Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-03-2005 Planning and Zoning Commission PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Monday, February 28, 2005 - 7:30 PM Informal Meeting Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center Meeting Room B 220 S. Gilbert Street Thursday, March 3, 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. Presentation of the proposed new Zoning Ordinance for the City of Iowa City D. Consideration of the February 17, 2005 Meeting Minutes E. Adjournment Informal Formal City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM February 25, 2005 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Karen Howard - Associate Planner Re: Code Rewrite work session - Monday, February 28 At your informal meeting on Monday, we would like to do a trial run of the presentation for Thursday. Bob Brooks has prepared some introductory remarks and staff has prepared a rough draft of the powerpoint presentation. We will work at the meeting to fit these pieces together, so we will have a smooth presentation of the highlights of the proposed Code to the public on Thursday. With regard to the upcoming open house sessions, we will bring a sign-up sheet, so we make sure that these sessions are well-staffed. The public review draft of the Code is back from the printers. We will distribute copies at the meeting on Monday. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT: Benjamin Chait, Beth Koppes, Don Anciaux, Jerry Hansen, Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks MEMBERS EXCUSED: Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, John Yapp, Anissa Williams, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Kim Kirchner, Evelyn Frey, Ed Pierson, Robert Croush, Victoria Concha, Casey Cook, Mary Ott, Regina Alatalo, Larry Schnittjer RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended denial, by a vote of 6-0, REZ04-00017/SUB04-00017, 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. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, ANN04-00001, an annexation of approximately 62.03 acres of property located east of Kitty lee Road, west of Highway 218 and north of Highway 1, including Highway 1 right-of-way. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, REZ04-00030, a rezoning of approximately 50.03 acres of property from County A 1 to CC-2, Community Commercial (approximately 16.05 acres), CI-1, Intensive Commercial (approximately 20.22 acres), CO-1, Office Commercial (approximately 10.92 acres) and RR- 1, Rural Residential (approximately 2.83 acres) be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement addressing: 1. Naples Avenue I Highway 1 intersection: Funding responsibilities for construction of turn lanes and traffic signal improvements as recommended in the traffic impact study, including the developer/subdivider funding 100% of the cost of the north leg of Naples Avenue, and 90% of the cost of turning lane improvements, improvements to the south leg of Naples Avenue, and traffic signal improvements at the Naples Avenue / Highway 1 intersection, as recommended in the February 2005 Menards Traffic Study. The City will reimburse 10% of the cost of these improvements upon installation and acceptance by the City. Said improvements are to be installed prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any lot in the development. 2. Naples Avenue design and access: Naples Avenue north of Highway 1 being constructed to collector street standards, with shared access points for Lots 13&14, and 11&12, as numbered on the MWD Davis Addition concept plan submitted on February 17. Access drives to Lot 2, the CI-1-zoned lot, shall be opposite these shared access points, to create predictable and consistent access points. 3. Kitty Lee Road improvements: Prior to access being permitted to Kitty Lee Road, Kitty Lee Road shall be reconstructed to City collector street standards from Highway 1 to the commercial driveway, and a left turn lane shall be constructed on Highway 1 for eastbound traffic turning north onto Kitty Lee Road. To determine if a Highway 1 right-turn lane is needed for west-bound traffic turning north onto Kitty Lee Road, a traffic study (approved by the City) predicting turning movements related to the proposed land use of Lot 1 must be completed. Any improvements recommended by the traffic study must be completed prior to an occupancy permit being issued for any property using Kitty Lee Road for access. 4. Kitty Lee Road funding: The developer/subdivider paying funds equal to % the cost of reconstructing Kitty Lee Road to City local street standards from the northern-most commercial driveway/entrance intersection to the south property line of Lot 1 of RH Davis subdivision Part II. 5. Landscaping: The perimeter landscaping generally depicted on the preliminary landscaping plan dated 1-27-05 be planted prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any lot in the development. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 2 6. Fencing: The design of any fencing along the west and north boundaries of the commercial lots identified as Lots 1 and 2 on the MWD Davis concept plan being approved by the City as part of site plan approval. 7. Access control: No direct driveway access to Highway 1 is permitted. 8. Sanitary sewer provision: Requirements for the sanitary sewer lift station to be sized to serve the proposed development with potential to be upgraded to serve the entire watershed. 9. Highway 1 sidewalk: In lieu of a sidewalk being constructed along the Highway 1 frontage, the developer/subdivider paying for the paving cost of a four-foot sidewalk. The City will use this money for a public sidewalk in the future as part of future Highway 1 pedestrian improvements. 10. Installation of lighting at Intersection: Upon incorporation into the City, the installation of lighting to improve visualization to City standards be installed at the intersection of Highway 1 and Kitty Lee Road. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, V AC05-00001, the vacation of approximately 19,050 square feet of unimproved Dane Road right-of-way, located north of Mormon Trek Boulevard. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:35 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING/SUBDIVISION ITEM: REZ04-00017/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. Miklo said this item had been before the Commission at several previous meetings. They had voted on it at the 1/20/05 meeting recommending approval provided a number of conditions were addressed. The applicant had submitted new plans for the City Council's 1/15/05 meeting. City Council had returned this item back the Commission because the Commission had not had the opportunity to review the new elevation plans and provide a recommendation. The new plan had been revised to include 7-foot instead of a 5-foot setbacks for the zero-lot line interior lots and also new models for the exterior zero-lot lines. Public discussion was opened. Kim Kirchner, 2906 Sterling Drive, said last week she was at the point of accepting the proposed redevelopment plans with the conditions that the Commission had recommended to Council. The neighborhood had done a lot of leg work, written a letter, placed announcements and notified the neighbors to attend the Tuesday 2/15/05 Council meeting. On Tuesday when she arrived home, she'd received a letter that the developer had presented a new plan and that this item was no longer on the Council's agenda. Kirchner said that had been very frustrating, especially since the neighborhood had spent as much time as they had trying to get persons to attend the Council meeting and express their opinion. They had also done all of this 10+-years ago. Kirchner said it appeared to her that the Commission had told Third Street Partners to abide by certain guidelines at the initial meeting in December. They had never done so. Third Street Partners had submitted what they thought they wanted but had not paid any attention to what the Commission had told them to do during the subsequent three meetings. Kirchner said the developers had changed the plan numerous times as if it was a moving target, which made it difficult for Staff and the Commission to pinpoint the different changes and explain them to the neighbors. In previous meetings she'd voiced that she'd like to see more single-family dwellings in the new proposal which had been part of the original plan approved over 10-years ago. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 3 Kirchner said she didn't understand why there had been so many delays and debates, but she understood that it was the Commission's job to pinpoint and narrow down. It had been a lot of wasted effort on the neighbor's part to have done this 10-years ago and to have to do it again now, especially when the agenda item had not gone through Council as projected. Kirchner said she understood that the Commission wanted to have better housing and specific plans. What was being presented was not a cohesive design which was what was in their current neighborhood. Frantz, one of the partners of Third Street Partners, lived not far from their neighborhood and was in favor of seeing this go through. In her opinion, they were trying to wear down the community, wear down the Commission who had stated in the previous meeting that they were not in favor of the proposal but had approved the application simply to send it on to Council for a decision. Kirchner said she did not know what else to say. She had had a letter prepared to read but was too frustrated with the situation to read it. She said that zoning should mean something and not be a constantly changing target. Evelvn Frv, 1855 Sterling Court, said they had all moved in to the Village Green subdivision knowing that the fields would someday be developed. It had been a given and they were all looking forward to having the through streets developed and that sort of thing. Fry said what she didn't understand was why this land had been so difficult to build on. Over, over, and over again changes and different plans. Fry said over the years the plans for this area had changed, the City's requirements had changed. Change was never easy but it was a fact of life. The neighborhood had found out that new developments within the City limits must make efficient use of space. They all understood that and supported the concept. Fry said they understood the concept of increasing the diversity of available housing within a neighborhood. They understood it because they lived in it. Village Green was hugely diverse. There were single-family homes, condominiums, apartments, 4-plexes, Wellington Condominiums and huge houses on the hill. They understood the concept of diversity of housing and would continue to live within it and support it. Fry said she did a lot of walking and noticed when she walked though Village Green that one could not see clearly the demarcation between one part of the subdivision and the next part - areas which had been built 30-years ago, 20-years and the part that had been done even last year. They were different, but when moving from one area to another the edges had been blended and it was nicely mixed; the ingredients were well mixed throughout. Fry said they'd like to see this continue. The neighbors and neighborhood could change, they were willing to change. They understood that higher density was a fact of life and as long as the City supported higher density with adequate services and it was well designed, they could live with that. Fry said what they could not handle was a blazing scar across the center of their neighborhood and that is what they felt part of the proposed development would be, a blazing scar. Developments of higher density did need to be build within an existing neighborhood but they needed to be well planned and a lot of thought given to the detail of the development. The neighborhood felt the current proposal was woefully inadequate. Fry said Third Street Partners had not significantly changed the proposal since the first go-round in the last four months. Fry said she didn't know how the Commissioners felt, but she felt the neighbors were wasting their time. She felt the developers should come up with a plan that everyone could cheer about. Ed Pierson, 2054 Hanna Jo Court, asked for a clarification of the lot-line layouts on the overhead. Miklo pointed out how the current proposal varied from the 1993 OPDH rezoning and where the 17 additional lots are proposed. Robert Croush, 42 Pond View Court, asked how the plan before the Commission at this meeting was different than the one that had been submitted to the Council. Miklo said the building models were different than what the Commission had voted on and the setback on the interior zero-lot line lots had been increased from 5- to 7-feet. Crousch said his concern was still the lower part near the railroad tracks from the standpoint of noise. He was not sure it was an issue for the Commission however he had a concern about it and he felt the developer should have a concern about it as well. If a buffer could be built or created it would be advantageous for the people in the community. The noise primarily was from the rooftop units on the factory across the tracks. It emanated to the residences, especially when the wind was from the south. Crousch said he would be wiling to help in any way that he could to work to resolve the noise issue. Public discussion was closed. Anciaux asked for a motion to approve REZ04-00017/SUB04-00017, with the changes as submitted. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 4 Request died for lack of a motion. Motion: Freerks made a motion to deny REZ04-00017/SUB04-00017, with the changes as submitted. Brooks seconded the motion. Freerks said the neighborhood had spent a lot of time on this as had the developers, Planning Staff and the Commission. It was troubling to see these changes come at this point in time, the changes appeared to be going in the wrong direction. It was not really what the Commission had asked for. The Commission had already settled on recommendations. Freerks said she didn't feel the most recent submission was sufficient. It did not address the concern of having a cohesive design. Seeing it brought to the Commission at this point, she felt they needed to deny it as a Commission. Brooks said he was the only one who had voted against this application last time and he would continue to vote against it. Brooks said he felt there were several issues that he was not in agreement with. Brooks agreed with the sentiments voiced by Freerks saying he was unsure how the most recent submissions had 'made it' to Council when the Commission had approved certain building concept and elevation plans. He felt it was troubling that the developer had submitted changes at the eleventh hour and asked the Commission to approve the proposal. He needed more time to consider and evaluate the changes in comparison to what the Commission had asked for in the original amendment. Hansen said he'd voted for this item previously just so it would go to City Council with at least a conditional agreement. There were now 10 alternatives to the design elevations and looking it over roughly he felt there were only five that he would even consider. Hansen said without time to further consider the new submissions, he would vote against it. Koppes said she didn't like receiving new materials at the eleventh hour, trying to read it quickly and understand all the changes. The designs were very similar to each other and she liked the original designs better. Koppes said she felt the Commission was just being rushed into this so she could not support it. Chait said he was not going to speak to the merits of the issue. On Monday evening they'd received a heads up that this item was being returned to the Commission and had discussed having the issue deferred to allow the citizens to have more opportunity and the Commission more opportunity to express their concerns. The policy of the Commission had always been to have two meetings for issues before voting on them. Freerks said it came into play for her because the developer didn't even wish to address the issue this evening. Those new plans were counter to the direction the Commission had given back in December regarding what was necessary to create a more dense neighborhood with a cohesive design. There was nothing new being offered in terms of an explanation. To have to drag the neighborhood here again a second time, she was not comfortable with it. Anciaux said he was not comfortable with this item, especially last minute. He had not been home yet today to read his mail so had not even seen the new information and elevations before arriving at the meeting. Anciaux said he would likely vote against this. The motion to deny passed on a vote of 6-0. ANNEXATION ITEM: ANN04-00001, an application submitted by James Davis for a voluntary annexation of approximately 62.03 acres of territory located east of Kitty lee Road, west of Highway 218 and north of Highway 1, including Highway 1 right-of-way. REZ04-00030, an application submitted by James Davis for a rezoning of approximately 50.03 acres of property from County A1, Rural, to CC-2, Community Commercial (approximately 16.05 acres), CI-1, Intensive Commercial (approximately 20.22 acres), CO-1, Office Commercial (approximately 10.92 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (approximately 2.83 acres) be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement as noted in Staff report of 2/17/05. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 5 Yapp said Staff had received a revised zoning exhibit earlier that afternoon which removed the east-west road connecting Naples Avenue to Kitty Lee Road and the intensive commercial lot had grown slightly larger to the south. The north boundary remained the same. The Office Commercial area and the Rural Residential areas remained the same. Staff had also received a new concept plan which had been distributed to the Commissioners. Yapp said the concept plan was not necessarily binding but it gave a good indication of how the land might develop. The acreages shown on the agenda of each zone had changed slightly as well. Staff had placed the item on the agenda because the City had received a traffic study for this development. The traffic study proposed certain transportation and infrastructure improvements that would be necessary to support commercial development on this property. Anissa Williams, a Traffic Engineer for the City was present to answer specific traffic related questions. Yapp said a question had arisen Monday evening regarding the placement of a traffic signal at the Intersection of Naples Avenue and Highway 1 and also a question regarding the reduction of the speed limit on Highway 1 between U.S. 218 intersection and Kitty Lee Road. Jeff Davidson, the Transportation Planner for the City had written a memorandum to the Commission to address both questions. Yapp said Staff recommended approval of ANN04/00001 and REZ04-00030, subject to certain conditions being met including: 1) The necessary infrastructure being installed at the Naples Avenue and Highway 1 intersection. The property owner or sub-divider would fund 90% of those improvements and the City would fund 10% of the improvements. The rational for that percentage was due to: 1) without development on this property, a traffic signal would not be needed at all and 2) based upon the amount of turning traffic, approximately 90% was turning to the north leg of Naples Avenue versus only 10% turning toward the south leg of Naples Avenue. 2). The removal of the east-west road to Kitty Lee Road would have the effect of having more traffic on Naples Avenue and less traffic on Kitty Lee Road. The only lot proposed to have access Kitty Lee Road was the southern most lot. 3). Prior to that lot developing with a driveway to Kitty Lee Road, Kitty Lee Road be reconstructed to the commercial driveway to collector street standards and a left turn lane onto Kitty Lee Road be considered at the time that that lot is developed. Because Naples Avenue would have more traffic on it, access control measures be utilized including controlling the number of driveways on the southern third of Naples Avenue to allow cueing space for traffic exiting onto Highway 1. 4) The developer pay funds equal to % the cost of reconstructing Kitty Lee Road to City local street standards from the northern-most commercial driveway/entrance intersection to the south property line of Lot 1. The property on the west side of Kitty Lee Road would pay the other % upon annexation and zoning. 5) Landscaping. Staff had received a landscaping plan which indicated pine tree screening planted along the rear of the residential lot; shrubs and trees along the perimeter of the large commercial lot; and a variety of water tolerant species planted in the outlot. 6) Fence. Proposed around the large commercial lot. It was staff's recommendation to get details on this fence as part of a site plan. 7) No direct driveway access to Highway 1 be permitted. 8) Sanitary Sewer Provision: Requirements for the sanitary sewer lift station to be sized to serve the proposed development with the potential to be upgraded to serve the entire watershed. 9) Sidewalk: In lieu of a sidewalk being constructed along the Highway 1 frontage, the developer pay a fee toward the cost of that sidewalk. The City would construct that sidewalk in the future as part of future Highway 1 pedestrian improvements. Freerks asked if there would be some type of division from lot #1 in the CC-2 zone and the CI-1 proposed Menards area to prevent cut-through traffic from access on Kitty Lee Road to the proposed Menards. Yapp said Staff could not answer that yet. The initial development information that Staff had seen there Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 6 would not be easy access between the two lots but Staff did not yet have an official subdivision or site plan application. Freerks asked if that was something that the Commission should be concerned about in the future. Miklo said there were pro's and cons but it would provide a possible secondary access for emergency vehicles. Yapp said at this meeting the Commission was just voting on the zoning pattern along with certain conditions. The next step would be to review a sub-division application which would have more specifics for infrastructure. Anciaux asked if Staff felt the revised plan with the removal of the east-west connecting road would provide adequate traffic circulation. Yapp said Staff recommended approval with conditions. Anciaux said he personally would rather see the road go over to Naples Avenue as it would provide a lighted, controlled access for the entire area. Yapp said again there were pros and cons. It reduced the amount of traffic using Kitty Lee Road by not allowing the access between Kitty Lee Road and Naples Avenue but for the one particular lot the only access would be through Kitty Lee Road if access was not provided through a parking lot on the development site itself. Hansen asked what the zoning was on the west side. Yapp said it was agricultural. Hansen asked if it was within annexation boundaries and how developable was that property for residential. Yapp said he thought Staff would not recommend residential immediately on Highway 1. Hansen said in the long term there was the potential for a large traffic stream coming down there. If persons wanted to go to the proposed Menards, they would have to go out to Highway 1, go around and go back in. Yapp said without a road access that was correct. Yapp showed an overhead map of the Southwest District Plan which showed a future collector street for future residential development to the northeast. Koppes asked if it was specified where the driveway could be located and how close it could be to Highway 1. Yapp said Staff had recommended that Kitty Lee Road would need to be reconstructed to that driveway. The location of the driveway was unknown. Koppes asked if during a rezoning, could/should the Commission state the reason they would not want access from CC-2 and CI-1. Yapp said now would be the time to make a note to specify limited or require access between CC-2 and CI-1. Anciaux asked what were examples of businesses that were allowed in CC-2. Yapp said retail, grocery stores or restaurant; with a special exception the potential for a convenience store and gas station. Brooks asked when reviewing the original plan, which had contained the east west road, had the Commission stipulated or discussed any restrictions from any of these lots onto Kitty Lee Road. Had restrictions been placed on the lower lot? Yapp said the Commission had not placed any. Typically the City only required restrictions to arterial streets. Brooks said he'd like an explanation from the developer why not leave the connection to the lower lot over to the Naples Avenue and out to the signalized intersection and restrict all access from Kitty Lee Road to any of those lots and bring all the traffic out through the controlled intersection at Naples Avenue. Freerks asked what had been proposed for the little island that was created? Yapp said that had been proposed as a separate commercial lot. With the latest proposal, under the zoning, it would all be the same zoning. Public discussion was opened. Larrv Schnittier, said with regard to the questions as to why the road had been removed - all that discussion was a result of the traffic study. The traffic study required that there be basically 250-feet of storage lanes on the entrance road. The proposed intersection was only % of that distance. It had not been possible to move the proposed intersection any further north. The developer had looked at various alternatives that would allow them to still be able to meet the requirements of the persons who wanted to build on the CI-1 parcel but it had not been possible. The grade considerations had been tough. Trying to fit everything together had not worked, especially since there had to be the 250-feet of storage space between Highway 1 and the intersection. The small CC-2 parcel had been marginally developable at best Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 7 with its grades. It had been very small and they'd basically taken it out of this new plan. To do anything with it would have required substantial retaining walls. Koppes asked for suggestions from Schnittjer regarding limiting traffic from the CI-1 area accessing the CC-2 zone and exiting the driveway off Kitty Lee Road. Schnittjer said the proposal they were working on for that parcel had a security fence on all sides of it which tied back into the building. The security fence would go to within 20-feet of the Highway 1 right-of-way. Anciaux asked if the elevations for the lot adjacent to Kitty Lee Road, were such that it could be situated such so that it didn't look like you were to access it from Naples Avenue. Schnittjer said it would not be readily apparent that there was any possibility from Highway 1 . Schnittjer said they had been working feverishly on this item all week so they could have a presentation put together to present to the Commission. They didn't like putting something before the Commission at the eleventh-hour but with all the negotiations that had been going on, it had not been preventable. Victoria Concha, 4086 Kitty Lee Road, said it was news to the residents of that area that the access to Kitty Lee Road was now gone. She'd need to think about it for a while, but it had the potential to be a good thing. She was concerned as to what would go in the little triangle at the bottom. If it were to become a gas station and they had access off Kitty Lee Road, that would be horrible. They had no sidewalks, no place to go on the other end because it was a dead-end street. Many residents walked and ran along their street. They would not be able to do so if there was a gas station at the end of their street. Concha said she was in receipt of notice of the traffic study which contained a recommendation for a left turn lane onto Kitty Lee Road off of Highway 1. Everyone in the neighborhood she'd talked to felt the surveyors had to have made a mistake. There were 17 houses in her development. Very few of those persons went to Kalona or Washington on a regular basis needing a left turn lane into their development. There was very little left-turning traffic into their development - they all turned right off of Highway 1 onto Kitty Lee Road. Turning right at that intersection was horrible, they were just asking for someone else to be killed there. At that intersection Highway 1 merged from two lanes to a single lane and there was also a median there. Persons thought they could pass a slowing car on the left side but it was not possible with the median. Traffic was picking up speed at that intersection, to turn right onto Kitty Lee Road a vehicle had to get off on the shoulder and hope they didn't get rear-ended or side-swiped. Concha said it made no sense to the residents of the development for a left turn lane when a westbound right turn lane is what is needed. She and her husband had spoken with Jim Davis whose perception was that a feeder road would have been primary access to get into and out of Menards. Semi trucks would never be able to make a right-hand turn there. She would love to see a right-hand-turn lane recommended to be installed there for safety purposes. Yapp said when they had met on Monday evening and the east-west road to Kitty Lee Road was still informally in the plans, he had suggested that a right turn lane be added to the Staff recommendation. The applicant's traffic study had not indicated a need for a right turn lane however the study had been based on capacity not safety or study of the geometry of the intersection. In Staff recommendations for the CZA, proposed condition #3 stated that "prior to any construction or development on that lot, a traffic study specifically for that lot be generated that would indicate additional improvements necessary for that intersection." It depended largely on the proposed land use for that lot. If it would become an insurance office it would generate very little traffic. If it would become a gas station, that would generate a lot of traffic which would indicate a need for a larger turning lane facility there. Yapp said it was somewhat putting off the decision of specifically what type of infrastructure but before any specific development was proposed, Staff recommended that a smaller traffic study just for that be done. Freerks asked if Staff predicted possible commercial development to the south along the highway? Yapp said that was somewhat of an unknown. That property owner had not expressed a desire for their property but with highway frontage it had the potential. Casey Cook, 1 Oak Park Court, said he was a 50% owner of a garage self-storage facility, 30% owner of an adjacent property and was in the process of purchasing two additional near proximity lots so he had a lot of interest in this particular area. Cook said the development of Menards would bring a lot of economic vitality to this area but would also accelerate the development of the lots that fronted along Highway 1 toward commercial. Some of the lots were already zoned commercial, those that were not Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 8 zoned commercial were underdeveloped. Cook said keeping that in mind and how did one knit that area together with the infrastructure changes what the Commission was looking at. Cook suggested that the proposed sewer line go straight down Naples Avenue and pick-up the manhole at Sierra Court. It was more direct and he felt it would be more efficient. He'd also discussed this idea with Rick Fosse and Ross Spitz of the Public Works Department. Cook said as part of the annexation process he felt it was important that these lots have easy access to sanitary sewer. It was important to make provisions for some type of manhole to be located either near or directly in front of one of his properties which has a central location. It would be beneficial for all the property owners in that area if they have reasonable access to sewer. He also shared the neighbors concerns regarding the intersection at Kitty Lee Road. He said there was a potential to isolate properties so he felt it was important to take steps to accommodate the properties in the growth area. Cook asked how many cars were expected to be entering the proposed Menards on an average daily count basis when the Menards development was stabilized? Williams said only a peak-hour analysis had been done which had been right around 2500 vehicles each peak hour onto Naples Avenue. Cook asked how that compared to a 100-house subdivision. Yapp said it would be more, depending on the location. Approximately 700-1000 vehicles, so this would be approximately 2 % times as many vehicles. Cook said when he had served on the Commission, the secondary access counts kept elevating up and up. The proposed Menards vehicle flow was approximately 2 % greater, without a secondary access he felt that would be an issue. Cook said he felt there needed to be a secondary access, the intersection at Kitty Lee Road needed to be improved and there needed to be a right-hand turn lane coming off Highway 1, heading northbound. Cook said he was also concerned with left-turn access into the future commercial properties. There were elevation changes and if persons were focusing on turning across traffic flow from a single lane there needed to be more scrutiny of that intersection and to have the properties to the south brought into that scrutiny when it was considered what the intersection should look like. He fully agreed with Hansen's statement that in the very near future there would be a large flow of traffic there. Mary Ott, 4056 Kitty Lee Road, said she'd come to the meeting to talk about the lack of a right-hand turn lane onto Kitty Lee Road. The elimination of the east-west road was new news, the subdivision residents needed further time to think about that. Ott said a right-hand turn lane was needed right now. At the point where persons were picking up speed to exit Iowa City, persons turning right onto Kitty Lee Road were slowing down. That area of Highway 1 was poorly marked, the median was there and almost everyone had had to take to the shoulder to keep from getting hit. Ott said with the potential for a convenience store gas station going into the small triangle area, if it didn't' have access onto Highway 1 it would have access onto Kitty Lee Road which meant more people would be turning there. If a right turn lane were not installed, it would be a disaster as there had already been accidents there, one of which resulted in a death. Reaina Alatalo, 3671 Old Oak Lane, said she supported the right hand turn lane. Many years ago when the DOT had suggested that Highway 1 become a super highway they had all attended meetings and had petitioned to have a right hand turn lane installed at that time. That had been approximately 10-years ago, which was an indicator of how long a right-hand turn lane had been needed there. Alatalo said that intersection also needed nighttime lighting, not a stoplight, but lighting. Currently there was no light for vision at night. Alatalo asked what was the requirement for a fence between the commercial area and the residential area. The fence that was there now was very poor. It had some barbwire at the top but when there had been cows in that pasture the cows had been lose all the time. Alatalo said something needed to be done so there would be a mechanism to stop anything coming from the commercial areas to the residential area before anything was approved. Yapp said the City of Iowa City did require streetlights at intersections. Once this was in the City that would be the point at which the City would look at adding street lighting at the intersection at the highway. Yapp said it was his understanding that a fence was proposed around the larger commercial lot along with the landscaping. Pine trees were proposed for along the rear of the lot, however, staff didn't know if there would be fencing for each individual lot. It would be as each lot was proposed for development. Miklo said there was no requirement for a fence. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 9 Hansen said once the Commission had voted to annex, when would the City look at lighting for that intersection. Yapp said it would need to wait until infrastructure started to be established on the site both for electrical and conduit. At this point Staff couldn't say for sure. Hansen asked if the addition of street lighting at that intersection could be made a condition of the rezoning. He said they'd discussed reducing traffic speed and activating the signal earlier because the neighbors and Commission were very worried about safety there. He felt the development would draw a lot more traffic to that area and as bad as it was now, it could only get worse. Public discussion was closed. Brooks said with reference to the comment made by Cook regarding the volume of traffic and only one access was starting to concern him. He requested Staff to explain that rationale and if there were similar situations in town where there was a development of that magnitude including the CI-1 zone plus the other 11 lots in the development which would contribute to traffic. Yapp said the existing Menards - Toyota - Jiffy Lube - Nappa were all on a single means of access on Highway 1. North Gate Drive was also on one means of access and was proposed to 'loop around' to provide secondary access some day. Yapp said Staff had met with the Fire Chief that morning when the updated plans had been first proposed to them. The Chief had accepted this given certain design conditions on Naples Avenue including the access control for the driveways, dual left- turn lanes, 5 lanes at the intersection (dual left-out, a through- out, and two right in lanes), plus the sidewalks would be usable area by the fire department if an accident would occur at the intersection. Yapp said he thought the Fire Chief's preference would be a road or some type of access easement connecting lots 1 and 2. Brooks said he was trying to make sure that through the back door they didn't allow the general public access out through Kitty Lee Road. He could see the need for emergency vehicle access to get through there if they needed to but de-facto allowing people to cut through another parking lot. It took away their ability to project and plan what was going to happen. Chait said given the late changes, would it be reasonable to defer this item? Yapp said the Commission would need an agreement from the applicant. Chait said the Commission didn't know exactly what the parking lot around Menards was going to look like, it was hard to conceive of a parking lot that you couldn't get to from one side to the other. Prior to this evening the east-west road had been clearly marked. The level of the Commission's preview had been very significant when they had reviewed all the developments and changes around and Carousel Motors and Wal-Mart and Cub Foods and Staples. The Commission had been very involved in how traffic would circulate in those areas as well as traffic / pedestrian flow. Chait said if the Commission had more time they might be able to figure something out, the developer's representative had admitted that they'd been scrambling too. Chait said he didn't feel a fire department breakaway access would be feasible in this situation. The fact that there would be 2 % times the traffic beyond the rule of thumb for subdivisions was very significant. He said a couple more weeks to be able to look at this and get more comfortable with it, especially since the changes had happened overnight would be optimal. Anciaux said they'd also talked about potential cut-through traffic in the previous plan adding to the Kitty Lee Road traffic problems. He wondered if the residents of the Kitty Lee Road could use the cut-through to get to an access that would have a traffic signal if that road were still there. Chait asked Schnittjer if this item could be deferred. Schnittjer said one of the primary reasons he'd wanted to remove the frontage access road had been because it had not provided a good secondary access. . It was too close to the highway. · It didn't provide any access to the back part of the subdivision. · The access road would come in to the area where Menards would need to store vehicles · It was the most likely place that an accident would occur which would block the whole street system as it was. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 10 Schnitljer said the cost considerations of that street had not entered into their decision process, it had been all the other factors. He said Mr. Davis was cognizant of the neighbor's situations and didn't want to take a chance on imposing more traffic on them until such a time as what happened to the north and west of this area. Davis had been in favor of keeping the east-west road. Schnittjer had explained to him that it was not possible to make the intersection work with the lane requirements and there was too much of a potential for traffic conflicts at the close intersection with the Highway. With what was proposed for the Menards site at this time, there was no latitude for moving it to the north. Yapp said the Menards building and lumber yard were proposed to be sprinkled which was another factor of Staff's acceptance of this application. Hansen said he had not heard if they could defer this item or not. Motion: Chait made a motion to approve ANN04-00001, an annexation of approximately 62.03 acres of property located east of Kitty Lee Road, west of Highway 218 and north of Highway 1, including Highway 1 right-of-way. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Motion: Chait made a motion to approve REZ04-00030, a rezoning of approximately 50.03 acres of property from County A1 to CC-2, Community Commercial (approximately 16.05 acres), CI-1, Intensive Commercial (approximately 20.22 acres), CO-1, Office Commercial (approximately 10.92 acres) and RR- 1, Rural Residential (approximately 2.83 acres), subject to the nine (9) conditions of a CZA as listed in Staff Report of 2/17/05 and including a tenth (10) condition for the installation of street lighting at the intersection of Kitty Lee Road and Highway 1. Brooks seconded the motion. Freerks said she was willing to support this since the Commission would be able to look at the right hand turn lane that the neighborhood was concerned about at later date. Depending on what was developed on those lots, it would probably become necessary very soon. Anciaux said he felt that by approving this the traffic signal at Naples Avenue would give the neighbors on Kitty Lee Road some additional interval and hopefully provide some gaps in traffic. Brooks said he still had some reservations about the 2-% times the normally allowed traffic flow without a secondary access but if the Fire Chief was accepting of it he would have to depend on his professional expertise to say it was acceptable. He agreed with Freerks that when lot 1 was developed that there be serious evaluation of improvements to Kitty Lee Intersection if not before. Once it was annexed, the City Council could begin to address the issues of lighting and turning lanes. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. VACATION ITEM: VAC05-00001, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to vacate approximately 19,050 square feet of unimproved Dane Road right-of-way, located north of Mormon Trek Boulevard. Yapp said the pavement had been removed; the area could no longer be used as a street; Staff recommended the vacation. The County was proceeding with their half of the project. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Chait made a motion to approve VAC05-00001. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. OTHER ITEMS: Election of Officers Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes February 17, 2005 Page 11 Motion: Chait made a motion to elect Bob Brooks as Chair, Jerry Hansen as Vice Chair and Beth Koppes as Secretary. Hansen made a motion that nominations cease. The motions passed on a vote of 6-0. Miklo said hopefully by next week Staff would have a copy of the Code Draft printed and would provide copies to the Commissioners. At the next informal meeting Staff would review some of the presentation materials with the Commissioners. The March 3rd formal meeting would begin at 7:00 pm to allow for the public presentation of the Code Draft. CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 3.2005 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Koppes made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:07 pm. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:/pcd/minutes/p&zI200S/02-17 -OS.doc