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