Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-11-01 Recommendation�7 Y 0 STAFF RHPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: 5-7743. Barker's Second Addition GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Applicable regulations: 45 -day limitation period: SPECIAL INFORMATION Public utilities: Public services: Transportation: Physical characteristics: Prepared by: Doug Boothroy Datc: October G, 1977 Barker and Barker Development Co. c/o Robert Barker 2002 Dunlap Court Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Preliminary plat approval To develop 11 commercial lots West of Highway 1 and south of the City limits 13 acres Undeveloped and County CH North - undeveloped and R3, West - undeveloped and RIA, South - commercial and CH, East - commercial and CH. Extraterritorial control as provided in Chapter 409, State Code of Iowa and requirements of the Subdivision Code and Storm Water Management Ordinance. 10/22/77 Adequate sewage service by the City would be available upon annexation, therefore, septic systems will need to be provided in the interim. City water does not presently serve the site but should be extended as soon as is possible upon annexation. Police protection will be provided by the County. Fire protection will be provided by Coralville. Vehicular access is from Highway 1 and Willow Creek Drive. 'Ihe topography is gently to moderately sloping (2-9 percent). 3 • ANALYSIS '111e subject addition is located in the County and adjacent to the City limits and within the City's two-mile extraterritorial control area. It is the applicant's intent to subdivide a 13 -acre tract (zoned County CII) into 11 commercial lots, three of which are occupied by existing commercial establish- ments (Lots 8, 10 and H). Although the proposed development is in the county, it is partially serviced by City sewer with a private lateral system. If the existing lateral sewer is less than 8" in diameter, then the City should not accept it upon future annexation; but if this sewer is 8", then before acceptance by the City, construction plans should be provided, the City Engineering Division should inspect said sewer, and, if needed, the sewer should be brought to City standards. R l: CO t•Atf: N I )A'I' I ON 'Ihe Staff recommends that consideration of the preliminary plat be deferred, but that upon revision of the plat correcting the deficiencies and discrepancies noted below, the preliminary plat be approved. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES 1. The location of the floodplain boundaries for Willow Creek should be shown. 2. The proposed sanitary sewer along the north side of Willow Creek Drive should intersect with the Southwest Interceptor Sewer at an angle which will discourage sewer back flow. 3. The size of the existing private sewer should be shown. 4. The provisions of the Storm Water Management Ordinance have not been met. 5. All existing structures should be fully dimensioned from property lines. h. The elevation lines should be labeled at intervals of five feet. 7. 'Ihe radius for the turn -a -round on Willow Creek Drive should be 35 feet and the back -of -curb to back -of -curb measurement should be 28 feet and the diameter or radius of the median should be either 14' diameter or 7' radius. 8. All existing and proposed utilities should be shown. 9. A temporary asphalt apron should be installed on the existing access drive to Lots 10 and 11. ATTACHMENT Location map ACCOMPANIMENT Preliminary plat ' Approved by: 4V4��4 Dennis R. Kraft, irecto Dept. of Community Development • \l//\ C/TY L/M/T I ; l LINE awrw '+a✓R a..er¢r Z �/ �/ weor DAIRY /2 AlXR TT ( OCArlON MAP N•T.S. S- 77y3 u 0 0 STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Doug Boothroy Date: October 6, 1977 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: S-7744. Oakes Meadow Addition GENERAL INpORMATION Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Applicable regulations: 4S -day limitation period: SPECIAL INFORMATION Public utilities: Public services: Transportation: Physical characteristics: Dean G. Oakes R. R. 2 Iowa City, Iowa Preliminary plat approval To develop 28 residential lots North of Muscatine Avenue, west of Southlawn Drive, south of Brookside Drive, and east of Memory Gardens 7.1 acres Undeveloped and RIB, R2 North - single family and RIB West - undeveloped and RIA South - undeveloped and R2 East - single family and quasi - public and RIB Chapter 9.50 of the Municipal Code and the Storm Water Management Ordinance. 10/28/77 Adequate sewer and water service is available. Sanitation service is available as well as police and fire protection. Vehicular access is proposed from Brookside Drive. The topography is gently to strongly sloping (2-15 percent). ANALYSIS The subject addition is proposed to be located in the Court Hill neighborhood. This is a mature neighborhood which is almost completely developed and having boundaries formed by the following arterial streets: Court Street to the north, 3 1st Avenue to the West, Muscatine Avenue (American Legion Road) to the south, and proposed Scott Boulevard to the east. Proposed access to this subdivision is from Meadow Street and Brookside Drive. '11ie 60 feet of right-of-way (ROW) over which Meadow Court is proposed to be constructed is, according to City records, not street ROW but an access easement. The City could not accept a street, the access to which is over private property. If the subdivider can provide access to the development, an important aspect in the consideration of the subdivision is its relationship to the Court -Hill neighborhood regarding its impact on neighborhood traffic circulation, i.e., Friendship Street, Meadow Street, and Southlawn Drive. As proposed, the development of the subject area would not be conveniently accessible from major streets. The developer is planning to provide only one means of access to the subdivision of approximately 11 single family lots and 17 duplex lots (39 units total). This access would also necessarily serve any development in the future of the RIA area directly west (approximately 8 acres). This will present traffic circulation and safety problems to both the subdivision and the neighborhood. Traffic to and from this residential area would use Friend- ship Street, an undersized minor collector which at peak traffic periods is at capacity (particularly from Meadow Street to 1st Avenue), or be forced to a less desirable, more circuitous route on local residential streets not capable of handling resulting increased traffic loads (e.g., an indirect route following Meadow Street to Ferndale to Terrace Road to Court Street, or Brookside Drive to Eastwood Drive to Southlawn Drive to Muscatine Avenue). In addition to this impact, this residential area would not he easily accessible to emergency and service vehicles. The design of this subdivision needs to account for its impact on the existing neighborhood. This impact can be accommodated by provision for a secondary means of access from the subdivision to Muscatine Avenue. Also, provisions need to be made in this subdivision for extension of a street west into the undeveloped R1A area. This street should intersect with Meadow Street extended at a point approxi- mately 450 feet from the intersection of Brookside Drive and Meadow Street. Another issue presents itself regarding on -street parking within the R2 area. As amended, the Zoning Ordinance allows in an R2 Zone two of the four required parking spaces to be behind the other two. The lack of separate ingress and egress of an automobile without moving any other automobile parked will result in on -street storage. Because Meadow Street extended is to serve as a minor collector street to Muscatine Avenue, it would seem advisable to plan for this traffic by providing adequate width paving for both parking and through traffic. RECOMMENDA'T'ION The Staff recommends that Meadow Street be extended south to intersect with Muscatine Avenue and align with Carver Street and a means of access also be provided from Meadow Street extended to serve the undeveloped area to the west. Also, the design of Meadow Street should provide for its construction as a collector with 36 -foot wide pavement and 60 -foot wide ROW. Further, the Staff recommends that consideration of the preliminary plat be deferred, but that upon incorporating the above comments and correction of the deficiencies and discrepancies noted below, the preliminary plat be approved. -3 - DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES 1. 'I11c location of ❑I1 utilities and their casements should be shown (e.g., between Lots 21 and 22 and storm sewer on Meadow Court). 2. All of Meadow Court should be included in the subdivision. 3. A note should be included to indicate that no structure is to be allowed within the storm water detention basins. 4. The plan does not comply with the Storm Water Management Ordinance. S. The R2 Zone boundary should be shown. 6. An inlet will be needed at the southeast corner of Meadow Court and Brookside Drive. A'PI'ACI HENT Location map ACCOMPANIMENT Preliminary plat Approved by: "(j Dennis R. Kraft, Dftector Dept. of Community Development OCity Myy E.•+� j .�, �ew.. D �`y , 2 tea m•� 'Y I DATE: October 14, 1977 TO: Don Schmeiser, Senior Planner FROM: Jim Brachtel, Traffic Engineer'3 RE: Oakes Meadow Estate Addition In the area bounded by Muscatine Avenue, First Avenue, Court Street and Scott Boulevard extended, there are three streets which provide access to the south. These streets are Southlawn Drive, Willow Street and Juniper Drive. All three streets are local streets with Southlawn Drive having an elementary school abutting it on the east. It would be desirable to provide a fourth means of access to this area from Muscatine Avenue. The proposed alignment of Meadow Drive would provide this additional access. Further, it is the only opportunity the City has for a link street between Muscatine Avenue and Friendship Street between Southlawn Drive and First Avenue. This north -south continuity is desirable. If the Commission concurs that this continuity is desirable, then it should follow that the intersection of Meadow Drive and Perry Court as proposed is undesirable. The developer has raised concerns about excessive speed on Meadow Drive if a reverse curve alignment was used in lieu of the proposed alignment'. While speeds maybe impacted at the curve the typical driver will be back to speed within a very short distance from the point of (1) reverse curve or (2) double corner. Further, if the driver perceives excessive delay in the double corner area he may well attempt to compensate for the delay by driving faster after he leaves the double corner area. Generally, the reverse curve alignment would provide for a smoother safer facility than the double curve as proposed. While a reverse curve may have negative impact on the lot configuration as proposed, reconsideration of lot configuration as it would compliment a reverse curve may yield a better overall subdivision. Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me. 3gsy h� STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Doug Iloothroy Item: S-7745. Bryn Mawr Ileights, Part 11 t;IiNI:RA I. INFORMATION Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Si ze: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Applicable regulations: 45 -day limitation: SPECIAL INFORMATION Public utilities: Public services: Transportation: Physical characteristics: Date: Octohrr 20, 1977 Ilryn Mawr Heights, Inc. 425 Highway I West Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Preliminary plat approval To develop 66 single family lots South of Denbigh Drive and west of Sunset Street 18.77 acres Undeveloped and RIB North - single family and RIB, West - undeveloped and RIA, South - undeveloped and R2 Cast - single family and RIB Subdivision Code and the Storm Water Management Ordinance October 30, 1977 Adequate sewer and water service is available. Sanitation service is available as well as police and fire protection. Vehicular access is proposed from Sunset Street. The topography is gently to moderately sloping (2 to 9 percent). ANALYSIS The desilln of the residential streets as proposed by the developer of the subject addition, Bryn Mawr Heights, Part 11, is the major concern the Staff has with this subdivision. The function of local residential streets (in this subdivision, Ealing and Wrexham Drive) is to provide access between housing and collector streets. The design speed -2 - and geometry of local streets are intended to allow them to function in a safe and reasonably expeditious manner. Local streets are not intended for through traffic and high traffic volumes and speeds. They are to be designed to encourage a neighborhood environment and to promote maximum safety in an area where children are predominant. This function can best be accomplished by designing local streets which arc restricted in their length (less than 900 feet or alternatively a cul de sac) and curvilinear. Both Haling and Wrexham Drive do not meet these standards and will inhibit the development of a neighborhood environment which they should enhance. It is the Staff's advice to the subdivider that serious consideration be given to finding an alternative street pattern to the grid pattern as proposed in the Bryn Mawr heights Addition. RECOMMENDATION The Staff recommends that consideration of the preliminary plat be deferred but that upon revision and serious consideration to amend the plat in conjunction with the constraint mentioned above and correcting the deficiencies and discrepancies noted below, the preliminary plat be approved. DEPIC1ENCIFS AND DISCREPANCIES I. All lots should be fully dimensioned. 2. All casements should be fully dimensioned. 3. Sidewalks should slope to the street at a rate of 1/4 inch per foot (see street cross section). 4. The street edge of the sidewalk surface should be located above the curb 1/3 inch for every foot horizontally from the curb (see street cross section). 5. Arterial streets (Sunset Street) should have a paving thickness of not less than 8" (see street cross section). 6. The plan does not comply with the Storm Water Management Ordinance (i.e, preliminary calculations have not been submitted, capacity of storage ponds are not indicated, etc.). 7. The location of fire hydrants should be shown. Fire hydrants should be located no more than 400 feet apart and the preferred location would be on corners. 8. Off-site detention basins should have a separate legal description (sec Makada Subdivision). 9. Overland flow for the storm water storage ponds should be shown to Willow Creek Drive. 10. Grades for proposed streets should be shown. 11. The size of all utilities should be indicated on the plat. 0 COMMENT -3- 0 In order to avoid the special assessment procedures of Chapter 384 of the State Code of Iowa, the final plat should be submitted in two parts. ATTACHMENT Location map ACCOMPANIMENT Preliminary plat Approved by: t!p D anis R. Kra , Director Dept. of Community Development 0 0 LOCATION MAP SCALE I :600 S-7795