welcome to the May 21st meeting of the Des Moines City Planning and Zoning Commission. I will start by reading our rules and procedures. The Planning and Zoning Commission is generally an advisory body to the City Council. City Council will hold a public hearing and make final decision on all matters before the Commission, other than site plans and subdivision plats, unless denials or conditional approvals thereof are appealed. The applicant will be given 10 minutes to present the request. Proponents and then opponents from the public are then allowed to speak in that order with each speaker allowed a maximum of five minutes. The applicant is then allowed five minutes for a rebuttal. The hearing will then be closed and the commission will discuss and vote on the issue. All comments are to be germane to the item under consideration and speakers are to maintain a courteous manner. Items listed on the consent portion of the agenda will not be individually discussed and will be considered for approval in accordance with the recommendation in the staff report unless an individual present or a member of the commission requests that the item be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately under the public hearing agenda. So to start, could we have a motion to approve the minutes from our last meeting, unless anyone has any questions or corrections of those documents?

Madam Chair, I will approve.

Thank you. All in favor to move approval, please raise your right hand. Thank you. Any abstentions? Perfect, thank you. Motion passes. Moving into the consent agenda. Item number one is a request from Riley Hogan for review and approval of a public hearing site plan and for a type two design alternative in accordance with city code for property located at 5909 North Waterbury Road to allow construction of a 720 square foot addition with a seven foot rear yard setback, which is 23 feet less than the required 30 foot rear yard setback per code. Would anyone in the audience this evening like this item removed from the consent agenda and discussed under the public hearing agenda? Does anyone want to discuss this item tonight? Okay. How about the commission? Okay. Item number one will stay on consent. We do have the possibility for the next three items to move to the consent agenda, so I'm going to read through each of those and then ask the same questions. Item number two is a request from Marco Gonzalez for the following regarding property located at 2551 Morey Street. Determination as to whether the requested rezoning is in conformance with Plan DSM. amend plan DSM to revise the future land use classification of the property from business park to low density residential and rezone the property from EX mixed use district to N3C neighborhood district to allow construction of a one household residential dwelling. And staff has let me know that the applicant is in agreement with the zoning conditions and that there were not comments from the public about this item. So would anyone in the audience tonight, is anyone here to discuss this item or like this item to stay on the public hearing agenda? Anyone on the commission? Okay. Could we have a motion to move item number two to the consent agenda?

I move that we move item two to the consent agenda.

Thank you. All in favor, please raise your right hand. Okay, we'll move item two to consent. Item three, similarly, this is a request from Broadlawn's Medical Center represented by Denise Kundy. for the following regarding multiple parcels located in the vicinity of 1826 Hickman Road. Determination as to whether the requested rezoning is in conformance with Plan DSM. Amend Plan DSM to revise the future land use classification of the property from low density residential within a community node to public semi-public within a community node. and rezone the property from N5 neighborhood district and NX1 neighborhood mixed district to P2 public, civic, and institutional district to allow a non-accessory surface parking lot for use for the Broadlawns Medical Center. And again, the applicant was in agreement with staff conditions, and they received one comment card in support of this item. Would anyone in the audience tonight like this item to remain on the public hearing agenda? agenda. Anyone on the commission? Okay, could we have a motion to move item three to consent?

I'll make that motion.

Thank you. All in favor, please raise your hand. Item number three, we'll move to consent. And item number four, a request from Youth Homes of Mid-America, represented by Jamie Bussell, for the following regarding property located at 1011 Park Avenue. Determination as to whether the requested rezoning is in conformance with Plan DSM and rezoning the property from NX-1 Neighborhood Mixed District to NX-2 Neighborhood Mixed District to allow a group living shelter use. Um, there were no zoning conditions on this request. One comment card was received in support and one in opposition. The opposition card didn't have any further comments. Um, would anyone in the audience tonight like this item to remain on the public hearing agenda and anyone in the, on the commission? Okay. Again, could we get a motion to move this item to consent?

I move that we move this item to consent.

Thank you Jane. All in favor please raise your right hand. Okay that passes and then to round it out could we get a motion to move the full consent agenda item which consists now of items one through four.

I move the extra items onto the consent agenda that we've discussed.

Thank you. I'm not used to hearing your voice coming from down there. All in favor of the motion please raise your right hand. Thank you.

I just want to clarify the motion was for all items one through four. Just I wanted to make sure that was worded correctly if there was any confusion.

Correct.

Thank you. That brings us to item number five. This is a request from Invest DSM represented by Teresa Greenfield for the following regarding property located at 3125 Kingman Boulevard. Determination as to whether the requested rezoning is in conformance with plan DSM. amend plan dsm to revise the future land use classification of the property from low density residential to high density residential and rezone the property from n5-4 neighborhood district to nx3 neighborhood mixed district to allow three row home buildings with a total of 20 residential dwelling units and sriyoshi will present this item for the city

Thank you, Madam Chair, Sreyashi Chakraborty planning staff. I will be presenting item five. And let me pull this up here. This is a rezoning request for a property at 3125 Kingman Boulevard. The request is to rezone a property which is currently zoned in 5-4 neighborhood district to the NX3 neighborhood mixed district, which would allow the applicant to construct three row home buildings for a total of 20 residential dwelling units. Land use plan amendment will also be required to change the classification from low density residential to high density residential. This is a subject property. This is located on the north side of Kingman Boulevard, just to the west of the intersection with 31st Street. This is in the Drake neighborhood and is in a primarily residential area. The area includes a diversity of housing. As you can see in the zoning map, there is a mix of duplexes, fourplexes, as well as multiple household dwellings surrounding the proposed subject property. This is a narrative submitted with the rezoning application, which gives some information on the proposed project. As you can see, three-story tall buildings with one bedroom, one bathroom, and two bedroom, two bathroom units are proposed, and we'll go a little bit more into the details here in just a minute. I have some site photos to familiarize you with the area. The green space that you can see is the subject property. It's currently vacant. It used to house a large single family home previously, which was declared a public nuisance and has subsequently been demolished. So it currently stands vacant. This is looking east towards the intersection with 31st Street, and you can see here in the picture some multifamily across 31st Street. This is looking west on Kingman Boulevard. As the photograph indicates, Kingman Boulevard is truly a boulevard with shady canopy trees. It's got a wide central median, and it's got a separated sidewalk. A few more photographs here, and I'm going to go through these. It'll again show you this is looking down from the subject property towards the residences to the south. This is looking up again into the subject property here. You can see there's two multiple household buildings directly adjoining the subject property. The one with the brick facade includes, I believe, 16 dwelling units. The one to the west, 3205, includes 15 units. There's a little bit of a grade, as you can see in this photograph, going up from the sidewalk up to the property. And here's another view. there is a shared parking in the back for the multiple the existing multiple household buildings there's a driveway that runs all the way to the back and you can see there's a surface parking lot here's another view of that again looking south onto the residential areas from the from the kingman frontage of the subject property The applicant submitted a site concept, and you can see that there's three row home buildings here. The building fronting Kingman Boulevard has eight units, and these are proposed to be three-story in height. They are 936 square feet. and they include one bedroom, one bathroom. Every unit has a tuck under garage for an off-street parking space. The two buildings to the back, they include two bedroom, two bathroom units. They're about 1,152 square feet in area. And again, they're three-story and have the tuck under garage. So there's a total of 20 off-street parking spaces provided in the garage spaces. The applicant also provided some concept elevations. This is the frontage of Kingman Boulevard. You can see the building that will be fronting Kingman. And then this is a concept rendering of the two buildings in the back. Just to give you an idea, this shared public space right here is roughly 21 square feet. 21 feet and the applicant I believe has a more detailed presentation and can talk about some of the design elements including the building material proposed and the accent materials and so on. As I mentioned, this property used to include a large single-family home. The previous owner had tried to rezone it in the past. The large single-family home was used for eight years apartment units and it was a non-conforming use. The previous owner did try to rezone to allow eight units at that time. In 2022, the city council denied that rezoning request and subsequently the building has been demolished. Now there's a new proposal before us to rezone this property to NX3 to allow the three row home buildings for a total of 20 residential dwelling units. This does require a high density residential designation, which allows density over 17 dwelling units per net acre. And it also requires the NX3 district to allow the number of units and the building type and the height that's being proposed here. Staff does believe that the proposed high density residential designation is appropriate for this location so long as the layout and the design proposed is context sensitive and good quality. um the proposed number of units here the height is um is in line with the area as i showed you in the photographs and in the aerial there is some multiple household uses just adjoining that particular intersection so it fits with that context the building height also a lot of the houses are two and a half stories and with the with some of the grade and so on, they are roughly comparable in terms of height in that area. Additionally, in terms of the location, this is a good location for this kind of diversity in housing because it is in close proximity to a lot of different amenities including neighborhood amenities such as schools, parks, the interstate, the entertainment district in the Dogtown entertainment area on University. So staff does believe that a higher density use in this location is appropriate so long as the development is done in accordance with an approved site plan and the conditions of approval. which I will go over here. Staff is recommending approval from low density residential to high density residential and the rezoning from N5-4 to NX3 subject to two zoning conditions. The first zoning condition is any use of the property, which is roughly 0.56 acres, shall be limited to a household living use with a maximum of 20 household units. And the second condition is that the development of the property shall be in substantial compliance with the development concept and the architectural character as well as material that the applicant has proposed with the rezoning application. and to the satisfaction of the planning and urban design administrator. The applicant conducted a few neighborhood meetings and they can go a little bit more into details, but here's a summary of the first one. And I will just let you scan through this. Please let me know if you'd like me to stop at any point. This is the second neighborhood meeting, and here's a summary of some of the questions and discussion items here. And then here's a sign-in sheet. I believe the applicant also visited with the Drake Neighborhood Association and here's some information on that. We received quite a few letters and emails, both in support and in opposition to the project. This is a letter from the Drake Neighborhood Association. It's a letter in support. And I will let you read, go through this. This is another letter of support. This is one of the multifamily buildings that is adjoining the subject property. And this is again in support of the proposed project. Another letter of support. Okay. We also received a petition of several neighbors and interested residents who signed in support of the project. And you can see their names are listed here. If they are within the 250 feet of the notice area, we do include that in the notice map since it's a signed petition. A few more emails in support of the project. All right, moving on, now we have some, a couple letters here in opposition. And I'll let you read through this. I would like to point out to the commission that the resident that submitted this email included a couple videos with the email, which for security reasons, I'm not able to share. But it is my understanding that the neighbor is in attendance and will respond. SHARE THOSE VIDEOS TO YOU FROM THEIR OWN DEVICE. I WILL LET THAT OCCUR DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. THEN MOVING ON TO COMMENT CARDS. GO THROUGH THESE. And this is the consent map. Opposition is 6.07% and support is 21.6%. I did also receive a comment card just right now, which I'd like to get into the public record. And this is in opposition, however, we are unable to include this in the consent map because this is outside of the 200 feet radius that we utilize for our consent map. But just wanted to bring that to your attention. So that concludes my presentation. I'll be happy to take any questions at this point.

What questions do we have for Yoshi?

Yoshi? The city's engineering department took a look at this project, they express any concerns with the stormwater issues that were cited in one of his letters.

They did not express any concerns at this point. During the site plan process, the applicant will be required to come up with a stormwater management plan to ensure that they are addressing any issues and that they are not adding any adverse impacts onto the stormwater, existing stormwater on the street.

Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant present? Welcome back. Please state your name and address for the record and you have up to 10 minutes.

Great. Thanks.

Good to be back. I was in your seats when we voted on this site last time. Dan Drendel, Slingshot Architecture. I guess as of today, we're at 400 Locust, and we're moving to the Financial Center this week. Yeah, thanks for representing a team today. We have several of the development team traveling today, and Scott and Molly are having their baby today. So I think it's excusable that they're not here. So the development team is a group coming together to execute this project and make it happen. HomeInk and Cutler Development are the teaming primary developers. Slingshot Architecture is the design team. Central Iowa Land Trust, Community Land Trust is also participating in that. And I'll have some description of what's going on there. And Invest CSM is contributing with the land donation. So I'll keep the pace going here so we don't go over 10 minutes. But in this presentation, we're going to talk about the project background, neighborhood context, community engagement process, project goals, housing outcomes, and where we are at in the process right now of site design and what aspects of the context we're considering to try to shape up the project. So as we referenced previous time that this project's been in front of planning and zoning, there was a property in place that had caught fire and had fire damage and had some stalled redevelopment plans. Invest DSM acquired the property in 2022. In 2023, Invest DSM and actually Slingshot Architecture started meeting or met several times with the neighborhood FEW DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS AND WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO START TALKING THROUGH PRIORITIES AND HOW TO ADDRESS THE COMP PLAN AND PLAN DSM AND THE DRAKE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ON THE SITE AND WHAT OPPORTUNITIES THERE WERE FOR AFFORDABILITY, SUSTAINABILITY, DENSITY, AND REALLY LONG-TERM HOME OWNERSHIP WAS A PRIMARY priority in those discussions just with the scale of homes that were being you know deconverted from rentals being a pretty high price point in the neighborhood and that those along with this project coming offline really took away some smaller units in the in the immediate context and so Yeah, immediate neighbors especially had weighed in and said, you know, a project that was not rental and smaller units, something with ownership in it, a condo project or a row home project was really desirable. So as we reconsidered the project this time around, over the last year, actually over the last two years, as we've gathered funding for this project, the project has 20 units, one bedrooms, two baths. Saroshi did a great job. We actually, in further plan development, have been able to figure out how to configure the one bedroom with a one and a half baths, which is really nice for kind of a public guest bathroom powder room as well. So the project will be all-electric, mass timber, high-efficiency MEP, matching some of the other Cutler development projects in the community. Funding secured is going to enable 60% to 80% AMI in the ownership program. And Home Inc. will... have really all of the future owners complete pre- and post-purchase counseling with their programs. And the CICLT project will run the HOA for the 99-plus years in the land lease. And, yeah, so we've had some great meetings with the neighborhood and secured a lot of support as well. So rezoning 10X3, try not to repeat all the things that don't repeat. We're really focused on, as you saw the pictures of the site, we're really focused on with this building, you know, there's, yes, there's still density coming back in next to some other dense apartment buildings, but maintaining a parking strategy that doesn't continue or increase burden on the street's street parking, provides some green space, and also starts to engage the streetscape with pedestrian-friendly activity. So front doors that face the street, which is really lacking on this side of the block with the apartment buildings. So kind of nice, the image that you guys had is from our first public meeting. Our second public meeting, we went back with a few edits that tried to respond to the community input. Just a desire for an increased relationship of, like, the masonry detailing and massing. So some porches start to get articulated even further than they were before, and the brick massing kind of comes up to the... There's a railing and a setback, and I'll explain why in a second, but... that the brick massing comes up to that level. I think we've hit on it but it's this project is really I think exemplary in my opinion of you know adding density into existing neighborhoods and trying to meet some affordability goals within our communities while adding a new type of home ownership within the community. OK, so we're preliminary in design. But as we go to public meetings, it's a great opportunity to get to design in front of the community and get feedback and then incorporate it. We know that we're asking for a very specific zoning condition here. So we want to start to explain our thinking of how we'll address the context well, um, even with, uh, increased density. So, uh, looking at the setback of the block, as I was mentioning, you know, the apartment buildings don't really front the street and activate the street with, um, pedestrian orientation, uh, very well. The apartment building to the west of us doesn't have a door that fronts the street and it's set back 80 feet from the street. Um, the apartment building to the east has a single door, um, And then so we're really trying to engage in the realm of where the single-family homes meet the street and so that our front yard of our building and the walk-up and the entry to those units are grouped so that they really start to interact with that single-family rhythm of the street and kind of blend the multifamily and single-family aspects of the block. So within that, also in the grouping of how we're articulating the front of the building, we're grouping two of the eight homes that front the street together and massing so that the masses of the building are more at a 24-foot scale and closer to the single-family homes that are like 32, 34, 42 feet wide. So trying to, again, kind of blend the scale of multifamily and single-family on the block. And then we, since the first public meeting to the second public meeting, parking was just a question that came up, and it always does. But we had a desire to try to reduce the amount of curb cuts through the sidewalk and combine drives with our neighbor. So we did initiate that conversation since the public meetings. And so we have this idea that's in front of them that's in the works but hasn't A lot of, or some momentum started where we actually, in addition to the single car garages per unit that we'll provide on our site, adding another nine stalls offsite by combining the drives and then parking between the properties. So that's a really positive result that's come out of the current conversations. Talked a little bit about the site plan. It's really a new typology of unit that's not in the market right now. So it's kind of exciting that some of the public-private partnerships that are going on here are going to yield a new type to reference success in the community. And some of the evolution, and I already talked about this a little bit, but we also zoomed out the image so that really the neighborhood could see the scale of the single family and multifamily buildings next to ours so that you can really start to see, again, we're trying to blend scale from two, two and a half story massing to three. So that's what I have for you so far. We're continuing to work on some brick detailing that kind of works or references some of the other infill brick buildings in the neighborhood. And we're excited to continue to pursue that and look for your support tonight.

Thank you. Before we move to the public part of the item, does anyone on the commission have questions for the applicant?

I've got a few. So as you definitely know, since you've been on our side as well, right, the number one goal we're looking for tonight is determination as to whether the requested rezone is in conformance with plan DSM creating our tomorrow comprehensive plan, which I assume you know because we had that slide up there right earlier. This is only one of the two that are relevant to us, isn't it? One of the two sections. So we have eight goals under land use and four goals under housing, right? That we need to be identifying whether or not we meet them. Are there any that you believe this project in the way that's being presented relative to the rezoning here are close and maybe not something that you're worried about or something you may need to make some changes to in the future, especially like why is this plan better than the rezoning request that was made before and denied? What is different relative to the goals and its compliance with those?

Yeah. So I'm weighing in a little bit from mainly my design side, but I think that's appropriate to what you're asking. So that property was a divided property set back from the street that wasn't necessarily interacting with the context too much. So it's kind of actually shifting toward the current evolved neighborhood character is nice. And increasing the mix of unit types that we're getting here. So affordable and for ownership and not for rent is kind of another blending of opportunities for different types of occupancies in the neighborhood, which is really a central tenant to these goals.

So in that, because that seems like that hits land use four or housing goal four, right? Which is the accessible and affordable one. Is that right?

That's what I was thinking. Yeah. I mean, I have like excerpts here. I'm not...

Gotcha. Okay. So you mentioned that, you know, there's going to be opportunity for 60% to 80% AMI to actually be able to be in here. And it seems like there's projections for them to be owners, hopefully. So what is the average and median household income that's expected to be owners of this property?

We can provide those. The I think the talking point that I didn't hit that I think is very germane to what you're talking about is the way that the CICLT community land trust program will work. And in combination with the federal home loan grant that is involved in this project as well, We will home ink as they work with their pre-counseling services. So once they get the family, and it'll be different whether you have, you know, your size of family determines what number you're going to hit to your question. But the way that the actual sale price will be determined is that the monthly expenditure for the homeowner will be limited to 30% of their gross income. once they've qualified in those ranges of the 60% to 80% AMI. So that'll be all in inclusive of HOA dues

I mean, do you have enough density here then to meet profitability or even to meet that gap? Because when you're looking at this area, it seems like an analysis of 2025 and 26 home sales within a 10 block radius of either place. The area of this seems that your average cost per square foot is about 160. And last time we were told that right now our average projects are 254 is what they're needing to sell for for things coming through Invest DSM. Because of the... Seems challenging?

Because of the additional funding sources that are involved in this that will actually be able to offset the sale price, or the sale price will actually be determined at the level that I just described, 30% of their gross income.

So how much money is being put in to make sure you make that gap up then? Seems like that must be a lot if those numbers are right.

I don't have our whole funding stack here to present to you for rezoning, but there are, uh, grants and funding that are in place through the home bank side of the, is anyone from invest DSM here to talk about it or they just send you no offense. I'm here. Sorry. Yeah, no, you know, I'll, I'm just here to speak about the rezoning.

Planning and zoning doesn't usually get too far into vetting the financials.

Goal four of plan DSM is the number one requirement for us to vote yes or no on this tonight. This is germane to goal four, or this is germane to number one objective within our remit as stated in the packet and state what you're asking us to vote on tonight.

I think it's, we usually take applicants word for it that they have done their own financial research and run their own pro formas, and they believe that this works. So I'm not sure why you don't.

Because again, because I haven't seen evidence that their numbers are right usually, and we haven't seen evidence from them, and apparently they aren't here either to show that their numbers are right. So I don't mean to be cynical, but when we have young developers who are often biting off more than they can chew... Are we doing that again?

I've seen a history of the Cutlers developing a lot of successful products.

May I ask a question, Madam Chair?

Could I just be specific as a clarification for the development team that is running the, Invest CSM is contributing the land to this project, and then the development team that's running the project, to your questions, is Homeink and the Cutlers.

So how many projects like this have been occurred? How, how are they working? Like how good are they doing at meeting the objectives of goal four within housing as per plan DSM's goal, which is what we are evaluating, whether or not this rezoning is going to be viable.

The colors are doing very well. And as you mentioned, and then homeink is, um, doing, uh, mostly single family homes, but home ownership in the same model that we're talking about. And, um,

Yeah, I do have a question. Thanks. I'm a little bit confused. First of all, when you first gave the presentation, or Shiroshi did, we saw a proposed design of the building. It had a slingshot name on it, but it was an earlier one, much more contemporary design. Yeah. And I think Shiroshi, does that design that Shiroshi showed has anything to do with your thinking at Slingshot? No.

Yeah, yeah, I can walk you. Thanks for asking. So both images were designed by us. The image that was in the staff report was the image that we took to the May 7th neighborhood meeting. That was not... That was a meeting specifically with an open invite for this project only. We had some discussions with the neighborhood amongst other topics. The desire to see something with a little bit more historic kind of ties to it was a desire. And another piece that specifically influenced the additional development of this image was just that it had kind of a railing across the whole neighborhood. front and that that felt kind of contemporary beyond what was in the neighborhood. So between the meetings, between the 7th and the 13th, we made these adjustments and also stepped back so that the heights of the adjacent buildings that are in the context could be seen as well.

I'm happy to hear that because here in the zoning ordinance, according to the ordinance, it's intended to preserve the scale and character of neighborhoods developed with a mix of bungalow and two-story houses, predominantly in the Victorian Revival and arts and crafts styles. And the first picture that we saw earlier on for the May meeting, early May meeting, was quite contemporary. And I'm not complaining about or, you know, objecting to that. But it didn't seem to conform properly. in many ways with the zoning ordinance and I think that this one personally my opinion is this one is more appropriate for the area so I wanted to be clear that you know what you're thinking what you're thinking was along that line and thank you for the clarification absolutely thank you yes

So first of all, I think this is a super exciting project. I'm really happy to see Invest DSM land being used to create more housing opportunities of different types for more folks. And I hope that we do more of that. I do have a, believe it or not, a design question. Sure. I'm wondering about light for that middle building. And I'm wondering, you know, I appreciate the work. I don't even like to see more units. I know. I know it's not popular. But I am worried about the lighting for that middle building and why this particular, when you have these pictures together, I can see the references. But it seems I haven't, none of the render, in all of the renderings, those folks are in the shade. Sure. And we do know that light's an important consideration.

Sure, absolutely. So, appreciate that. And, yeah.

support of density in the neighborhood meeting was much the same, where people said, hey, I don't know if this is popular, and then lots of people stepped up and said it is popular.

So anyway, so the spaces, the tightest space, like Shorosi mentioned, was about 20 feet. We've had some multifamily projects with spaces that are up to even 15 feet. What we're doing is In this, to address exactly the topic that you're talking about, is really increase our reference images even over here to the right. Increase a lot of glazing for the unit size. they're much beyond you know what we would typically see um so that's um something that we're doing both all the units will have both sides of their unit have glazing so really you'll see all the way through these units um you know not like a typical apartment building where you have one side accessing light so we'll get cross ventilation we have big uh big glaze openings and then the other thing that I don't have the courtyard image in my slides. Apologies. But in the courtyard image and all the facing facades, we're actually misaligning the windows so you don't look into each other's windows. So the glazing is oversized, but we're not looking into each other's windows. We're also going to set the glazing up very high in the space, both because we're excited about the CLT construction of the project so that you can really see that wood plane at night and things, warmth inside. But also so that we're really maximizing how much light can penetrate into the space Thank you.

Thank you Any other questions Thank you, thank you Okay, is there anyone in the audience here tonight who would like to come up and speak in favor of this item?

Please come on forward

state your name and address for our records and sign in on that white sheet when you're done. Okay. And Dan, I think I forgot to ask you to sign in on the white sheet when you're done. You can do that later. Thanks.

You have up to five minutes. Okay. Thank you. I'm Courtney Ackerson. Um, I live at nine seven nine 26th street. Um, and I'm coming to speak, um, with my, not just, I don't live directly on Kingman, but I walk it daily, but also as a member of the Drake neighborhood association and former president. Um, while some of this was being discussed or former projects were being discussed. So I have some context of sitting in on strategic planning meetings and, um, and, uh, neighborhood input meetings. So I am in full support of this. I am very excited to see something thoughtfully come into our neighborhood that kind of brings back density that we've seen go away from some of the big projects of renovating some of the homes in our neighborhood. I think it's neat to see something go from a safety concern to something where people are owning and coming into our our Neighborhood may be more permanent than just renters. I think high density is important but considering this could be home ownership and the way that you can really take pride on in your home and over a long period of time rather than just for a short while. I am also in support of this based on the sustainability of the project, the materials they're bringing in, the thoughtfulness behind creating the building. I think it's really neat to see that come into our neighborhood as well when we have a lot of historic homes that may be those things weren't able to be considered when they were being built. The new modern technology that we have to make decisions and to build in our neighborhood, although it's a historic district, I think it's neat to see the modern ideas come in. And we need some of that to balance out and to become the diverse neighborhood or to keep being the diverse neighborhood that we are. We're one of the most diverse neighborhoods in Des Moines and I think the only way we're gonna stay that is to make sure that we have these new projects in here as well. So.

Yeah, thank you for your time and for consideration. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak in favor of the project? Please also state your name and address and sign in when you're done. You have up to five minutes.

My name is Lori Calhoun and I live at 2808 Cottage Grove Avenue. I also have been on the Drake Neighborhood Association Board for 10 plus years. I also sit on the steering committee for the Special Investment District for Invest DSM. So I have been part of this journey since its inception. In particular, this is probably one of more of my passion projects in that when the building was torn down and we were looking at apartments, we really wanted to start seeing home ownership. So as people wanted to downsize or if they wanted to kind of come in and get new housing, we needed to have something available for them, which doesn't really exist in the neighborhood. addition to that I think that affordability we again we're having some turnover as we took down our Maltese down to single-family and I feel like we were gonna start to sacrifice some of the diversity which we really wanted to retain within the neighborhood I think that the design What I most appreciate is the thoughtfulness that went in here with Home, Inc., and then with the Community Land Trust. I've also been working with, from afar, kind of trying to see how we could support the Community Land Trust to make sure affordability could be sustainable. It's not something that would go away for the first-time buyer, but it would stay with that project. and it is exciting to see all of those things come together in an opportunity. I do think in this section of the neighborhood, it seems to fit. I know that there's been some concerns that we want more single-family homes, but I feel like this gives a lot of people a lot of opportunity and brings some vibrancy that we actually need to have in the neighborhood in order for it to be sustainable. It's also safe and efficient, uh, homes. So if you're going to do multi dentist or a high density, this is a safe density, which we've seen a lot of really bad density in some of our other homes that are in the neighborhood. So, um, it is an exciting opportunity and it's also, one where Invest DSM has been an extremely good collaborator with the neighborhood and helping us find those right answers to help meet our objectives. And I feel confident that we'll be able to be successful in this. So again, I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Thank you. Thank you.

Any other supporters of this item?

Hello, everybody. My name is Alec Davis. I live at 1815 Center Street, which is in the Sherman Hill neighborhood. But I'm a business owner in the Drake neighborhood at Delco Pizza at 24th and University. So I've been operating a business. I'm a former Drake Neighborhood Association board member as well. And I generally live work and play in these areas quite a bit And I just wanted to say, you know as as a community member as a business owner. I support this I think it's a great use of bringing vibrancy back into these neighborhoods It's a great group like the people listed on that sheet the dance straight there. Those are all great organizations I don't think we could have a better group of people working on this. So so I think it's very needed in this neighborhood as i mentioned we're losing a lot of housing typologies in this neighborhood we're losing a lot of affordable housing and this is a great new use of the space and is really thoughtfully done and personally i'd like to have more customers in the neighborhood so I think welcoming more people into our neighborhoods, into our city should be one of our goals. My organization, I'm wearing Momentum DSM. We aim to be the most pro-housing organization we can be in the city. So we need more of it. We need it everywhere. And this is, I don't think you could come up with a better project to fit in this neighborhood. So thank you.

Thank you. Other supporters of this item?

Hi, my name is Carol Maher. I live in downtown Des Moines in Ward 3. And it's bike month in May, just in case you didn't know. I'm a big bike advocate, so I look at a lot of things through my bike lens. But there's so much to love about this project. First, the community land trust that this will be put in so that these units will be Retain their affordability throughout their life because the land is owned in the community land trust Is really a powerful statement and commitment to our community community and this is a great project to be the first ones One of the first ones to go into that I'm also a big fan of naturally occurring affordable units because I think, you know, there's a lot of quote-unquote bad stuff around that, but sometimes I get sad when Invest DSM just deconverts single families that were cut up because I know those are people that... They're going to lose their homes. So it's nice to see something of this density going back into that spot. I'm excited about that. I'm excited that it's closer to the street. That's a big win. That's really great. Anytime I hear someone reducing curb cuts, again, as a bicyclist, I get really excited about that. So thank you, Dan, for considering that, and I hope you can work out the agreement with the neighbor to share a driveway. And then when you get to design, and this isn't design, but I'm going to throw a few things out there. Make sure you have some windows that are operable. As someone who lives in a high-rise apartment building, it's really important to be able to get fresh air. And indoor bike storage. Please, please provide a bike room. It's really important that you do that. And I hope you and the Cutlers consider adding that design. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there other folks who would like to speak in favor of this item? Please state your name and address and sign in when you're done. You have up to five minutes.

Good evening. My name is Dan Langworthy. I office out of 118 Southeast 4th Street in Des Moines. I'M THE OWNER OF THE 15-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING DIRECTLY WEST OF THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AND I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT TODAY. INITIALLY I WAS A LITTLE SKEPTICAL OF THE PROJECT, AND I HAD A LONG SIT-DOWN CONVERSATION WITH THE CUTLERS AND INVEST DSM, AND THEY REASSURED ME OF ALL THOSE CONCERNS. Just to talk a little bit about my background, I used to be a developer for Newberry Living, and I used to compete against the Cutlers. And they are about as good as they come. Even though they were competitors, they were much better than I am. Yeah, so we competed against them. They did multiple LIHTC rounds, and I know there were some concerns with their capital stack and funding sources, but I can assure you they are extremely sharp, they're extremely intelligent and community-focused, and being in the LIHTC space, low-income housing tax credits, once you do that development, that form of development, everything else comes a lot easier. So I have full faith in the development team, Invest DSM. I just worry if this development doesn't go through, the LAN's just going to sit unused or another developer will come in with not the community focus of the Cutlers. So I really want to spend a lot of my time just focusing on CUTLER'S PLAN FOR THIS SITE. THE ONLY CHANGE I WOULD HAVE FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS MAYBE TO LOWER THE SETBACK TO MOVE IT UP FROM THE STREET. MY CONCERN IS JUST BLOCKING SOME OF THAT DAYLIGHT THAT HITS MY FALCONIES ON THE WEST SIDE. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I SUPPORT THE PROJECT IN FULL. IT'S A GREAT DEVELOPMENT TEAM. IT'S A GREAT PROJECT. I REALLY THINK IT OPENS UP THE STREET. SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? Anyone neutral? Or opposed? Please come forward if you would like to. State your name and address same routine. You have up to five minutes and please sign in when you're done.

I wrote it down, so I'm really sorry. I'm going to read. I have a ton to say. My name is Betsy McCarty, and I live at 3225 Kingman Boulevard, just four properties down from the proposed project site. Just want to point out, none of these other people live on this exact block, and if I get a chance, I can show you the size of what the Drake Neighborhood Association actually is. I'm here to express my opposition to to the proposed zoning and increased in an increased in density at 3 3125 Kingman Boulevard. My concern is that this neighborhood is already struggling with infrastructure and public safety issues. We already deal with parking congestion, drainage and stormwater problems, traffic concerns, daytime drug activity, and repeated drive by shootings in the surrounding area. Since 2020, there have been three drive by shootings directly in front of my home. I believe these existing issues should be meaningfully addressed before increasing residential density in this area. Adding 20 additional units to a neighborhood that is already struggling with infrastructure and safety concerns does not feel responsible or compatible with the current conditions of the neighborhood. So stormwater management, my neighbor to the west of me and I have both experienced stormwater problems affecting both of our basements and garage during heavy storms. I'm concerned that additional buildings, pavement, and runoff could further strain an already struggling drainage system. There is also currently a sinkhole issue in the street in front of 1069 33rd Street, just a couple properties north of my home, which adds to my concern about the condition of the existing infrastructure in this area. I'm the one that brought the video, so if there's a chance, I will show the video of the street flooding. I personally walk this neighborhood multiple times a day with my dog. I have witnessed multiple drug exchanges happening in broad daylight. My own property has also been impacted. I've had tire slashes. I DO NOT THINK IT'S FAIR TO PLACE MORE FAMILIES INTO THIS AREA UNTIL SOME OF THESE ONGOING CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED. PARKING IS ALSO A MAJOR CONCERN. THERE'S A FIRE HYDRANT DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY LIMITING AVAILABLE STREET PARKING. The surrounding apartments and multifamily properties already heavily utilize the existing street parking nearby. During major events such as marathons that use Kingman Boulevard, parking congestion becomes even more difficult for residents and visitors. I also question whether nearby residents were adequately informed about this proposal. I have spoken with many neighbors on the block who only learned about this project within the last few weeks. While I understand there may have been discussions through the Drake Neighborhood Association, attendance at the meeting I attended recently was very limited and did not reflect the broader neighborhood population that will be directly impacted by this development. I, this may or may not pertain, but I'm gonna keep, I'm gonna say it. I also thought Invest DSM's mission was to help revitalize and strengthen existing neighborhoods. Over the past few years, I personally walked this neighborhood speaking with residents about neighborhood improvement grants and many neighbors could not even afford basic beautification or renovation efforts for their homes. I would much rather see the development here I would much rather see development here that better fits current capacity and conditions of the neighborhood rather than a high-density project that could further strain parking, infrastructure, drainage, and public safety concerns that residents are already dealing with. I respectfully ask that you deny this rezoning request and consider whether this level of density is appropriate for this location.

Thanks for your time. Thank you. Do you want to see the video?

I don't know if that's even something.

So this is obviously a really a lot of room.

And this is the corner of 33rd and Pingman. You're just seeing this from my house. I don't know how well you can see it, but you can tell that there's flooding happening right there. And then I took another video of when it slowed down. So this is happening whether we have Hard rain light rain just kind of depends on how much rain that we get but pretty much every time it rains, we get a large amount of water accumulated at that corner. I actually had a neighbor that I talked to today that does oppose it but couldn't come today said that he parked on 33rd Street before they tried to fix the problem. And there was a little bit of a fix to the problem after they dug up the road. But he actually had a car destroyed because the flooding actually hit up onto his car enough to total the car. just being parked on the side during a marathon or whatever. And then the last thing I wanted to show you was just, this is the Drake Neighborhood Association map. And this is the block. And I live on the bottom corner of that little square there. So that's who it's affecting. And nobody today has talked yet that lives on that actual block.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak in opposition? Please come forward. Again, state your name and address for our records and sign in when you're done. You have up to five minutes as well.

Good evening. My name is Ron Langston. I live at 3301 Kingman Boulevard. I live across from Betsy. I am opposed to this for some very practical reasons. I'm not against the intent of people having affordable housing. That's not the issue here. And I live just outside of the zone. But nevertheless, I'm affected. I've lived in my house for about 41 years. My surrogate grandmother lived down the street at 2700 Kingman Boulevard. We've been in the neighborhood for I remember her stories about how the trees, Maplewood trees, would overlook Kingman Boulevard, how it was, when she was a child, how the train trolley would come down Kingman Boulevard. Kingman Boulevard is a historic district, an historic neighborhood. 30 years ago, I worked with Mayor Preston Daniels very hard to make sure that we moved multiple housing, cut-up housing units, which were primarily housing Drake students, etc., back to family residential homes. Low density. It has been successful. Young people are buying into Kingman Boulevard. I've seen two generational changes since I've been there. I tried to explain very politely to the developers that I'm not opposed to their idea. I just think that their design for that street, for that neighborhood and its historic value does not fit. to trying to put lipstick on something that doesn't work. I don't want to get cute here, but I want to try to stay focused. The design does not fit the historical nature of Kingman Boulevard. I can't say it any more plainly than that. Putting that type of structure in that neighborhood, on that particular block does not fit. There are other places in Des Moines where that would fit more appropriately, but it just doesn't fit on that street. That street has historically been a residential housing street. Let me say in closing, I've watched between 33rd and 35th Street, two houses being built. I watched between 31st Street and Rutland on Cottage Grove, two houses being built. I asked at the neighborhood meeting, how come you can't build a house there on that property? I was told it didn't pencil out. It did not pencil out. Well, apparently, it pencils out on Cottage Grove. It pencils out on the 31st in Cottage Grove. It pencils out on Rutland, but somehow it doesn't pencil out there. My point is, this structure, though well-intended, does not fit the historical nature and character of Kingman Boulevard. I'm asking you to really weigh that. Young people are buying in. I have young neighbors all around me. So to say that people can't afford to live on Kingman Boulevard, the other people that I understand have come up here and testified do not live on Kingman Boulevard. They live on 26th Street or some other street, but they don't live on Kingman Boulevard. Kingman Boulevard is already highly dense. When they have Drake relays, when they have the runs, tours, when they have the Greek food festival people park on 33rd Street, on College Grove, on Kingman, there's no parking. Now I know they said that the housing will have some parking underneath, but when they have their friends, neighbors, holidays, it's gonna be a very congested street. It is a quiet street where people walk their dogs, where kids walk to school in Roosevelt and calendar, where people enjoy evening walks. It's just not a fit for that location. Not the purpose. It's just not a fit. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Uh, is anyone else here to speak in opposition to this item? Okay. Applicant, you do have five minutes for a rebuttal if you'd like to address any of the concerns.

Thank you. Yeah, we'll just address a few of the concerns quickly. Great question about operable windows. Definitely you'll have operable windows on both sides of these buildings, as I mentioned, to get cross ventilation through all of the units on this property. All of the garages are sized to not only have bike storage, but also all trash bins will be inside. So just something that happens on row home buildings. Nobody asked about it, but I'll throw it out there. Parking, we did hear from the neighborhood that outside of major events that people do park on the street, but that's not full at this time. We think with our strategy of providing one garage per unit and nine additional stalls that... we think will be pretty adequate to continue having a successful balance in the neighborhood. The storm, as we mentioned, Shoroshi mentioned, we'll go through site plan review to actually get this designed, but the strategy is going to be to have underground storage detention so that storm events will actually be contained on site and then released over time if it actually is at that capacity. So it won't make the situation worse on the street. And I'm glad that both support and opposition have shown up to talk about this project. I think it's made the project stronger as we've gone. I think just respectfully, we disagree about this location being a great site for this project. And we see the neighborhood not only as a historic neighborhood, but also a very diverse and interesting and eclectic neighborhood, especially with architectural styles and typologies of housing. And so we want to continue that and add a project that really activates the street and adds people who want to walk around the neighborhood and see the neighborhood and, you know, keep a neighborhood safe because this is their opportunity for home ownership. They're going to take pride in that and really want to be a part of the community. So we think it's really a great place for this project. Any other questions or I'll just write my name down and leave you guys to it.

What was the billed cost per square foot?

I don't have that yet.

Oh, we don't?

I don't have it with me.

Okay.

Thank you. I will then close the public hearing and open it up to the commission for discussion and votes. What do we think?

Sure, I'll make a couple comments. When I heard about the project and heard about what Central Iowa Land Trust was doing, I thought, wow, this is exactly what this community needs and how housing costs can be controlled to get younger buyers, families into good, affordable housing. um i understand the arguments from the neighbor the concerns but this building is flanked on both sides by pretty dense multi-family units be open to your neighbors hopefully you guys can become friends if this project goes through and that'll be a great part of your community and new neighbors I'm really glad to hear that stormwater runoff is being captured on site. That was something I was concerned about. So appreciate you guys taking a look at that. So understand some of the concerns from the neighbors. Please work with everybody as things continue to go through. I think it's a great project and it's got my full support. Thank you.

Chair Rosha, could you show the picture of the proposed building, please? No, the other one.

I think the more recent one was in the applicant's presentation. There it is.

Yeah, there we are. Thank you. These are just suggestions, okay? The developer and the architect have, of course, can choose colors and so forth. First of all, I'd like to talk about black. Black buildings, in my opinion, do not age well. And I say that for a couple of reasons. I remember back in the 1970s when the U.S. federal courthouse was built down on Walnut. It was in the 1970s, and it was a very difficult time of our time. nation's history. We had a lot of problems with the price of gasoline and so forth and so on. There were a lot of political problems. Black seemed to be a kind of an integrity color. It gave us a sense of stability. It gave us a sense of permanence. Things change and culture changes. And by the 1990s, it looked like a really austere building and a building that you really, really, really want to go into, right? And the U.S. government finally figured it out. And what does it look like now? It's a different color altogether, okay? Now, I'm not saying this, this is just my personal opinion, okay? And you can do with it what you want. But when I look at downtown Des Moines from the west looking to the east, The Capitol building is the landmark that you see, right? And what's right to the north of it when you look at the skyline on the east side of the river? You see Heather Manor, which is now a different, you know, an apartment building a different way. It was painted black. And to me, it's the same thing that the U.S. courthouse in the 1970s was. My point is black does not, in my opinion, age well. And so I'd suggest on this building that that be considered in terms of the design. I support the notion of including a bike room. I think that would be a really popular and useful function for the building. And the third comment is that I think I'd be willing to sacrifice some of the setback to get more fresh air and natural light within the courtyards of the three buildings. Oops, sorry. So those are my suggestions. But I think this is a good project. When I originally looked at it, I thought, I'm not sure about this at all. But the presentation, the support from the neighborhood, and the general notion of density and what we need ring true to me.

Thank you. Chair, I'd like to add my comments and make a motion. I... really enjoy hearing about the public process that this project has undertaken. I would like to say that that should be a part of every project and for other developers to follow suit, which the neighborhood support is really important. They are seeking to have homeownership opportunities in an affordable way for families to to enjoy an affordable product. I think this project meets that. I like what the design team has put together. And I also think that the Cutler development project developer, I should say, Cutler development, they are excellent developers and they will figure out a way to put that financial stack together. Overall, I think it makes sense for this lot. I think we need more housing as we all know affordable housing product a new affordable housing product That's not a federal tax credit. We should be rejoicing to see that in our community So we should be supporting that I hope that the council will support that as well and Those are my comments unless somebody else has additional comments. I would like to move staff.

I Would I REALLY LIKE THE PROJECT AND I KNOW THAT THE MORE IT GETS DEVELOPED TO MEET A BUDGET IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO START TO SEE SOME THINGS HOPEFULLY NOT CHANGE TOO MUCH. SO DAN I'M TALKING TO YOU. THE DRAKE NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, DES MOINES, you know, the historic buildings all were red brick buildings because that's what the clay is around in central Iowa. So I really like that. I'd like to scale the bricks to stay residential scale. Don't do the budget thing where I got to get jumbo brick to make it work. I also like the sill details in the brick, especially in the latest renderings. All those things are going to be a budget fight. You can see it coming. But I really like the project. I like the way it's being funded. I think it's what we need to see more of in the community on sites like this, because there are sites like this all throughout Des Moines. And we need to see more of this, not less of it. I do echo a little bit of Will's concern about black. I'm sure you'll address that. They just don't age well and take a lot of maintenance. But I think it's a great project. I think it's sorely needed. And I'm really excited to see it happen. So I'm fully in support of the motion.

I have one more thing to add.

I want a second Will's suggestion about reexamining the setback so that we could put a little bit more light and air in the middle. And I... I know I'm slightly expanding the scope here, but I do want to say that I think most of us, I don't know, I can't say that everyone in this room has been a tenant at some point in their life, but I'm sure most of us have been. And so we do still need high quality rental housing in this city. And it tends to come up as the villain in these kinds of conversations. And I just want to call attention to that. And also to the tremendous amount of subsidy that goes into a project like this. This is not efficient. We're using a lot of subsidies that could be used to fund other projects stacked on top of each other to make a project like this happen. And so there is a tradeoff for this type of product, and I want us to be aware of that. That being said, as I've said before, I am in full support, and I don't know if Johnny needs a second.

He does not.

It's the last comment it seems like we've had a design discussion when we're talking about rezoning I guess my concern on the rezoning is personally I agree with Jane that we need more density I believe you know I'm not an architect so the other stuff doesn't bother me as much but the capping this at 20 units seems like given the cost that this probably has and ensuring that we want this to actually not be potentially limited given What we're saying here, obviously the buy price at 1680 AMI, it can be reasonably thought to be about 149, $123,000 is what we should expect someone coming in to be able to buy this at. And so the subsidy is on top of that. I don't know how much this is actually gonna cost to build. Invest DSM says they haven't done anything for less than 254 square. It'd be good to know how big that subsidy is, but the 20 household unit cap, gives me pause as to whether or not if something changes or the environment changes or I mean the economic environment changes makes me wonder whether or not that 20 cap is going to ensure the viability of this project with the potential for significantly different financial conditions, especially when we don't really know what the certainty is of all the pieces in that stack. So I would request a family amendment to remove the limit of 20 units off of item 1 under C, C1.

Johnny, that's a question to you.

I think based on what we've heard tonight, staff has been working with the applicant and the neighborhood, and this is the number of units that the development team has proposed. So... I would like to see the motion as is, and if it doesn't go through, then perhaps it could be amended.

Any other discussion on the motion, which is to move approval of the staff recommendation? Okay. All in favor, please raise your right hand. Opposed? Thank you. Motion passes. And that is our last item for tonight. Do we have any committee or director's reports? No. Okay. Thanks, everyone. Appreciate it.