HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-2005 Planning and Zoning Commission
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Monday, January 3, 2005 - 7:30 PM
Informal Meeting
Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center
Meeting Room B
220 S. Gilbert Street
Thursday, January 6, 2005 - 7:30 PM
Formal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
410 E. Washington Street
AGENDA:
A. Call to Order.
B. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda.
C. Rezoning/Subdivision Items:
1. REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017 Discussion of an application submitted by Third Street Partners for a
rezoning from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Housing
Overlay - Low Density Single-Family Residential (OPDH-5) zone and a preliminary plat of Village
Green, Part XXIII and XXIV, an 83-lot residential subdivision on 25.67 acres of property located on
Wintergreen Drive.
2. SUB04-00031 Discussion of an application submitted by Saddlebrook Meadows LLC for a final plat of
Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47-lot residential subdivision located south of Whispering
Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane.
3. CZ04-00002 Discussion of an application submitted by Annetta Hull for a rezoning from County Resort
District (A-2) to Suburban Residential (RS) for 3.25 acres of property located east of Sand Road &
south of Sycamore Street.
D. Comprehensive Plan Item:
Discussion of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to amend the Southwest District Plan to
change the land use designation from Large LoURural Residential to General and Office Commercial
for property located North of Highway One, West of Highway 218 and east of Kitty Lee Road.
E. Annexation Items:
ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030 Discussion of an application submitted by James Davis for a voluntary
annexation of approximately 50.40 acres and a rezoning from County A1, Rural, to CI-1, Intensive
Commercial (44.86 acres), Commercial Office (2.56 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (2.96 acres)
for property east of Kitty Lee Road, north of Highway 1, and west of Highway 218.
F. Other Items:
G. Consideration of the December 16, 2004 Meeting Minutes.
H. Adjournment.
Informal
Formal
March 14
March 17
** January 17 Informal Meeting is cancelled due to Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 6, 2005
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Robert Miklo
Re: REZ04-00017/SUB04-00017
At the December 16 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, Commissioners raised
concerns about the proposed OPHD plan and asked staff and the applicant to address
a number of issues.
Commissioners expressed concerns about the compatibility of the lots with the
proposed 5-foot front yard setback (lots 85-102 and 111- 130) and the lots on the other
side of the street, which are proposed for zero-lot line dwellings. Staff has met with the
applicant and has reviewed building footprints and designs from other recently
approved developments that would be more compatible. The attached sketch
(attachment #4) shows how zero-lot line buildings could be brought closer to the street
to be compatible with the more dense housing that the applicant is proposing. The
applicant is considering these suggestions and should have a response prior to the
January 6 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Commissioners asked that the landscaping of the common areas be done in a timely
manner. The landscaping required for Outlot A, which was part of the original OPDH
plan for this property, was not installed by the previous developer. To address this
concern the OPDH plan should require that the landscaping for the outlots be installed
prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the proposed buildings. The
landscaping on individual lots should be installed prior to certificates of occupancy
being issued for those lots. The specific timing of the landscaping should be addressed
in the legal papers for the final plat.
Some of the speakers at the December 16 meeting expressed a concern that the
connection of Sterling Drive to Wintergreen Drive will result in an unreasonable amount
of traffic on Sterling Drive. They complained about cars currently speeding in the
neighborhood. The Commission asked staff to evaluate the traffic patterns in the area.
Sterling Drive has always been planned to extend to the east and to connect to a
collector street (Wintergreen Drive), which provides access to Scott Boulevard and the
arterial street network. Based on the density of development and the circuitous route of
Wintergreen and Sterling Drives and Dover Street, staff does not believe that traffic
volume will exceed that of a typical residential street. Connection of Sterling Drive to
Wintergreen Drive will provide for a secondary emergency access for the existing
neighborhood. Area residents may wish to investigate the City's traffic calming program
to address their current concerns about existing traffic in the neighborhood.
Neighboring property owners also expressed concerns about drainage in the area. This
property is currently higher than the lots located on Sterling Drive and Sterling Court.
When Sterling Drive is extended to the east the grade will be lowered and storm water
runoff will follow Sterling Drive and Chelsea Court to the east and south to the existing
storm water basin. There are also two storm sewers and drainage easements
proposed between lots 136 and 137 and lots 142 and 143, which will improve the
drainage of the lots on Sterling Court. In general the City Engineer believes that
development of the property will improve the drainage for the adjacent neighborhood.
The applicant has addressed some of the Commission and staff's concerns with a
revised plan. One of the previously proposed lots has been removed from the north
side of Sterling Drive and the corner lot (lot 103) has been made wider. All of the
single-family lots on Chelsea Court, Sterling Drive, and Wintergreen Drive now meet the
minimum 8,000 square feet requirement of the RS-5 zone. The alley has been
reconfigured to provide a lager open space in Outlot C.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The use of the alley and the shallow front yard set back for (lots 85-102 and 111- 130)
allows for more compact development and provides the applicant with 17 more housing
units than permitted by the previously approved OPDH plan for this property. However,
staff shares the Commission's concern that the plan submitted by the applicant would
result in an incompatibility of design with a dense urban pattern on one side of the
street and very dissimilar zero-lot line dwellings on the other. It is the intent of the
OPDH zone to allow flexibility in design and building types provided that the resulting
development is compatible with the neighborhood and the Comprehensive Plan. In
exchange for more design detail the applicant is able to increase density and is allowed
to build housing types that are not otherwise allowed in the RS-5 zone. In staff's view it
would be possible to design zero-lot line dwellings for lots (65- 84 and lots 131-134) that
would be compatible with what the applicant is proposing for lots 85-102 and 111-130.
Such designs have been approved for other developments, such as Saddlebrook
Meadows, Olde Towne Village and parts of Windsor Ridge. In absence of design
changes we do not believe that the proposed OPDH plan meets the intent of the OPDH
zone or the Comprehensive Plan. It would not result in a neighborhood that' would be
better than the single family lots allowed by the underlying RS-5 zone or the previously
approved OPDH. Staff recommends that consideration of this application be deferred
to allow the applicant to address the design for lots 65-84 and lots 131 to 134. Without
a revised design that adequately addresses the issue of compatibility, staff would
recommend that this application be denied.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. OPDH plan approved in 1993
2. Preliminary OPDH plan
3. Elevations
4. Sketch depicting alternative design
and
I
f
,
I
)
i
~
""
~
~
'\ ~
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Prepared by: Robert Miklo
Item: SUB04-00031, Saddlebrook Meadows,
Part 1
Date: January 6, 2005
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Saddlebrook Meadows, L.L.C.
Contact Person:
Kordick Surveying and Engineering
689 185th Street
Tipton,lA 52772
319-350-9767
Requested Action:
Final Plat
Purpose:
47 lots for the construction of 18 single-
family homes, 3 duplexes, 20 zero-lot line
dwellings and 6 townhouses.
Location:
South of Whispering Meadows Drive and
west of Pinto Lane.
Size:
8.95 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Vacant, OPDH-8
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: RS-8, residential
South: RS-8, vacant
East: Agricultural, county zoning, RFBH,
residential
West: RS-8, vacant
Comprehensive Plan:
Residential duplex or small-lot single-family
File Date:
December 23, 2004
45-Day Limitation Period:
February 6, 2005
60-Day Limitation Period:
February 21, 2005
SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Public Utilities:
Municipal water and sewer service are
available to serve this property. Garbage
collection will be provided by the city.
Public Services:
Police and fire services will be provided by
the City.
2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Saddlebrook development was annexed into the City in 1994. The annexation and zoning of
this property was subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The major conditions of the
CZA specified that the applicant would provide for wetland protection and mitigation; construction
of a trail network; dedication or payment of fees for neighborhood open space and dedication of a
school site. The subject area was zoned RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family at that time. In 2004
a Preliminary Plat and a Planned Development Housing Overlay (OPDH) over the existing RS-8
zoning was approved to allow the development of single-family homes, duplexes and townhouses.
ANAL YSIS:
The final plat complies with the approved OPDH plan and preliminary plat. As provided for in
the OPDH plan many of the lots are narrower and smaller in lot area than normally required by
the underlying RS-8 zoning. Lots 28-32 are for town house units. Lots 33-37,39-43,45-47,22-
27 are for single-family homes. Lots 38, 44 and 21 are for duplexes. Lots 1-20 are for attached
zero lot line dwellings. A common private open space is located near the center of the
subdivision.
The Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance requires the dedication of 16,500 square feet of
public open space or payment of fees in lieu of open space for a development of this size. The
Parks and Recreation Commission has indicated that open space dedication for the
Saddlebrook development should occur in the far western portion of the RS-8 zone where it can
be added to the Sycamore Greenway. The legal papers should indicate that the open space
obligation for this subdivision is being transferred to the adjacent undeveloped property. The
legal papers should also provide for off-site easements for the 15' water main easement and 15'
storm sewer and drainage easement. Plats and legal descriptions will also need to be included
with the legal papers. The construction Drawings and legal papers should provide for the
installation Pinto Lane to the intersection with Paddock Circle.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Provided that the deficiencies and discrepancies are resolved, staff recommends that the final plat
of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre 47 -lot residential subdivision located south of
Whispering Meadows Drive, be approved subject to legal papers and construction drawings being
approved by staff prior to City Council consideration.
DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES
1. The 15' utility easement along Pinto Lane needs to be labeled.
2. Outllot A should be labeled as Private Open Space.
3. The applicant should verify that the 90° angle ROW lines at both intersections of the alley and
Blazing Star intersection allow enough room for the curb returns. They may need to be
modified with curves in order for the return to fit within the ROW.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
Location Map
Final Plat
APProvedbY:~-~
Kar' Franklin, Director
Department of Planning and Community Development
ppdadminlstfreplsub04-OOO31.doc
-
I I
QJ /I
,v)
:::J
'Ü
-C:
, QJ
'-.
.~
~
(/)
a:
--
:J:
C
d.,
0\
I
¡
~ /.J
3 Slll^! Il 3 31 \--I\.J J \fJ
bee""" ~ 0 '0 J'OJ
"l I'~. _lit, : 0 IIJ \
, ., ",";-:- ~ _J \ \~~
\UD"~ ~ ~
~, "\ ·C t\\ i \ \
o//--~~~ I \ \
I c=== }-... I I \
Ii '" '"'"'''7J I -
::J: II 1)= ~ L.." i ::J: i J
7 III II ,""~~"i III / /
~ LL \L-~ iF' I u. />-/
~-.... a: },,",co~' ( D ^3N~JVH II: / f¡
t3 ~I~ . 1;1
~IF"'N", l~'~ /$/
¡sL- \~II I
o "¡Uo,,"owl i
~ ~. \ ""'"'" I I
~ .~~"' ~=~''"~ I I \
~ Q)-g§~ ~~ \ \
QD~D - - \ \
~ ~~~"Q i::'>. i1' ~W" 1 - ~ ,
~ I~ ~ IJJ~:~ ~
::..... ==1 ~L \ -/ ~::::J§~~
&-.. I.' ,,,"",'"' ,\ ~"- ~
t3 DIIIID~~"o'" fìììl 1 n S: \
~ ~'" IrT \ -/ I
L \ "'. · I-- ,,""IC'i', Ý
I I L-R~ ~ \\I~
""," t:::: ~
TTTT --!
II _lP
1111[/-'- L......J....---
--.llr' .............(.
Iffi rl ~
tJ;lllnt=
_ Nl Wé)3~ --' ¡--
""
- J/
.~
I I ~
f Sycamore T
t
q~
~ ~PLE CROWN LN
ì 'r-
I~
K
-
I
co
CJ)
a:
----
co
CJ)
a:
-
WO~ -
De"
Gí'-'
../"
~
""""
~
I
1-
'þ~
~v
-
\ ......,
- C\I
Ct)
o
o
o
I
~
o
CC
:J
CJ)
-....
T-
Ct)
o
o
o
I
~
o
CC
:J
CJ)
Q.)
C
o
_ t::
CO
C-
en
3:
o
"'0
CO
Q.)
~
..:::.:::
o
o
"-
.Q
Q.)
"'0
"'0
CO
CJ)
ž
o
ÞO-I
~
U
o
~
~
f-4
ÞO-I
en
I
-
'¡ I -r"~
J'- ! !- J
,...L. "
(\f'H'H r'~-h< I ,.
¿UJ'Î Jti.. b l\H /I: 39
Girl'
10\1\/;..\ (')'1'[ Y V'I\¡'\!'A
,,_ '/ ,\,,,1
........ ...-.
9-et
./1 ~l U09:J
>/¡" ]~$
J~J
<o~
~~J
.¡o~
~s
i
J & i.
~liB : i
~ &;!C J
if ! :
I ¡1 \
4 I
~
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 29,2004
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: John Yapp, Associate Planner
Re: CZ04-00002 Proposed rezoning from A2, Resort to RS, Suburban Residential, for
approximately 3.25 acres of property located east of Sand Road, and south of
Sycamore Street SE.
The applicant, Anetta Hull, has submitted an application for a rezoning from A2, Resort to
RS, Suburban Residential, for approximately 3.25 acres of property located east of Sand
Road, and south of Sycamore Street SE. The property is located in Fringe Area B of the
Fringe Area Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City, and is within the City's
designated growth area.
The property contains two homes on one lot. The applicant would like to subdivide the
parcel into two lots to allow for one home (and lot) to be sold to a separate owner. Before
they can be subdivided, they need to be rezoned to RS, Suburban Residential.
ANAL YSIS:
The Fringe Area Agreement provides the City with the opportunity to review and comment
on proposed rezonings within the two-mile fringe area prior to considerations of the
rezoning by the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of
Supervisors. This property is within Fringe Area B and is identified as being in an area
identified as having a high annexation potential. The Agreement states "any zoning
changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall also be consistent with the City's
adopted land use plan." The South District Plan states that residential uses will be the
predominant land use in the South District, with higher density residential uses and
neighborhood commercial uses at key intersections. In this case, the rezoning is
proposed to allow the two existing homes to each be on a separate lot; no additional
development is proposed. Given these circumstances, RS zoning is not inappropriate at
this location. However in the long term this location, at the intersection of an arterial street
(Sand Road) and a collector street (Sycamore Street), may be appropriate for more
intense development if this property is annexed into the city.
The City and County are cooperating on the reconstruction of the Gilbert Street / Sand
Road corridor. There is an unpaved access to the this property from Sand Road that staff
recommends should be closed either as part of the rezoning or subsequent subdivision.
Given that the City may not review the subdivision, staff recommends that the closure of
this driveway be a condition of the rezoning. Staff also recommends that this property be
subdivided into a maximum of two lots until such time that this property is annexed into
the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council forward a comment to the Johnson County Board
of Supervisors recommending approval of CZ04-00002, a rezoning of approximately 3.25
acres from A2, Resort to RS, Suburban Residential, for approximately 3.25 acres of
property located east of Sand Road, and south of Sycamore Street SE, subject to the
unpaved driveway to Sand Road being closed and that subdivision of the property being
limited to two lots until such time that the property is annexed into the city.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Location map
2. Rezoning exhibit
Approved by:
~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
I
I C\J
0
~ 0
I 0
0
I
o:::t
I 0
C\J
ü
I~
-
2
-1
«
w
0::::
«
~ \7
t3
w
~ CJ)
"0
CtI
~ 0
a::
"0
~ C
CtI
CJ)
~ "0
C
CtI
w
t3 CJ)
"0
CtI
0
a::
(])
10..-
0
E
CtI
()
ð)
..
Z
0
Þ-4
~
U
0
~ ~
~
~
Þ-4
rJ)
\
\
.
\
,
\
\
\\
\'
,\
\'
,\
\'
,\
\'
,\
NBB'50'09"E 234.71'
~~
Oy..~SON C~
'S F:ILS, ~~
DEe ' lJ:¿,
o 9 200~
-8282 I... J
- '§
-....------- t¡ ~
REZONING EXHIBIT·P~PA_R~~
TO JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA
IOWA CITY. IOWA 52240
PREPARED BY: MMS CONSULTANT
SYCAMORE ST. SE _
--------~.o·
ð=6'1O'55"
R=5763.22' ,
L=621 Bl' \ '
T=311 21' \
C=621 51'
CB=NI5'3,31 W 1 \
~:::I"C;::Y \\ \
\ 'ß\'
\,
~\ \
\ ,\ \
\ ~,
N v->\ '
W .\ \\\
~ \ '
\ \ \
8> \ \
~II~II_~ \ '\
01025 50 Th 100 '\ '
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET \
'"=100' \ '\ \ 'ð,
LINE SEGMENT TABLE \ ~
LINE LENGTH BEARING
l1 \ ~
~~ : 7~: N '41' \ \ .~.
\ \'
\ \\
\ \.
\ \ ,
\ \ '\ \ Iz
\ ' \ 18
\ \ \_\1
\ \ \ \ I~
\ \ \ ~\I\'
\ '\ \ SE CORNER
, \ SEC.27-T79N-R6W
\ \ FOUND NAIL
BOOK 35, PAGE 244
SHEDD I
POL9CH HOUSE EXISTING I
DRIVEWAY
D PONTOF
U BEOINNING
DECK ~
L:J
-..0
øø
LEGAl. DF..'ilCRlPTION
A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST ONE..QUARTER OF THE SOtrrHEAST ONE-
QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE
FIFTII PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, THE BOUNDARIES
OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
SHED
COMMENCING AT THE EAST ONE.QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 27,
TOWNSHIP 79 NORTII, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE FIFTII PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
JOHNSON COUNTY. IOWA; THENCE SOO"SS'lO"E. ALONG THE EAST LrnE OF
THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUAR1ER OF SAID SECTION 27, A DISTANCE OF 33.00
FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOtITHERLYRIGHT·OF-WAYUNE OF SYCAMORE
S1REET SE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING
SOO·58'10''£, 949.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT I,
WHITE BUCKS SUBDIVISION TO JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA AS RECORDED IN
PLAT BOOK 48 AT PAGE 162 IN nm RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY
RECORDER; THENCE S89"18'34"W, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, 43.74
FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RlGHT-OF-WAY LINE oF SAND ROAD
SE; TIŒNCE N12Ð4I'20''W, ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIOHr-OF-WAY LINE,
327.56 FEET; TIIENCE NORTHWESTERLY, 621.81 FEET ALONG SAID
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF·WAY LINE AND AN ARc OF A 5763.22 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, WHOSE 621.51 FOOT CHORD BEARS
NlS"39'31"W; TIŒNCE N50Ð39'41''E, 42.61 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID
SOtITHERLY RIGHT-Of· WAY LINE; TIlENCE N88Ð50'Q9''E, ALONG SAID
SOUTHERLY RIGHT·Of·WAY LINE, 234.71 FEET TO THE POINT Of
BEGINNING, CONTAINING 3.25 ACRES AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND
RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
AREA
3.25 ACRES
A2 TO RS
o
WEll
o
SHED
¡u
~
'OJ
V'
o
o
<II
D
SHED
SOIL TYPE
SPARTA LOAMY FINE SAND
WAUKEE LOAM
SLOPES
o 2 ::¡
0-2 ::¡
¡"
n
.,;
...
'"
~
~ CARPORT
EXISTING
DRIVEWA Y
NO.
418
17B
SOILS MAP
LEGEND
AND
NOTES
&.
.ð.
{:,
.
o
-..0
øø
- CONGRESSIONAl CORNER, FOUND
- CONGRESSIONAl CORNER, REESTABLLSHED
- CONGRESSIONAl CORNER, RECORDED LOCATION
- PROPERTY CORNER(S), FOUND (~ noted)
- PROPERTY CORNERS SET
(~:o~: ~~th ·(M~~o), plosllc lS Cop
- CUT ~X~
- PROPERTY It/or BOUNDARY UNES
- - - - - - - - CONGRESSIONAl SECTlQN LINES
---...--------- - RIQHT-Df'-WAY UNES
------CEHTERUNES
- LOT UNE5, INTERNAl
- - lOT UNES, PlATTED OR BY DEED
-------------- - EASEMENT UNES, 'MOTH ð( PURPOSE NOTED
__n_________n___n___nnn _ EXISTING EASEMENT UNES, PURPOSE NOTED
(R) - RECQRDED DIMENSIONS
(M) - MEASURED DIMENSIONS
C22-1 - CURVE SEGMENT NUMBER
UNlESS NDlED OTHER'MS£. AlL OIUENSIONS ARE IN FEET NÐ HUNDREDTHS
ERROR OF CLOSURE IS LESS THAN 1 fOOT IN 20,000 fEET
"
L2
-r
LOr I
~\0\~~
~0'"''
'-~(¡~~
~~~ñ¡f- ~!i,
~O ~ '(>0
qV'
LOr I
I
l
I
REQUESTED BY: EARL HULL
EXISTING ZONING: A2
PROPOSED ZONING: RS
[ g
.....!1!
,
~~ II
0
q
Sheet Title: I i:'
REZONING EXHIBIT MMS CONSULTANTS I INc ~.
. ¡r
Project Title: lowo City, Iowa (319) 351-8282 ~
A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SEC. 27 I\'
Designed by. Checked by. !
T79N-R611 OF THE 5TH P.II., JOHNSON COUNTY, 1011 MAS JEL
C, \130D\1315002Z,DWG
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 29,2004
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: John Yapp, Associate Planner
Re: Southwest District Comprehensive Plan amendment
The agenda for your January 6, 2005 meeting includes a public hearing on a request to
amend the Southwest District Plan to show commercial development on the
undeveloped property located north of Highway 1, west of Highway 218, and east of
Kitty Lee Road. Staff has generated a version of the Southwest District land use map
showing this change for your review.
In conformance with the staff recommendation in the December 16 Davis Annexation
staff report related to this property, we recommend that office commercial zoning be
shown on the northern portion of this property adjacent of the residential properties, and
that general commercial be shown on the southern portion of the property abutting
Highway 1 and Highway 218.
Approved by: /~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
Attachment
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 16, 2004
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Jerry Hansen, Don Anciaux, Dean Shannon, Beth
Koppes, Benjamin Chait
STAFF PRESENT: John Yapp, Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr
OTHERS PRESENT: Larry Schnittjer, Kim Kirchner, Ed Pierson, Linda Huff, Brad McDowell, Robert
L. Croush, Rich Oberfeld, Dave Alatalo, John Arthur, Victoria Concha, Kenneth
Moss, Jim Beeghly, Glenn Siders
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, a rezoning from Medium
Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/RS-8) zone and a
preliminary Planned Development Housing Plan and a preliminary plat of Olde Town Village, a 33.21-acre
residential and commercial subdivision that will allow 10 commercial lots and 62 dwelling units on 32 lots
for property located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and north of Lower West Branch
Road subject to review by City Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation Department and the
Corps of Engineers,
Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, ANN04-00002, severance of approximately 194-acres of land
from the Iowa City corporate limits to allow these properties to be annexed to the City of Coralville. This
property is adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road,
Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, settinq a public hearinq for 1/6/05 on an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan to amend the Southwest District Plan to change the land use designation from
Large Lot/Rural Residential to General and Office Commercial for property located north of Hwy One,
west of Hwy 218 and east of Kitty Lee Road.
CALL TO ORDER:
Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:33 pm.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
REZONING/SUBDIVISION ITEMS:
REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, discussion of an application submitted by Plum Grove Acres, Inc, for a
rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/RS-
8) zone and a preliminary Planned Development Housing Plan and a preliminary plat of Olde Town
Village, a 33.21-acre residential and commercial subdivision that will allow 10 commercial lots and 62
dwelling units on 32 lots for property located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and
north of Lower West Branch Road,
Miklo said the southern portion of the property was zoned RS-8, Medium Density Single-family
Residential and the northern portion was zoned CC-2, Community Commercial. Much of the property was
annexed into the City in 2001 and was subject to a conditional zoning agreement that spelled out
conditions that needed to be adhered to when the property was developed. One of those conditions had
been that there would be a planned development housing overlay for the RS-8 area prior to the
development of that property. The CZA also specified that several features of the Comprehensive Plan be
followed when laying out this area.
A large wetland area is currently the location for the sanitary sewer lagoons that served the Iowa City
Care Facility. That facility will be hooked into the City's sanitary sewer system, the lagoons will be
abandoned and rebuilt as part of the reconstruction of the wetland area, Some additional lower quality
wetlands will be removed as part of the redevelopment and reconstructed with the larger wetland which
will become a private open space maintained by a homeowners association. The redeveloped wetland
area will also contain the stormwater management facilities for the overall development.
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 2
Staff felt the plan as submitted adhered to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan as it provided for a
reasonable mix of housing types. The proposed plan provided a good transition to the existing single
family homes south of Lower West Branch Road and also a transition from the single family homes to the
large residential tract to the east. The area in the central section was devoted to zero-lot line units, the
area along Scott Blvd and Olde Town Road would be multi-family townhouse units, A commercial
development would be on the northern portion of the property laid out as a town square or main-street
type of development.
Staff felt the plan also complied with the CZA which stipulated fees to be paid to the City for improvement
of Lower West Branch Road; fees for the sanitary sewer system; and a water main extension fee. A
revised plat had been received earlier in the day but City engineers had not had a chance to review it.
Staff recommended approval of REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, subject to Public Works staff signing off on
the plat that had just been received.
Koppes asked if Lower West Branch Road was a collector street. Miklo said that was correct. The City did
allow residential lots to access collector streets when there was no other alternative but not direct lot
access to arterial streets, It was by design that the streets in the existing and proposed developments
didn't 'line-up' exactly. When the annexation had occurred, the residents of Hummingbird Lane had been
concerned that as the commercial area developed, traffic from south of Lower West Branch road would
use Hummingbird Lane to access the commercial area. They'd requested that there be an offset so traffic
would use Lower West Branch Road,
Hansen asked if there was only one style of townhouse? Miklo said that was correct. There was a note on
the plat that said townhouses would include at least three different façade designs including a variety of
colors, bricks and architectural details, If that was a concern for the Commission they could defer and ask
for more detail from the developer. The townhouses were to be in clusters of three or four which would
offer some variety in terms of scale of the units, Hansen said the Comprehensive Plan stated that it
should be varied,
Freerks asked how Outlot B and the wetlands played into this development. Miklo said it was likely to be
a private open space maintained by a homeowners association. It would have a conservation easement
for the wetlands and also storm water management. The Director of Parks and Recreation was consulting
with the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding if the City wanted the wetland area, It was likely
that they would not because of the maintenance responsibility and because it was not suitable for active
open space. Staff reviewed the wetland mitigation plan and felt it complied with the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance. The Corps of Engineers will also have to review and approve it. The neighboring property
owner had built a building that had gone over the property line so a little triangle of land would be
transferred to the homeowner to rectify the situation.
Public discussion was opened,
Larry Schnittier, MMS Consultants, said he was there to represent the developer and would be glad to
answer any questions,
Public discussion was closed,
Motion: Chait made a motion to approve REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, a rezoning from Medium Density
Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/RS-8) zone and a preliminary
Planned Development Housing Plan and a preliminary plat of Olde Town Village, a 33.21-acre residential
and commercial subdivision that will allow 10 commercial lots and 62 dwelling units on 32 lots for property
located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and north of Lower West Branch Road
subject to review by City Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation Department and the Corps of
Engineers. Shannon seconded the motion.
Anciaux said he liked the step down from single-family and the blending which protected the single-family
residences from the surrounding commercial and multi-family areas,
The motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017, discussion of an application submitted by Third Street Partners for a
rezoning from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Housing
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 3
Overlay - Low Density Multi-Family Residential (OPDH-S) zone and a preliminary plat of Vii/age Green,
Part XXIII and XXIV, an 83-lot residential subdivision on 2S.67-acres of property located on Wintergreen
Drive.
Miklo said this entire area was subject to a planned development housing overlay which was approved in
1993. The approved 1993 plan had included single family lots toward the western portion of the
development adjacent to Sterling Drive and zero-lot lines in the south and east and the open space, The
applicant was proposing to amend the planned development housing overlay including the storm water
detention and open space areas in order to add additional zero-lot lines which would replace some single
lots and a cul-de-sac to replace a loop street.
A planned development housing overlay provided the opportunity to cluster development and introduce
housing types that normally might not be allowed. There was an expectation of an amenity or some open
space features in exchange for the increase in density or change in housing types, Staff felt there might
be some ways to increase the density that had been proposed in 1993 but had some concerns regarding
how that was to be done.
In order to increase the density the applicant had proposed an alley system in the center of the block
resulting in fairly narrow lots of 27- to 3S-feet in width. Staff had a concern regarding open space and had
suggested the elimination of one unit in a particular area. Staff was also concerned about some lots which
were under the minimum 8,000-square feet required in the RS-S zone and a concern with the proposed
width of a corner lot and the adjoining narrower lots. Staff had suggested the elimination of one lot to
allow more space for the remaining lots.
Staff's biggest concern was with the introduction of the new housing type. They wished to encourage the
developer to give some consideration to the other side of the street opposite the alley units and design
something that would be compatible. Staff and the Commission had received some elevation drawings
but Staff felt the drawings could use more work to make them compatible with the housing units proposed
on the other side of the street. Only two basic housing models had been proposed for the center area.
Staff suggested that there be some variety in the facades so that there would be more variety throughout
the entire general area.
In summary, staff felt there might be a possibility to use the planned development to increase density but:
· there needs to be more design consideration for the lots on the side of the street opposite the alley
units in order to make it more of a compatible/consistent neighborhood
· there should be more open space
· increase the size of the corner lot and adjacent lots by eliminating one proposed lot
Miklo said Staff recommended that this item be deferred until those issues could be addressed, The
applicant agreed to a deferral.
Freerks asked if it was still proposed to be a S-foot setback which was very narrow. Miklo said the
applicant had proposed the S-foot setback along two streets, The photograph on the plan showed a fence
and some landscaping in the S-foot area to compensate for the reduction. Staff felt that that might be
something the Commission would want to make a requirement for approval.
Public discussion was opened.
Kim Kirchner. 2906 Sterling Drive, read a letter she had written, She said approximately eleven years ago
her neighborhood had fought for and received approval of the final plat for the neighborhood being
discussed. The plan had been acceptable to the surrounding neighborhood and the developer of the land,
The land had since been sold twice, most recently to Frantz who had submitted a different plan for the
neighborhood. Kirchner said eleven years ago they had been promised that they would not need to worry
about this area being rezoned, there would not be water or traffic issues, the existing property owners
would receive a proper transition from single family to multi-family properties. Kirchner said she and her
neighbors were disappointed that they were attending another meeting in regard to the development of
this land. The approved plan consisted of 62-units of which 32 were single-family units and 30 were zero-
lot line units. The plan had included a pond, two areas of green space and bike trail. The new proposal
was for 83 units of which only 21 were single-family residences and 62 zero-lot lines. It also included only
a small green space with play-ground area but no bike trails. Several neighbors had expressed concerns
with the rezoning process, the proposal to rezone the area from RS-S to OPDH S, the quality and quantity
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 4
of the houses, the constant problem with flooding of yards and streets, the congestion of traffic on the
streets and inadequate policing of the area,
Impacts the proposed development would have on the neighborhood:
Quality/Quantity: Qualitv of the neiqhborhood. Many of the residents had been in their homes over ten
years, They would like to see a development that would appeal to a population that was likely to put down
roots and invest in the neighborhood. Increase of qreen space so children could also enjoy the space
where they lived. Number of proposed units - would like to see the land developed into more single family
homes rather than the opposite. Water a concern in two ways: 1) For property owners immediately
adjoining the development off Sterling Court, every new development phase in Village Green had raised
the level of the land and the earlier developments got the run-off. 2) Storm sewers from Dover to the end
of Sterling Court and Sterling Drive already flooded heavily during rainstorms. The proposal was for less
green space and more concrete, how would the system absorb that added burden. Traffic. Sterling Drive
and Dover Street were not designed to handle the amount of traffic that will come in/out of the proposed
area. The streets are hazardous due to on-street parking. There have been many close-calls with people
not being courteous drivers and speeding, The neighborhood assumed this would only get worse with the
increased traffic entering/exiting their neighborhood, Access to Sterling Drive from the east.
Other concerns that the neighborhood wished the Commission to consider:
· Will there be a buffer to the noise created from the railroad and industrial buildings to the south of
the development?
· How will Lucas, Southeast Junior High and City High be impacted with the increase in density of
housing?
· Are there enough transit stops?
· Are the utilities installed at a level to handle the requirements of the proposed density?
· Was there an additional need for this type of housing?
· Was there adequate access and support for emergency and service vehicles?
· Would there be sufficient off-street parking?
· Did the placement of an alleyway in a remote area provide easy access to the neighborhood from
the railroad and would it invite inappropriate and unlawful behavior?
Kirchner said they were concerned with the process of the development in the Village Green Area, They
felt they had done their work 11-years ago and she was there to express her concerns.
Ed Pierson, 2054 Hannah Jo Court, asked Staff to speak to traffic flow and to street connectivity. Pierson
said at the time his subdivision had been developed the three developers had indicated that there would
be landscaping around the water retention basin in the south central section along the railroad tracks. It
was to be developed at the time the lots were sold, It was his understanding that with the lots being sold
that might not be the case now. Pierson asked who had responsibility for the landscaping development in
the park area around the water retention area.
Miklo said Sterling Drive would go to the east and hook up with Wintergreen Drive which would provide
ways for getting to the east and to the west. This was basically the same street pattern that had been
approved in 1993, there were no significant changes in the street pattern. A cul-de-sac had been changed
into a loop street. In 1993 the plan submitted by the developer Jim Anderson, had required landscaping
and a bike trail. Frantz would be responsible for implementing the 1993 landscaping requirements unless
as part of the current rezoning process that open space landscaping requirement was removed. That was
not on the table. The landscaping would consist of some trees being planted in that vicinity. In 1993 there
had been some discussion that the City might accept that area as open space, but Parks and Recreation
Commission had since indicated that they did not wish to accept it as a public park because they didn't
want to take on the maintenance responsibilities for the detention basin.
Anciaux asked if the retention basin would alleviate some of the drainage problems from the area. Miklo
said he'd spoken with Denny Gannon who had a general sense that development of this site should
improve drainage conditions with the continuation of Sterling Drive which would direct water down to the
basin area but he'd not reviewed detailed stormwater management plans yet. Currently the field was
higher than the land to the west so it would be brought down to a lower grade which in and of itself should
improve the drainage,
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page S
Hansen asked where was the closest park? Miklo said Mercer Park. It was one of the parts of the City
that didn't have a great deficit in terms of neighborhood park land. Hansen asked if there would be
connect!ons to the park for pedestrians. Miklo said the sidewalk on Sterling Drive would be the only public
connectIon.
Linda Huff, 18S6 Sterling Court, said when they'd purchased their land over 20-years ago it had still been
a water detention area. She asked about the water in her backyard and if that would be taken care?
Every time it rained, a pond formed in her backyard, Originally it had been planned to be the water
detention area, she wanted to be assured that she would not continue to have a pond in her backyard.
She was also concerned about the traffic. Mercer Park would create a lot of cut-through traffic from Scott
Blvd to Mercer Park, Their neighborhood had smaller streets so the neighborhood had concerns about
traffic in their area.
Anciaux asked Miklo to have Public Works review the drainage in that area, Miklo suggested that the
applicant's engineer might want to address that in more detail as well.
Brad McDowell, 1721 Dover Street, said he'd like to echo what had been said about the traffic. Not only
was traffic going to Mercer Park, there were additional developments to the west and along First Avenue
as well, Persons would travel on Sterling Drive to Bradford to First Avenue which would become a major
through-fare. Currently cars parked on the street and he felt the street could not handle the additional
traffic flow. For his family, it would be a major safety concern.
Robert Craush, 42 Pondview Court, asked who would be responsible for maintaining the pond area since
the City was not interested in it. Miklo said it would be the homeowners association for the development
that was being proposed. Craush asked when would the Association be created? Miklo said it would
occur at the time final plat was approved for this development. Craush asked what would the Association
include as far as boundaries? Miklo said the applicant would need to address that question. He didn't
know if there had been a Homeowners Association with the first few phases of Village Green South or
not. Miklo said he felt at a minimum it would have to include the new housing development and the
stormwater area. Craush said when he'd purchased his property the documentation had indicated that
there would be an Association in the area where he was living, He wondered if his home would be
included or not. He felt that was an issue that needed to be addressed.
Craush also had a concern regarding the large commercial building that had been constructed south of
the railroad track near the water retention area. The building had several very noisy roof-top units, he felt
the noise would be a concern. Craush asked if a noise barrier could be constructed along the railroad
track or some type of noise barrier constructed on the roof around the units to divert the noise.
Rich Oberfeld, 63 Pondview Court, said he was also concerned about the noise in that area from the
factory. It was very loud. The streets including Sterling Drive were very narrow. He knew for a fact that
when the trains came through three or four times a day, people cut through that area. He felt there would
need to be no on-street parking allowed. Currently when a car was parked on the street, two cars could
not pass without one waiting for the other. He was also concerned about water draining into the pond
area. He wanted to be sure the homes on Pondview would not be flooded when the level of the land was
lowered.
Ed Pierson, said currently at some of the heavier rain times the basin became full and took the normal
underflow under the railroad tracks but it raised the water level in the residential area, Their sump pumps
were still running. He was concerned about re-grading for the people on Sterling Drive and in the south
Village Green area as that would affect their water tables and potentially create more problems for them,
Pierson said they'd waited many years expecting to get some landscaping around the pond area. Could
there be a timeframe set for the developer to accomplish that task, Miklo said that could be done as part
of the approval process.
Public discussion was closed.
Motion: Chait made a motion to defer REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017, a rezoning from Low Density Single
Family Residential (RS-S) zone to Planned Development Housing Overlay - Low Density Multi-Family
Residential (OPDH-S) zone and a preliminary plat of Village Green, Part XXIII and XXIV, an 83-lot
residential subdivision on 2S,67-acres of property located on Wintergreen Drive. Hansen seconded the
motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 6
Shannon said he'd heard a concern about the density, was this development going to be built to be owner
occupied? Miklo said it could be either owner occupied or rental, the City did not have control of that.
Miklo said from Staff's discussion with the Developer, he thought it was the developer's intent to sell units
for owner occupants.
Freerks said she'd like to see more work done on the compatibility from across the street to make the two
merge better. Also, address the landscaping issue and make sure that it got done. Ten years was a long
time to wait. Parking and traffic should be looked at and Staff should assess whether no on-street parking
should be considered based on the traffic potential. The corner lot could be problematic. The open space
issue should be addressed,
Chait said in terms of what he'd like to see from Staff, Kirchner's letter had mentioned a lot of boiler plate
concerns that the Commission always considered and certain standards that were always met. He felt it
would be helpful to the neighborhood if Staff could respond to them in a more articulate way that
explained in a way that a lay person could understand more clearly what was being done. The increase in
density would have some impact on those kinds of issues, even though the standards might be exceeded
for addressing those concerns, Staff should provide an answer as to "by how much."
Koppes requested to see the actual 1993 approved plat and the stormwater management plan.
Shannon said mention had been made about the water conditions. He'd like to have someone address
that issue and talk to them about what was going to happen with the water. He'd hate to see things get
worse than what they currently were.
Anciaux said a couple times they had also seen where a drainage problem was actually in the old
subdivision such as the broken tile by the APE house. He requested Staff to have City Engineering look
at that area to make sure everything was flowing the way it was supposed to.
Brooks said he agreed with all the requests that had been made. He was still wrestling with the 5-foot
setback and the examples of the building facades that they'd been presented with. They were pretty weak
from a design standpoint in his opinion, He'd like more evaluation and discussion of the 5-foot setback
and clarification as to how it would relate to the surrounding neighborhoods and what kind of character it
would create for the neighborhood.
Hansen said he was conflicted on this proposal on a lot of points. He agreed with all the things that had
been requested to be looked at. He was struggling more with the question of how many times did a
neighborhood have to fight for something to be done. It had been 10- or 11-years since the initial
development, it had had several owners in the process, people had bought houses with certain
expectations. It was a buyer beware which should apply not only to the people who were buying the lots
but it should also to the people who bought the property to subdivide, Hansen said he was not saying he
would not go along with the proposal, but it was going to take a lot of work in his opinion, otherwise he
would rather stick with the original plat.
Chait said the neighborhood wasn't built yet. His contention was that the Commission dealt with issues of
change and development and redevelopment. There would be situations where already developed
neighborhoods were bought out and redeveloped. For the whole Village Green Area which was being
developed over a period of years to change before it was even completed based on a billion reasons
seemed reasonable to him. Just because something was etched in stone or was built didn't mean that it
was over, things were always changing. The location of the alley and the location of the 5-foot setback
were in the middle of something that didn't exist now. They were not imposing it on someone who already
lived there. As long as the alley and the 5-foot setback met the terms and conditions of the standards that
they were employing in other parts of town, he found those things to be very exciting, It created a very
different type of community and neighborhood as opposed to the homogeneity of all the same. He
thought that was a big part of the Comprehensive Plan and the goal that they were looking for.
The motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 7
ANNEXATION ITEMS;
ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030, discussion of an application submitted by James Davis for a
Compr~hensive Plan amendment, voluntary annexation of approximately 62.39 acres and a rezoning of
approximately SO.4 acres from County A1, Rural, to CC-2 (18.18 acres), CI-1, Intensive Commercial (18,1
acres), Commercial Office (11.12 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (2.98 acres) for property east of
Kitty Lee Road including Highway 1, and west of Highway 218.
Yapp said the application had been for an annexation of SO.4 acres. Highway 1 had been added so the
annexation would be for 62.39 acres to include Highway 1. There would be three steps involved in the
process 1) A Comprehensive Plan amendment, 2) the Annexation itself and 3) a zoning designation for
the property.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
The Southwest District Plan land use map showed this land as large-loUrural residential. This designation
had been given to the area due to the lack of sewer capacity for anything more intensive than rural
residential, Le, lots on their own sewer systems, Recently the City had completed a sewer upgrade which
had capacity for further development. The applicant had proposed a sewer lift station on this property to
provide sewer capacity, The 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan identified this interchange and the
abutting properties to the interchange as appropriate for commercial development once utilities were
made available.
The applicant had provided five points as justification for amending the Comprehensive Plan and the
Southwest District Plan to show this as commercial;
· The property abutted the Highway 1 and U.S. Hwy 218 interchange
· All the other quadrants of this interchange were commercial
· The land on the south side of Hwy 1 and on the east side of Naples Avenue were annexed into the
City as Commercial
· The applicant would work with the City to provide a buffer for the residential to the west and to the
north
· The Large Lot Rural Residential is less than desirable in the vicinity of the Hwy 218/Hwy 1
intersection
Provided that sanitary sewer could be brought to this property and that there was a transition and
buffering to the residential areas, Staff would agree with the points made by the applicant.
ANNEXATION
· The annexation policy of the City was that annexations were to occur primarily through voluntary
annexations under three criteria
· The property must fall within the adopted growth area of the City, This property is within that growth
area.
· The development will fulfill an identified need without imposing an undue burden on the City, Part of
the City's economic policy was to support developments that would build the City's tax base, The
developer would provide the infrastructure to this property, there would be minimal cost to the City in
extending fire and police protection and street maintenance services.]
· Control of the development was within the City's best interest. Given that this property was within the
City's growth area and is a high volume interchange, Staff felt control was within the City's best
interest.
Yapp said the property owner owned approximately the first 1S-feet of Kitty Lee Road. The State of Iowa
would need to approve this annexation but was comfortable with the City just annexing the first 1S-feet of
the road provided the City entered into an agreement with Johnson County regarding maintenance of
Kitty Lee Road. Staff had met with the Board of Supervisors earlier and it was apparent that an
agreement could be reached. The City had jurisdiction over subdivisions within two miles of City limits, A
decision would need to be made whether to extend that limit, it was Staff's recommendation not to extend
the two mile area with the requested annexation,
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 8
REZONING
The applicant had requested a commercial designation for the majority of the property. Staff had received
a revised zoning exhibit which would include Community Commercial zoning, a general retail zone, for
the properties abutting Hwy 1 and Hwy 218; Intensive Commercial zoning; Office Commercial zoning for
the northern part of the property; and Rural Residential for the very northern triangle. The northern most
lots would not be included with the annexation, the property owners intended to purchase that property,
Staff was concerned with how commercial development would impact the existing residences and to
make sure that there was a transition and buffering to those properties. One way to transition to those
properties was through lower intensity zoning in the northern parts. The applicant had shown Office
Commercial zoning, a lower intensity use, in that area. Landscaping methods to screen the view of the
development had also been proposed by the applicant on a concept plan. A row of trees abutting the
northern commercial lots had been shown and the storm water pond was to become an outlot as part of
the transition area,
A request for more detail on the landscaping plan to the south had been received. Staff had also indicated
to the applicant that they would recommend a landscaping plan for the west side of the commercial
development abutting Kitty Lee Road. It would be an abrupt change from the commercial to the
agricultural use. To date Staff had not received any more detail on this, Staff recommended that a
condition of the zoning be that a comfort level be achieved with the landscaping and buffering,
A new road into the property had been proposed opposite Naples Avenue which would become a 4-lane
intersection with Hwy 1, Staff had requested a traffic study of the impact of this development to the
Naples Avenue / Hwy 1 and Kitty Lee Road / Hwy 1 intersections including the need for a traffic signal,
turn lanes on Hwy 1 and on Kitty Lee Road and other potential controls. It was Staff's understanding that
the study was underway, Staff would report to the Commission when they received a copy of the study.
The DOT would also need to review and approve the study. They might place conditions on the new
access point. The study would also indicate the percentage of the cost of traffic-related improvements
needed to be made to Hwy 1 based on the traffic generated from this development. A commercial
intersection was proposed approximately SOO-feet north of Kitty Lee Road. Staff would recommend that
Kitty Lee Road be required to be reconstructed to City collector street standards to the commercial
intersection, the cost to be borne by the developer. Because Kitty Lee Road was an existing road, Staff
recommended that the developer be required to pay one-half the re-construction cost for Kitty Lee Road,
should it need to happen in the medium- to long-term.
A sewer lift station, sized to serve the larger watershed, would need to be constructed. The capacity
constraint of the area was with the sewer line that went under Hwy 218. North of Hwy 1 there would be
capacity for approximately 200-acres of additional development to be on that sewer line. As the area
grew, the City would need to determine whether properties along Hwy 1 could use that sewer line as
there was a limited amount of capacity.
Staff recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment provided there was a
buffer/transition between the commercial development and the residential properties and recommended
approval of ANN04-00001. Staff recommended REZ04-00030 be approved subject to a Conditional
Zoning Agreement which addressed:
1. Funding responsibilities for installation of a traffic signal and turn lane improvements at the
intersection of Naples Avenue and Hwy 1 and Kitty Lee Road and Hwy 1,
2. Improvements and funding requirements for Kitty Lee Road.
3, Requirements for landscaping and buffering where the commercial development abuts residential
properties and Kitty Lee Road.
4, Access control Le., no direct driveway access to Hwy 1.
S. Requirements for the sewer lift station to be sized to serve the proposed development with potential
to be upgraded to serve the watershed.
Chait asked if the term of the lift station was finite, Yapp said the lift station would not be finite. A wet well
would be sized to serve the larger development. The pumps that would initially be installed would only
serve this development, more pumps could be added later. The main constraint was the size of the sewer
line itself, There potentially could be a gravity sewer line in the future that would go under Hwy 218 and
near the church on Mormon Trek. It would be a project that would need to be bid by the City.
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 9
Chait said Kitty Lee Road was a county road so why was the City escrowing funds for a county road.
Yapp said 15-feet of Kitty Lee Road would come into the City. The escrow money would be toward future
reconstruction costs of the road. Staff was recommending that so the general public would not have to
fund that. Miklo said it was likely that at the time the road would need to be improved it would be entirely
within the City. Behr said it was reasonable to expect that even if the road were not within the City, the
City would participate in funding improvement of the road. Staff was using the term escrow which was
normally used for these purposes. However for this particular case it would actually be a payment to the
City, The funds would technically not be held in escrow but would become City money to be used for that
future purpose,
Brooks asked if there would be any access allowed from Lots 1 and 2 onto Kitty Lee Road, Yapp said
there would not, Staff would write that condition into the legal papers. Brooks asked if the landscape
buffer could also be considered at least on the north side as it related to Outlot A. It would provide more
additional visual screening from what would be developed in the intense commercial area to the
residential properties along Kitty Lee Road, He'd like to see a buffer between the intense commercial and
the residential/office area along the north side of lot 2, He felt there needed to be more detail on the
landscape buffer such as width, variety, a commitment to schedule for installation.
Public discussion was opened.
David Alatalo, 3671 Olde Oak Lane SW, spoke on behalf of himself and his wife Regina who was in the
audience. They had lived in their home for 12 years and the Davis' had been 'great' neighbors. Concerns
he wished to bring to the Commission's attention for consideration included:
Use of Olde Oak Lane in general. They lived at the end of Olde Oak Lane. When they'd received the
initial letter and map it was not clear if the lane would be extended to connect through to the back half-
of the property, It was basically a single lane with gravel and a little black top on it. During construction
phases they would have feelings about heavy equipment traveling on the one-lane private drive.
Barrier between residential and commercial properties. Some additional information had just been
provided in terms of the definition of a barrier between residential and commercial properties. What
exactly was being proposed to provide a barrier between the two properties? They wished to see more
definition and detail along those lines.
Traffic on Hwv 1 was already an issue for residents in that neighborhood, The road narrowed down and
when persons were trying to turn right, vehicles went onto the shoulder to pass the stopped car. With a
commercial development they had a lot of concerns about getting on to and off of Hwy 1. He was glad
to hear a traffic study was going to be done.
Sewer lift station and its location, Hopefully not too close to the back fence.
Alatalo asked what would be logical expectations for a property owner to have in terms of additional
annexation. They would be surrounded by the City. What should they expect to happen in terms of county
vs, city on a long-term basis? He understood it was the American way to have property, to sell it, buy it
and do things to it, but all of the current residents had purchased homes when it had been zoned
residential. To have high intensity right at your back fence deserved some opportunity to address.
Chait asked how the Good Neighbor Policy which had just been written into the City Code revision played
into this situation of an annexation, Miklo said Staff always encouraged persons to meet with their
neighbors before bringing a proposal to the City,
John Arthur, 4104 Kitty Lee Road, said he'd like to express the same sentiments as Alatalo had about the
neighborhood and the Davis' but they had concerns as well, A major concern was the transition between
residential and intensive commercial which included noise, light, and the visual effect. Outlot A - who
would own it; who would maintain it; who would enforce the maintenance of the Outlot as far as the
plantings and the landscaping that would be done on the buffer. He felt a landscape buffer was the bare
minimum when placing intensive commercial next to a residential area that had been in existence for at
least 25-years,
Anciaux asked what types of uses could go into the lots at the 'top' at the north end? Yapp showed the
zoning proposal. In office commercial, typical uses were lawyers or doctors offices. Offices were
considered a commercial use but they were a lesser intensity that didn't generate as much traffic and
typically didn't have the evening activity. Community Commercial was proposed for the properties fronting
the highway, those would be more retail oriented. It could include convenience stores or restaurants.
Intensive Commercial was a more intensive use that made use of outdoor storage and there might be
more oµtdoor activity with that type of use, i.e. lumber yard,
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 10
Koppes asked if office buildings could have apartments in a CO zone? Miklo said it was permissible by
special exception.
Victoria Concha, 4086 Kitty Lee Road, agreed with what the other neighborhood residents had already
said. The Davis' had been wonderful neighbors.
Buffer She requested that the buffer be constructed before construction began. It would prevent the
same 10- or 11-year wait that the Village Green residents had been dealing with. It would also help to
cut down on construction dust and noise. Recently in preparation for rezoning when dirt had been
moved across Hwy 1, Hwy 1 had become a danger to cross because of the dust.
Access People would not know that there would not be direct access to Kitty Lee Road from the
commercial developments. Persons would assume that they could use the 15-foot road extension to
travel Kitty Lee Road to Rohret Road. It currently was a dead end road and people flew up and down
the hills fast. It was fun to do so, However, there were no sidewalks and it was a danger for the children
who lived there.
Siqnaqe There needed to be adequate sized signage posted that it was not a through access, The tiny
'dead-end road' sign would not be sufficient.
Kenneth Moss, 4110 Kitty Lee Road SW asked what would be done about the water flow. He'd heard the
flow of the creek would be changed and the pond would be moved. Yapp said the developer could speak
to this better than he could as no plans for this had been submitted yet. Outlot A, where the pond was
currently located, would be utilized for stormwater management. It was Staff's understanding that there
were wetlands located in that area. Before the development could be subdivided, a wetland
determination, a stormwater management plan and a grading and erosion control plan would all have to
be developed.
Larry Schnittier, MMS Consultants, said he'd been working with Jim and Dave on this project. Schnittjer
said they didn't have all the answers but they had some ideas.
Landscapinq - discussions to date were that it will probably be white pine trees which grow fast and
provide a relatively dense screen. In the southern area of the proposed screen area they will withstand
moisture, It would be a double row with the trees off set to one another.
Traffic on Hwy 1 - the developers hadn't seen a report from Stanley Consultants yet so they didn't know
what the answer will be yet.
Sewer lift station - no final determination made yet, will probably be in the northern corner of lot 4 as
illustrated.
Future Annexation - at the current time Iowa City is not requiring any involuntary annexations. It was his
understanding that if a property owner wanted to be annexed it was their responsibility to propose that
they be annexed.
Noise. Liqht. Vision, - not all the answers yet.
Outlot A - owned & maintained by a development organization similar to a homeowner association with
the maintenance related on a lot area basis, Enforcement of the maintenance - no answer yet. It had
been his experience that it was a lot easier to control in a commercial rather than a residential situation
because commercial property owners wanted their area to look nice.
Early Planninq of the Buffer had already been discussed, no final determination when. They had
considered providing a few smaller plants which would catch-up and grow faster than the larger ones.
Kitty Lee Road - no answer yet, more of a traffic issue.
Creek and pond - both will be modified as part of the wetlands mitigation plans. No exact detail on
modification yet. Hope to have pond be similar to what it is today, but won't be exactly the same, Can't
accommodate both storm water management and a large body of water at the same time. A smaller body
of water would accommodate the wetlands requirement better because Corps standards didn't allow deep
water, just 'wet and mucky',
Schnittjer said all the above issues would need to be addressed with the Cops of Engineers, Department
of Natural Resources and the City.
Public discussion was closed,
Brooks said Lot 7 seemed to come south into the commercial zone at the end of Olde Oak Lane. He
wanted to be sure that there would be no access to Lot 8 off of Olde Oak Lane. If it were zoned
residential it would lock out the possibility of Olde Oak Lane being a secondary entrance/exit into Lot 8,
Yapp said there was a difference between the zoning and the concept plan. Schnittjer said they'd address
that.
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 11
C~ait in~uired as to the timeli~e for com~letion of all the phases of approval and voting on this project.
Mlklo said Staff would work with the applicant to resolve as many of the unresolved issues as possible,
hopefully resolving all before the Commission's January 6, 200S meeting.
Brooks asked Schnittjer about the traffic study timeline and when did he expect to receive it from Stanley
Consultants. Schnittjer said he thought they were working on it right now, Brooks said it would be nice to
have the study and an evaluation of it from the Public Works Staff to understand exactly how it would
work. That was one of his serious concerns.
Motion: Brooks made a motion to defer ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030, a Comprehensive Plan
amendment, voluntary annexation of approximately 62,39 acres and a rezoning of approximately SO.4
acres from County A1, Rural, to CC-2 (18.18 acres), CI-1, Intensive Commercial (18.1 acres),
Commercial Office (11.12 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (2.98 acres) for property east of Kitty Lee
Road including Highway 1, and west of Highway 218. Hansen seconded the motion.
Anciaux said he was concerned with the intensity of Lot 2. What would be the possibility of it becoming
something such as a lumber yard with all the noise from trucks backing up. He'd like to have addressed
what could be done to mitigate that noise and/or to make sure it was not a problem when it was
developed since it backed up to a residential lot. Chait said since this issue seemed to be a potential
concern there was a new super Menards in the south end of Marion which they could look at in terms of
the scale and the context of how a development like that happened, Driving by, it seemed to him to that it
integrated pretty well into the topography and the neighborhood.
The motion passed on a vote of 7-0,
ANN04-00002, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a proposed severance
of approximately 194-acres of land from the Iowa City corporate limits, to allow these properties to be
annexed to the City of Coralville. This property is adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road,
Yapp said this was a City initiated application to sever this land from the corporate limits of Iowa City to
allow it to be annexed to the City of Coralville, Iowa City would have difficulty providing sanitary sewer
service to this property which was located within the Clear Creek watershed. By gravity, sewer would flow
into Coralville. In May 2002, the Iowa City City Council had adopted the Clear Creek Master Plan which
was a master development plan for this area, The 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan stated "At some
point this area would need to be severed from Iowa City because of the difficulty to provide municipal
sanitary sewer." In 1994 the cities of Iowa City and Coralville had executed an agreement that eventually
this area would be severed to allow it to be served by Coralville. Five property owners controlled property
within the proposed severance area including Clear Creek Development and the City of Coralville. The
effect on those properties would be that they would become under the political and taxing jurisdiction of
the City of Coralville. Coralville would become responsible for providing municipal services to those
properties.
Yapp said Staff recommended that the severance be approved subject to the severance resolution not
being effective until and unless said properties were annexed to the City of Coralville so that there would
be no period of time when they were not in either City,
Brooks asked if the S property owners were supportive. Yapp said Staff had heard from four who were
supportive but had not had a response from one property owner. All property owners had been aware of it
for several years.
Public discussion was opened.
Jim BeeQhlv, 172S Camp Cardinal Road, asked what type of zoning would result for them; did Coralville
have the same zoning classifications; would their zoning would change and their taxes change as a result
of the zoning change; would their school district change - they currently were in the Clear Creek school
district.
Yapp said there was a Clear Creek Master Plan that had been adopted by both Iowa City and Coralville.
Beeghly said he only had information from the web site, he'd not spoken with the City of Coralville yet.
Yapp said the zoning designation would change to a City of Coralville zoning designation but he didn't
know to which one.
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
December 16, 2004
Page 12
Beeghly asked if there was an anticipated time frame for this. Yapp said the City of Iowa City was further
along than the City of Coralville was, but it was his understanding that they would like it to happen within
the next 6-months or so. Yapp said he didn't think the school district would change. Miklo suggested
Beeghly make an appointment and visit with staff at Coralville City Hall.
Brooks asked when a transfer like this occurred would the Coralville zoning be something comparable to
Iowa City zoning, it couldn't become industrial or commercial. Miklo said it would be up to Coralville, City
staff couldn't guarantee that it would mimic current Iowa City zoning structure.
Glenn Siders, representing Clear Creek Development, said he had a copy of the Memorandum of
Understanding and would be happy to visit with Beeghly yet that evening to address his questions, The
projected zoning in the Master Plan was residential; the school district would remain in the Clear Creek _
Amana school district; their anticipated schedule for road construction was to let the bid around 4/1/0S so
construction could begin 'this' year with an opening around October, 200S. Construction work on this
project would begin Monday 12/20/04. Approximately two weeks ago both municipalities had approved a
clearing contract to clear the timber for the right of way and the grading work to begin next spring. The
City of Coralville was beginning the process of annexation and hoped to have the process completed
within a 2-3 month timeframe.
Public discussion was closed.
Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve ANN04-00002, a proposed severance of approximately 194-
acres of land from the Iowa City corporate limits to allow these properties to be annexed to the City of
Coralville. This property is adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road. Brooks seconded the motion.
Hansen said this had been documented for a long time, it would be a good move for both cities.
Anciaux said it was good to see cooperation between the two cities, It had been stated that the sanitary
sewer service would be much easier through Coralville, the Master Plans were already in place.
The motion passed on a vote of 7-0,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM:
Consider setting a public hearing for January 6, 200S on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to
amend the Southwest District Plan to change the land use designation from Large LoURural Residential
to General and Office Commercial for property located north of Hwy 1, west of Hwy 218 and east of Kitty
Lee Road.
Motion: Freerks made a motion to set the public hearing for 1/6/0S. Hansen seconded the motion.
The motion passed on a vote of 7-0,
OTHER ITEMS:
There were none
CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 2,2004 MEETING MINUTES:
Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Anciaux seconded the
motion, The motion passed on a vote of 7-0,
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: Koppes made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:29 pm. Shannon seconded the motion. The
motion passed on a vote of 7-0,
Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary
Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill
s:/pcd/minutes/p&zI2004/2004-12-16-04p&z.doc