HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-16-2010 Planning and Zoning Commission
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Monday, December 13, 2010 - 6:00 PM
Informal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Lobby Conference Room
410 E. Washington Street
Thursday, December 16,2010 - 7:00 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 I Development Item
REZ1 0-00013 / SUB 10-00012: Discussion of an application submitted by Casey Boyd, LLC for
a preliminary plat and a rezoning to amend the Planned Development Overlay-Medium Density
Single Family (OPD-B) plan for Hickory Pointe, 2nd Addition, a 1-lot, 2.97 acre residential
subdivision located on Hickory Trail, west of First Avenue.
45 day limitation period: January 12, 2011
D. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: November 29 and December 2,2010
E. Other
F. Adjournment
Informal
Formal
Staff Report
To: Planning & Zoning Commission Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Item: REZ10-00013 & SUB10-00012 Date: December 16, 2010
Hickory Pointe (a re-subdivision
and amendment to an approved OPD-8 plan)
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Casey Boyd, LLC
250 1 ih Avenue, Suite 150
Coralville, IA 52241
Contact Person:
Casey Boyd
cjboyd@msn.com
319-354-8118
Requested Action:
A re-subdivision of and amendment to an approved
OPD-8 Plan; Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas
Development Plan approval
Purpose:
To combine 3 lots into 1 for the purpose of
constructing 16-unit apartment building. The
previously approved OPD-8 Plan was for three, 6-
unit townhouse style buildings.
Location:
West of First Avenue as an extension of Hickory
Trail.
Size:
2.97 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Planned Development Overlay (OPD-8)
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: Undeveloped (ID-RS)
South: Park (P1)
East: Undeveloped, Residential Single-family (RS-5)
West: Undeveloped (ID-RS)
Comprehensive Plan:
The Northeast District Plan identifies these lots for
townhouse development.
File Date:
Hickory Hill (C8)
25 August 2010
Revised plan submitted November 27
Neighborhood Open Space District:
45-day limitation period:
January 13, 2011
2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The subject property consists of approximately 2.97 acres, located along the west side of First
Avenue and north of the intersection of First Avenue and Hickory Trail. Adjacent, undeveloped land
directly to the west is owned by ACT and is zoned Interim Development, Single-Family Residential
(ID-RS). Property directly to the east (across First Avenue) contains two undeveloped single-family
lots along a steep ravine. Further east, along Hickory Trail, the neighborhood is low-density, single-
family residential (RS-5). To the south is an entrance to Hickory Hill Park. With the exception of
property at the northwest corner of First and Rochester Avenues, all properties along First Avenue,
south of Hickory Trail, are zoned RM12 or OPD-12.
The applicant is seeking to amend an Planned Development Overlay (OPD-8) plan that was
approved in 2008. Prior to that the property was zoned Low Density, Single-Family (RS-8). The
OPD-8 re-zoning was conditioned on a proposed plan for 3 buildings with 6 townhomes each. All
town homes were accessed via a private rear drive off of Hickory Trail. The plan included an area of
private usable, open space at the southwest corner of the property that also served to screen the
development from Hickory Hill Park to the southwest. The applicant has indicated that the reason
for the requested change is to further cluster development on the property to minimize the area of
land that would need to be graded.
The applicant is now proposing to re-subdivide the property to combine the previous 3-lot
subdivision into one lot in order to construct a single building with 16 condominium units (2-3
bedrooms each). The proposed building would have vehicle access from Hickory Trail. Required
parking will be provided beneath and behind the building, with garage entrance from the rear
(west) side of the building. The submitted plan shows the northern half of the property as open
space with a portion to be planted as prairie.
The applicant has indicated that they have used the "Good Neighbor Policy" and have had a
meeting with neighboring residents as well as with a representative of Friends of Hickory Hill Park.
ANAL YSIS:
Current zoninq: The current OPD-8 zoning was conditioned upon a specific site plan that included
18 town homes and private, usable open space at the southwest corner of the site. The RS-8
zone, to which the current OPD-8 zone refers, is primarily intended to provide for development of
small lot single-family dwellings. The minimum lot size in the RS-8 zone is 5,000 square feet for
detached housing. The density bonus provisions allow the minimum lot size to be reduced to 4,000
square feet if vehicle access is restricted to a private rear lane. Under the RS-8 zoning, the
applicant could build approximately 13 detached units along the First Avenue frontage if vehicle
access was restricted to a private rear lane, with an additional 2-3 lots along an extension of
Hickory Trail.
The Planned Development Overlay designation is intended to permit flexibility in the use and
design of structures and land in situations where conventional development may be inappropriate,
and where modification to requirements of the underlying zone will not be contrary to the intent and
purpose of the zoning, inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, or harmful to the surrounding
neighborhood. The OPD zone is intended to:
1. Provide flexibility in the design, placement, and clustering of buildings; mixture of land uses;
use of open space; traffic circulation and parking; and related site design considerations.
2. Encourage the preservation and best use of existing landscape features through
development that is sensitive to the natural features of the surrounding area;
3. Promote efficient land use with smaller utility and street networks while maintaining
pedestrian oriented street frontages;
4. Encourage and preserve opportunities for energy-efficient development;
PCD\Staff Reportslrez10-00013 hickory pOlnte staff report.doc
3
5. Promote an attractive and safe living environment compatible with surrounding residential
developments;
6. Provide and alternative method for redeveloping older residential areas; and
7. Encourage infill development.
The subject site contains man-made regulated slopes and the topography is such that vehicle
entry from First Avenue would be impractical. Moreover, it is the policy of the City to restrict the
number of curb cuts along arterial streets. The ppplicant has proposed a plan that provides all
vehicle access off an extension of Hickory Trail, with required parking provided beneath and
behind the building.
Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan's design guidelines for new
neighborhoods emphasize efficient and compact design, stating that densities of 5 to 7 dwelling
units per acre "allow the expense of installing streets and sewer and water lines to be spread out
among more homeowners and will make it easier and less expensive for the City to provide
municipal services."
While the predominant land use in the Northeast District neighborhoods is detached, single-
family housing, the Comprehensive Plan envisions a mix of housing types throughout the
district, including the location of townhouses and small apartment buildings along arterial streets
and near institutional facilities and parks. The plan states, "Where density increases occur or lot
sizes are reduced, the design of both the streetscape and structures within the development
should receive careful review to ensure compatibility in terms of appearance and scale."
Staff believes the proposed development does comply with the Comprehensive plan. The
Bluffwood Neighborhood subsection of the Northeast District Plan designates lots along the
west side of First Avenue as appropriate for multi-family uses. The plan calls for multi-family and
townhouse buildings to be "compatible with neighborhood architecture in terms of design and
scale."
A number of apartment buildings have already developed to the south along First Avenue. The
nearest multi-family building at the southeast corner of the Hickory Trail and First Avenue is a
two-story, structure that staff believe complements the single-family neighborhood to the east.
The proposed building was modeled on that structure, using sunroom bays and a mix of quality
materials to break up the large fac;ade and creating entrances along the First Avenue and
Hickory Pointe frontages that address the street.
While the Northeast District plan shows these particular lots as appropriate for townhouse style
development, the applicant has indicated that the amount of the site that would need to be
graded in order to establish townhomes (as was proposed with the original OPD-8 plan) is
prohibitive. The proposed plan concentrates density in a single building at the south end of the
property, preserving the northern half as open space. The plan shows a large portion of the lot
planted as native prairie, which complements not only the ACT property to the west, but the
large natural area that his Hickory Hill Park to the southwest. A cluster of trees at the southwest
corner of the property will help to screen the rear of the building from the park.
The Northeast District Plan also addresses the potential impact of urban development on the
integrity of Hickory Hill Park. Among its neighborhood planning principles, the plan calls for
incorporating and maintaining a green open space buffer between Hickory Hill Park and urban
development to preserve the natural integrity of the park."
Property to the west of the site (owned by ACT) is currently undeveloped, but is identified in the
future land use map for single-family uses. The Northeast District plan stipulates that future
development of this property be in the form of a conservation-style subdivision with access off a
continuation of Hickory Trail as a single-loaded street (houses along one side of the street only)
PC DIStaff Reports\rez10-00013 hickory pointe staff report.doc
4
to preserve access and views of Hickory Hill Park to the south and west.
General Planned Development Approval Criteria
Applications for Planned Development re-zonings are reviewed for compliance with the following
standards according to Article 14-3A of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance.
1. The density and design of the Planned Development will be compatible with and/or
complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass, and scale,
relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout.
Densitv: The overall density of the planned development proposed for this site is approximately
6-7 dwelling units per net acre. After accounting for streets, storm water management and
open space, RS-8 zones have typically developed with approximately 5.2 units per acre,
although theoretically up to 8 dwelling units per acre are allowed if there is no need to devote
land to infrastructure.
In staff's view, the density proposed for this development is compatible with the neighborhood,
as it is located adjacent to higher density development on lots along First Avenue, south of
Hickory Trail, with lower density single-family neighborhood located further to the east beyond
the ravine. By constructing a single building, the plan will preserves approximately half of the
site as open space.
Land uses proposed and qenerallavout: The topography of the site along with its location
along an arterial street (which requires 40-foot setbacks) and the preference for a rear lane to
limit curb cuts, all reduce the amount of useable private space for the development and make
the construction of traditional detached housing more difficult. Thus the applicant is proposing
a single, multi-family style building.
The proposed plan preserves the northern half of the property as open space-a portion of
which is to be planted in native prairie. This open space area is not practically accessible for
future residents of the condominiums due to the steep slopes that will be created in order to
allow the proposed development. However, restoring this area to native prairie would visually
complement the prairie restoration on the abutting property owned by ACT and, if installed and
maintained correctly, would help to minimize.erosion on the slopes. Staff recommends that the
rezoning be conditioned upon the applicant providing a plan for installing and maintaining those
portions of the site designated as prairie on the landscape plan. This will ensure that the future
condominium association understands its obligations to maintain the property and avoid
allowing the area to become invaded by non-native or undesirable plant species.
The site plan shows the garage entrance to underground parking on the rear (west side of
the building). Building entrances are provided on the east, west and south sides of the
building with a hand i-capped accessible entrance provided at grade from the rear parking lot
as well as from the First Avenue right-of-way. Staff recommends improving accessibility by
providing an additional pedestrian route from the Hickory Trail right-of-way. This would allow
better access to the property for visitors.
Mass and Scale: The proposed building would be 162 feet in length and 94 feet wide, with
sun porch bays projecting another 10 feet on the east and west sides of the building. The
maximum height of the building proposed is 35 feet, which is within the height limit allowed
for single-family zones. Given the size of the building, staff believes careful attention to
design detail is necessary to assure that such a large and highly visible building is
compatible with the existing neighborhood and any future single-family development to the
west as well as the adjacent park.
PCDlStaff Reports\rez1 0-00013 hickory pointe staff report. doc
5
Staff believes the proposed design of the building is compatible with the adjacent residential
development-both multi-family and single-family portions of the neighborhood. The basic form
of the proposed building is modeled on the 2-story multi-family building located at the
southeast corner of First Avenue and Hickory Trail, with the fa<;ade of the building articulated
by 10-foot deep bays and garage entrance to the rear of the site as required by code. Both
street facades feature formal entrances. The building will not exceed the 35-foot height limit for
the zone. The proposed building is finished with quality materials: brick on the main bulk of the
building with cement board siding on the bays and masonry veneer base.
While the proposed building is limited to 35 feet in height, the grading necessary for the
construction of the proposed building requires a retaining wall along both street frontages. The
retaining wall, portions of which will be up to 10 feet in height, is set approximately 15 feet from
the Hickory Trail right-of-way and nearly 30 feet from the First Avenue right-of-way. While
landscape screening would help to soften views of the wall, staff believe that special attention
should be given to the construction materials used in order that the wall fit into the streetscape
and not detract from it. Staff would recommend a natural looking stone wall as well as
landscaping that complements the natural surroundings, including the prairie restoration on
site. Given the height and length of the wall, which runs nearly 150 feet along First Avenue,
staff recommend that final design and landscape screening of the wall be approved by the
Commission or approved by staff at a later date if it is not ready for review prior to the
Commission's vote.
2. The development will not over burden existing streets and utilities.
The density of development is appropriate along First Avenue, which is an arterial street. In
general, the Comprehensive Plan recommends higher density development along arterial
streets and the future land use scenario in the Northeast District Plan identifies these lots as
town homes. As stated above, vehicle access to the development will be restricted to a single
access point from an extension of Hickory Trail, with parking underneath and behind the
building. This will minimize the number of curb cuts along the arterial street. Transportation
planners have reviewed the site plan and determined that sight distance for the access point
is safe.
With the previous rezoning staff received a number of calls from area residents expressing
concern that traffic turning into the development would be difficult or unsafe. A memo from
the transportation planner regarding the efficiency of turning traffic at this location was
attached to support the safety of this intersection.
3. The development will not adversely effect views, light and air, property values and
privacy of neighboring properties any more than would conventional development.
Because the Northeast District Plan calls for sensitive development adjacent to the park, and
because there continues to be considerable concern about the impact of development on the
park, staff has recommended three things that the developer could do to mitigate views of
the development from the park:
. First, choose landscaping that is sensitive to the site's proximity to Hickory Hill Park.
Trees and shrubs for the site from a list of native species provided by Johnson County
Heritage Trust.
. Second, restore the northern portion of the site, as well as sloped areas to native
prairie, preserving areas between the building and the right-of-way, and directly adjacent
to the right-of-way for more traditional landscaping (sod). This will complement
restoration efforts on the ACT property to the west and will minimize maintenance for the
condominium association and reduce the potential for erosion on the site. It is essential
the developer provide an approved maintenance plan for these areas to assure that they
PCD\Staff Reports\rez10-00013 hickory pointe staff report.doc
6
are sustained in a manner that does not encourage weeds or invasion by alien or
undesirable plant species.
. Third, give careful consideration to the buildings materials and color (including roofing
materials) in order to soften the views of the development from the park. For example,
the existing houses that abut the park along Seventh Avenue, near the Bloomington
Street entrance to the park, are sided/painted in dark earth-tone colors. This minimizes
their appearance from the park such that they blend in with the trees. The commission or
staff should approve final building materials, including colors, to ensure that they do not
detract or stand out from the park.
4. The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying
zoning requirements or from City street standards will be in the public interest, in harmony
with the purpose of the zoning code, and with other building regulations of the City.
For the reasons described above, staff does believe that the proposed land use and building
type, and density proposed are appropriate at this location. In constructing a single multi-unit
building, the proposal reserves nearly half of the site for open space. By concentrating
development at the southern end of the site, the proposal avoids disturbing critical slopes
along the northern third of the property and minimizes disturbance of most of the manmade
steep slopes on the northern half of the property. However, in order to develop the site as
proposed, the topography of the site must be altered significantly, creating new slopes with
grades of up to 25%. While the zoning code requires a grading plan for disturbance of
existing steep and critical slopes, no such requirement is exists for the creation of new
slopes. Given the magnitude of grading proposed for this site, staff recommends that the
applicant be required to secure a grading permit and that newly created slopes be stabilized
prior to issuance of a building permit. This will help ensure that erosion and run-off are
minimized and that slopes are not compromised during the construction process.
Staff would also like to address long term maintenance of the prairie plantings-this needs to
be recorded in order that the homeowners association understands its obligations to
maintain the area. In other words, a maintenance plan needs to be submitted and reviewed
for approval. There is a concern that if the maintenance is not addressed the City would
simply be permitting the proliferation of weed species. The applicant may want to look to
some sort of partnership with ACT, which is restoring prairie species on the land that
surrounds this. This may offer a cost-effective way for the homeowners to achieve proper
maintenance.
Level II Sensitive Areas Review
The applicant has applied for approval of a Sensitive Areas Development, a type of planned
development. The purposed of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) is to permit and define
reasonable use of properties that contain sensitive environmental features and natural
resources, and allowing reasonable development while protecting these resources from
damage.
The subject site contains steep and critical slopes, both of which are regulated through the
(SAO). The purpose of regulating development on and near steep slopes is to promote safety in
the design and construction of developments; to minimize flooding, landslides, and mudslides; to
minimize soil instability and erosion; and to preserve the scenic character of hillside areas,
particularly wooded hillsides. As explained above, staff believes a grading plan is appropriate in
this circumstance given the substantial amount of grading necessary to develop this site as as
proposed.
Neiahborhood Open Space: The zoning ordinance requires the dedication of .1033 acres (4,500
PC DIStaff Reports\rez10-00013 hickory pointe staff report.doc
7
square feet) of neighborhood open space for a development of this size. The developer has
agreed to dedicate the 1 ,920-square-foot portion of land on the south side of Hickory Trail such
that the boundary of Hickory Hill Park will extend to the street. This proposal will be referred to
the Parks and Recreation Commission. In lieu of additional open space, the applicant will be
required to pay fees equal to the value of 2,580 square feet of land.
Sanitary Sewer: A sewer connection is available along First Avenue right of way. A new sewer
line will be constructed along the Hickory Trail for any development to the west.
Storm water manaqement: Storm water drains are indicated on the site plan on the private rear
lane and on the new section of Hickory Trail. This system will tie into the existing storm water
system on First Avenue and Hickory Trail.
Summary: In staff's view, this proposal is consistent with the principles of the Northeast District
Plan, which identifies lots on the west side of First Avenue as appropriate for multi-family and
townhouse development, as well as the Comprehensive Plan's design guidelines for new
neighborhoods emphasize efficient and compact design with densities of 5 to 7 dwelling units
per acre. In staff's opinion the proposed density is appropriate and compatible in the context of
neighboring development, which includes multi-family development in the RM-12 zone along
First Avenue. Staff believes the proposed design of the building, with its projecting sun room
bays, and variation in materials to break up the mass of the building, is compatible with the
character of the neighborhood, including those nearby single-family uses. By clustering density
at the south end of the site the proposed development preserves half of the site as open space.
By planting a large portion of the open space in native prairie the site will blend in with the park
and adjacent prairie restoration on the ACT property. By providing vehicle access from Hickory
Trail, rather that direct access onto First Avenue, the proposed plan minimizes curb cuts onto
the arterial street and provides for efficient and safe ingress and egress from the development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ10-00013 & SUB10-00012, an
application submitted by Casey Boyd, to amend a the current Overlay Planned Development,
Medium-Density Single-Family Housing (OPD-RS8) zone and approve a preliminary plat of
Hickory Pointe for approximately 2.97 acres of property located on the east side of First Avenue,
at the intersection of First Avenue and Hickory Trail be approved subject to the following:
1. Substantial compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted;
2. An accessible pedestrian route be provided between the Hickory Trail right-of-way and
the rear (west) entrance to the building;
3. Detailed plan for establishing and maintaining portions of the site to be planted in native
prairie;
4. All landscaping (trees and shrubs) to comply with the species list provided by Johnson
County Heritage Trust or similar list from the Iowa State Extension;
5. Commission or staff to have final approval of building materials (including colors), design
and materials for the proposed retaining wall, and all landscaping for the site;
6. The applicant will be required to secure a grading permit for the site;
7. All newly created slopes, south and west of the buidling, will be stabilized prior to
issuance of a building permit.
PCDlStaff Reportslrez10-00013 hickory pointe staff report.doc
8
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Preliminary plat
3. Elevations of the building
4. 3-D view of the proposed retaining wall
5. Memo from transportation planner regarding safety of the intersection
6. Image from Northeast District Plan
Approved by: ~~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
PC DIStaff Reports\rez10-00013 hickory pointe staff report.doc
~
~
~
~
~
~
tj
en
a: ---,
-,
I
C
-
J
--~.------.._-,,---.,.,._~ -
~
~
o
o
~
o
~
N
~
.........
C'\l
~
o
o
o
I
o
~
::Q
P
rJJ
/
-~
\
co
c
a..
o
(
')
L
~~J
~ CJ ~~
OQ
~
0__
::t:r: -:)
---~v ')
;f
,
c:
o
...-j
....
::a
~
"'0
c:
N
Q)
....
c:
...-j
o
~
~
o
~
...-j
:I:
Z
o
~
~
U
o
~
~
f-l
~
rI)
~ rm.. ...IIIIII;I".I~~!I
~ ..! I ~r!l Ii
~~[) n!11'1 ii ~::
!tll I I~
III! I '111 IIII II II
i'~!llh!llllllJbL9li1l'II1'1
Ollill Iii rI iIIHIU.1 1111
!'j'['il""f~~~'~ /111"\" I Iii!
I i I l.ail III \ 0 I'
I i III tt.-.. . i;l
I
.
I I_
IPU I;! I
ii;iiiii . 'I II i 'i I ! P!!; !!ill
~. I b. t If I .1.-
1 I' !I~ I '.
tt I, j II ;j~. ; lit f -III
b UI M ~ '11.1 ~idi
')
It!
I"
~
CI.
W
f-
en
i!!z ~ -....Tl~~ - .
~Q P
~t: ~ <
~~ 515 8 ·
~ ~ ~~~ i I
~
z
o
t--i
E-i
t--i
o
~ If I
~!~ ,Ii
j C\1 ~ ~I!I:I
p., ~~ t: IllI
~~~I~ dl
t--i ~
~.~ siii!
~ llil
~
u
t--i
~
+i
I
I
I
I
I
NI
I
~ .----~--- ............ ~
----- -'-- ~-----_....
...._~.....\--._._--~~.-._..__._-_...--
! II ~~~[] 11III11 !II !i.l ~ii
n~llllh I"
Ii!
III I I I II
.
III 1;11:1111 1II1 .- II I I
I ;III!~,IIIII~!I:I~';;IIM; I i II ~d !
i I 'j i i' "I~;;;;:"" Iiii' ' , , , ,
I '~I ij II &" I!~DI
I
I ill! "._u , . -.1
h
-If
5.. 'I-
'i- ~ I
It! ..
.-1 ~-,
tr ~11'1
III fr'
~;I ::rl
II ~I'
II~ 1111
,I
I,~ I
", ii
5
0..
~
;
0..
I!!z ~
6;Q
~t::
~~ 5~
~o U~
:r ~ QIlQ
~
I
I
I
I
I
hi
III I
z
o
t--t
E-i
t--t
Q
5i1' If I
~~H~ Iii
>-< C\le - I.
; ~ ~ 5"I.i;-1
~~I~~ I
~o 0 .
g::~~ -11111 ~".:"
. II; '~':>''''..I'
~ Iii I
o
~
U
t--t
::r::
+~
996C;'.B'i'r (6lr) OvU<; IIMOI ')JJ:) VMOI 'J^I~O ~NlltJJ1S i1L9l
. 'OUJ 'aOfAJas fJUf1J'flJa JaneJ1ufl'
:JNI 'sTIflS :J3IJH.L
SJrJJJNJJrOaNO:J .LNIOd J.HOX:JUi
~ ~
i \
. "';;:'; H
~
I
~
.
~
.
!I
I~
II
J
.~
i.
!I
I~
Ii
;1
II
.,
~~
~"
h
I!
d
ii
I;
n
~i
:i
I.
;~
~-
~I
;.
.~
l~
"
n
,"
II
!
Ii
f;
IS
II
~;
!~
S'
.~
Ii
II
~,
'I
Ii
.;
:1
996"'-9H' (6(r) OVW; '\I'MOI 'All:) 'VMOI '3MlG :)NlltJ]lS 9L9Z
. 'ouI 'aofAJas Jiumrua JamlJ1un.
'JNI 's77!1EJ mm.L
SlfIlINIlfOaNO:J JJ{fOci J.1l0}[:J!H
... "
-
. '''::' H
~
I
~
.
~
o
!r
I~
lfi
J
"
il;
!i
I~
Ii
.~
ir
II
o'
!~
~"
h
i!
~!
Ii
I;
II
gl
:i
I.
;~
f
81
;0
J
j~
~~
il
Ii'
~j
I
I,'
~
~
~~
il
~o
.!
~:
.~
ii
II
g.
WI
I~
oi
!~
~~
! ~ 1
-.,...= -.....
.........~ -.......
~~W!:~
~~ '1-",.,
__ _ r
-2ITY OF IO\1..A CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 23, 2008
To:
From:
Bob Miklo, Senior Planner
Sara Walz, Associate Planner
Kent Ralston, JCCOG Assistant Transportation Planner ~
Hickory Trail / 1 st Avenue Intersection
Re:
At your request, staff observed traffic patterns at the Hickory Trail/1st Avenue intersection.
Specifically, the observations were intended to address concerns that northbound traffic would
have difficulty making left-turns (westbound) into the proposed residential development west of
151 Avenue and north of Hickory Hill Park.
The following assumptions were made for the purposes of this study:
· The proposed development would include 20 (3 bedroom) units that would generate a total
of approximately 140 trips per day (7 trips a day per household), all entering/exiting via an
access opposite from Hickory Trail
· Approximately 12 percent of the total generated daily trips (17) would be entering/exiting the
proposed drive during peak travel times; 12 percent is a generally accepted rule per traffic
engineering standards
· Delay for current southbound to eastbound turning movements will be similar to that of
future northbound to westbound turning traffic
· Said intersection operates relatively well from a traffic engineering perspective and has had
no collisions since 2001.
Staff observed that during PM peak hour traffic, a majority of southbound to eastbound
motorists turning left from 1st Avenue to Hickory Trail experienced no delay and were able to
freely negotiate said movement. The remaining vehicles that were required to stop and wait for
a gap in northbound traffic experienced no more than an 11 second delay to perform the
desired movement (this is an acceptable level of delay per traffic engineering standards).
Using the stated assumptions, and the results of our observations, staff does not feel that
motorists will experience unacceptable delays when accessing the proposed drive at said
location. Staff recommends re-evaluating the intersection before any significant development
to the east or west of this intersection is proposed.
Jccogtp/memos/1 slave hickorytr.doc
......:nt (3
"'''+. I ~
'" i5
,1,,\,,(\ '4'
'II ~
r' Ol
I .r:.
t::
o
6
"C
o
o
.r:.
....
o
.. .!:J
.r:.
Cl
'Q)
Z
"C
o
o
~
::I ,
m'ffi
~~
::~
00
-~
c:'o
.!l2I
0._
OlO
en.r:.
~t::
"CO
c:c:
.!l2ai
Ol ::I
.r:.c:
.....Ol
->
0<(
~~
5iI:
t:,
~
~ /
Cl
c:
o
(ij
C
Ol
1j I'1'I',J ~
o
Qi
>
Ol
"C
C
Ol
E
~ I ~
(1l
"C
c:
(1l
Ol
en
i ~
c:
· J ~
1 .9
en
~,J ~
o
.r:.
en
c:
(1l
0..
,l\Il9 I ~
I-
.:I
"
il
i
'f/' Ii
I .c'
iJl U. ""
?
II ~l\
...,*\
, \
~ \!:'''''~~ .
"., ... :. '~. j
e, '" ., -9 "".~ '\::~,
~ \,.,..'" .... 1> ~'
~ '
l ;
. ~,.
-,...,.
S
~. "
r'- I
..~.Ii, II
*'r.
'hr..
U'"
>>')'111
'jI, ;
/1'01 J..(Q,/
,IC
.,.eIl
.
.
1
,I"~"\ Wf
'ii It' ..
..
1: ~ .2
.... e i :; ~
..
, t! ~ ~ .E
i ;; C
S ~ q 1 e .!:' :i e
~ i 1 1: Ie Ii I) t C
"C i ! ~ . :0: ! .}\
" -<: :.. "
.. .. ~ ,l:!
Q ~ r ! .~ c
, a 1 i ;f! to ~
" a ~
~ 0 .... :II ti, C
I . l' III I ~ II I
~; I
t I
\ I
.....
=
"t..
-
o
Ol
"C
'iij
1ii
Ol
~
Ol
.;
I
.~ l
C,)
c..
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 - 6:00 PM - INFORMAL
CITY HALL, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes, Ann Freerks, Tim
Weitzel, Wally Plahutnik, Josh Busard
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Michelle Payne
STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Miklo, Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Christina Kuecker
OTHERS PRESENT:
None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Chairperson Ann Freerks.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM:
REZ1 0-00016/SUB1 0-00013: Discussion of an application submitted by TNT Land
development LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone to Medium
Density Single-Family (RM-12) zone for 2.84 acres and a preliminary plat for Terra Verde,
a 22-lot, 12.48 acre residential subdivision located at NW corner of Muscatine Avenue
and Scott Boulevard.
Kuecker explained that this was a two-part application. The first part is to rezone property at the
corner of Scott and Muscatine from RS-5 to RS-12 the other portion of the application is for a
subdivision dividing the entire 12.48 acres into a subdivision with 3 multi-family lots and 19
single-family lots. She said that while the Comprehensive Plan only shows single family homes
for that area, the neighborhood design concept and draft district plan allow for multi-family along
arterial streets. The project meets all subdivision design standards, is consistent with code, and
is compatible with the neighborhoods surrounding it. Staff recommends a conditional zoning
agreement (CZA) stating that the development will be consistent with the site plan submitted to
staff.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 29, 2010 - Informal
Page 2 of 3
Kuecker noted that access to the subdivision would be off of Terrence Lane, a new street
connecting to Muscatine Avenue. Staff recommends that installation of a north side sidewalk be
a part of the CZA. The developer proposes fees in lieu of parkland. She said that it appears
that all outstanding deficiencies and discrepancies have been corrected. Kuecker said that
provided that is the case staff recommends approval subject to:
1) The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine will be extended from Juniper Drive to Scott
Boulevard;
2) The sidewalk along Terrence Lane adjacent to 3330 Muscatine Avenue will be installed
concurrent to the construction of Terrence Lane; and
3) The multi-family buildings will be substantially compliant with the submitted site plan and
building design. If the developer wishes to change the design, the new design must be
approved by the Staff Design Review Committee.
Commissioners expressed concerns about the traffic in that area and at the intersection of
Muscatine and Scott. Miklo said that improvements that include a left turn lane, a traffic signal,
are anticipated in the near future. Eastham asked if the townhomes would be staggered in
height, and Kuecker said she did not think such specific design considerations had been worked
out. Busard asked about the design for Terrence Road and the temporary dead-end. Koppes
asked staff to check on the status and scope of the improvements planned for Scott and
Muscatine as it is a very busy area
Eastham asked about the storm-water retention plan and Miklo said that it would be provided on
the outlot.
REZ10-00017: Discussion of an application by Billion Motors for a request to amend the
Zoning Code to allow taller signs in the CI-1 zone near Interstate Highways.
Miklo explained that Billion Auto was located in an area that had recently been rezoned to a
zone that does not allow for signs as large as their existing sign. He said Billion cannot update
its existing sign without bringing it into conformance. This means the sign will have to be either
entirely removed and replaced with a shorter sign, or the zoning code will have to be changed to
allow for the sign's non-conformity. Miklo said that what Billion has requested is for the code to
be changed to allow such signs in the CI-1 zone, which is not something staff would
recommend. Staff recommends changing the code to allow for non-conforming signs to be
updated under specific circumstances. He said that they have not yet heard from Billion Auto
regarding their thoughts on the proposed compromise.
Eastham said it was his understanding that he was not allowed to consider the applicant's
financial burden in conforming to the code. He asked if there were other issues of non-
conformance with this property and Miklo said he did not believe so. Kuecker said that the
lighting issues are still being worked out. Eastham asked if other properties had been required
to bring signs into conformance. Miklo said there had been; however, the difference here is that
the requirement and the sign are both fairly new. Eastham asked if the height of the sign was
the only issue and Miklo said staff would check to see if there were other issues.
Eastham asked if there was any venue for the applicant to address their issues with the cost of
bringing the sign into conformity and staff said there was not. The issue of fairness to other
dealerships if this sign was allowed to remain was discussed. Miklo noted that the applicant
had requested that all properties in the CI-1 zone within 1000 feet of a divided highway be
allowed taller signs, but staff did not recommend that. Plahutnik said that the proposed remedy
for this particular problem seems to be to rewrite a section of the code, which makes him very
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 29, 2010 - Informal
Page 3 of 3
uncomfortable. Busard said he too had an issue with rewriting the code for a one-time matter.
Freerks asked how the same issue was being dealt with in other neighboring communities.
Miklo said that staff could check on that, but that sign codes vary greatly. Plahutnik said this
issue had been discussed when the code was revised. There was some discussion as to the
recent history of this particular property and how this situation came to be. Miklo noted that the
sign is allowed to be there; it is simply not allowed to be changed. The sign can stay there
forever, unchanged, so long as it is properly maintained. Eastham said that to him the proposed
code amendment is in direct conflict with the idea that a non-conforming sign should be
removed over time.
OTHER:
Miklo passed out the minutes from the last meeting as they were not availabekl when the
packets went out.
ADJOURNMENT:
Koppes moved to adjourn.
Eastham seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote (Payne absent).
z
Q
(/)
~
:Ec
:EO:::
00
UU
C)w
zO:::
-wc
zU~
OZc
N<eN
CC
ZZ
<eW
C)1-
~~
Z
Z
<e
..J
D.
co
~ >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
....
....
.... w
~ >< >< -. >< >< >< ><
c 0
....
..... w
- >< >< >< >< >< ><
Q -.
.... 0
(Q w
.... >< -. >< >< >< >< ><
- 0
en
N >< >< >< w >< >< ><
- -.
en 0
en
.... >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
co
Lt) >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
co
'It W W
.... -. >< >< >< >< >< -.
CD 0 0
Q W W
N -. >< >< >< -. >< ><
it; 0 0
(Q >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
it;
Lt) w
.... >< >< >< -. >< >< ><
~ 0
.... >< >< >< >< >< >< w
~ -.
0
co W
.... -. >< >< >< >< >< ><
- 0
M
:! >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
N
....
N >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
....
en
::EW ..- ..- (V') N LC") LC") (V')
o:e:; ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..-
-. -. -. -. -. -. -.
WQ. LC") LC") LC") LC") LC") LC") LC")
1-)( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
W J: >
I-
<C ::::i W W ..J
:) 0: !Xl ..J ..J
J: <C z ~ ..J <C
W 3C
en J: Z J: ::E
0 (.) <C ::::i (.) ':Ii j::::
.., W
C ~ en en ::E z ..i
~ W I- W
0: J: 0: W :) ~
W <C I- W Q. Z J:
::E en en W Q. ~ <C jjj
<C :) <C 0: 0 ..J
Z !Xl W LL ~ Q. Q. 3C
t:)
Z
j::::
W
W
::E
..J
<C
::E
0:
o
LL
en W
N >< >< >< >< >< ><
- -.
.... 0
....
Lt) W W W
.... >< >< >< ><
- -. -. -.
.... 0 0 0
....
:! w >< w >< w >< ><
Q -. -. -.
.... 0 0 0
(Q W
.... >< >< >< >< -. >< ><
- 0
co
~ >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
co
(Q W W
N >< >< >< -. >< >< -.
- 0 0
.....
..... W
.... -. >< >< >< >< >< ><
CD 0
..... W W
.... -. >< >< >< >< >< -.
- 0 0
Lt)
M >< >< >< >< >< >< w
it; 0
N W W W
.... -. >< >< -. -. >< ><
~ 0 0 0
en W W
~ >< >< >< >< -. >< -.
0 0
....
....
-
N
en
::EW ..- ..- (V') N LC") LC") (V')
o:e:; ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..-
-. -. -. -. -. -. -.
WQ. LC") LC") LC") LC") LC") LC") LC")
1-)( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
W J: >
I-
<C ::::i ~ W ..J
:) 0: ..J ..J
J: <C z ..J ~
W
en J: Z J: ::E
0 (.) <C ::::i (.) ':Ii j::::
.., W
C ~ en en ::E z ..i
~ I-
0: J: 0: W W :) W
W <C I- W Q. Z J: ~
::E en en W Q. ~ <C jjj
<C :) <C 0: 0 ..J
Z !Xl W LL ~ Q. Q. 3C
t:)
Z
j::::
W
W
::E
..J
<C
::E
0:
o
LL
Z
E
:J
....
o
:J
-00
a.> 0
~Z ....
u -- a.>
X g>.o
W+-E
:;:'a.>a.>
c:a.>~
E-a.>E"""
a.> c: en C\J
en51.o<(o_
a.>.o Z 0
O:<(III1Z
II II W~ II
-- """ ,
XOOZ:
:>:
W
~
PRELIMINARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 2, 2010 - 7:00 PM - FORMAL
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Ann Freerks, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes,
Michelle Payne, Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Miklo, Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Christina Kuecker
OTHERS PRESENT:
Terry Lavery, Jim Price
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
1. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of REZ10-99916, a rezoning of
approximately 2.84 acres locates at the northwest corner of Muscatine Avenue and Scott
boulevard from RS-5 to RM-12 and SUB10-00014, a preliminary plat of Terra Verde, a 22-
lot, approximately 12.48 acre residential subdivision located at the northwest corner of
Muscatine avenue and Scott Boulevard be approved with the following conditions:
. The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine Avenue being extended from
Juniper Drive to Scott boulevard;
. The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine Avenue and along Terrence Lane
adjacent to 3330 Muscatine Avenue being installed concurrently to the
construction of Terrence Lane;
. The multi-family buildings being substantially compliant with the submitted site
plan and building design. If the developer wished to change the design, the new
design must be approved by the Staff Design Review Committee.
2. The Commission voted 5-2 (Eastham and Plahutnik voting against) to approve REZ10-
00017 an application by Billion Automotive to amend the zoning code per staff
recommended changes to Non-Conforming Signs, Section C of 14-4E-8C-3.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM:
REZ1 0-00016/SUB1 0-00013: Discussion of an application submitted by TNT Land
development LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone to Medium
Density Single-Family (RM-12) zone for 2.84 acres and a preliminary plat for Terra Verde,
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 2, 2010 - Formal
Page 2 of 8
a 22-lot, 12.48 acre residential subdivision located at NW corner of Muscatine Avenue
and Scott Boulevard.
Kuecker explained that this was a two-part application. The first part is to rezone property at the
corner of Scott and Muscatine from RS-5 to RS-12 the other portion of the application is for a
subdivision dividing the entire 12.48 acres into a subdivision with 19 single-family lots and 3
multi-family lots. Kuecker said that there would be three outlots in the subdivision. Outlot A is for
storm-water detention, while Outlots B & C are being deeded to the neighboring property
owners. Kuecker said that this property is in the Southeast Planning District, the plan for which
is still in the process of being written. Kuecker said that the land use map shows this area as
being all single-family homes. She said that the neighborhood design section of the
Comprehensive Plan, however, does demonstrate that the intersections of arterial streets are
appropriate places for multi-family and commercial properties. Kuecker said that the draft of the
Southeast District Plan that is in process does show this area as having multi-family dwellings.
Kuecker said that the subdivision design does meet all of the requirements of the zoning code.
Kuecker said that the new multi-family properties would not be allowed access off of Scott
Boulevard or Muscatine and would access those streets off of a new street, Terrance Lane.
Kuecker said that the surrounding neighborhoods are primarily single-family, though there is a
planned development for the southwest corner of Muscatine and Scott Boulevard that has multi-
family units and a medical office. Kuecker said the developer's concept plan shows townhouse
style lots with the parking in the back of the properties. Staff felt that the concept plan and
building design were appropriate for the neighborhood. Staff recommends a conditional zoning
agreement to ensure that the new multi-family units are compatible with the existing single-
family neighborhoods.
Kuecker said that she had spoken with transportation planners about the concerns the
Commission had expressed regarding the intersection of Scott Boulevard and Muscatine
Avenue. The transportation planners said that the improvements to that intersection are
scheduled for FY13, and will include left turn lanes in all directions and a traffic signal. Kuecker
said that he applicant is dedicating additional right-of-way along Muscatine Avenue to facilitate
those future improvements and expansion.
Kuecker said that the applicant has shown in the concept plan a sidewalk on the north side of
Muscatine that connects to Juniper Drive. She said that staff recommends making that a part of
the conditional zoning agreement. The applicant also shows trail connections on the property
that tie into existing 8 foot sidewalk on Scott Boulevard and the open space to the north that in
the future could connect the Creekside Trail.
Kuecker said the applicant would like to pay fees in lieu of providing parkland. Kuecker said that
would have to go before the Parks and Recreation Commission, but that staff would prefer that
arrangement in this instance.
Kuecker noted that the revised plat has had all deficiencies corrected. Staff is recommending
approval of this application with the following conditions:
1) The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine will be extended from Juniper Drive to Scott
Boulevard;
2) The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine and along Terrence Lane adjacent to 3330
Muscatine Avenue will be installed concurrent to the construction of Terrence Lane; and
3) The multi-family buildings will be substantially compliant with the submitted site plan and
building design. If the developer wishes to change the design, the new design must be
approved by the Staff Design Review Committee.
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 2, 2010 - Formal
Page 3 of 8
Eastham asked if the developer had the permission of the nearby property owners to extend the
sidewalk to juniper. Kuecker said that the sidewalk would be constructed in the public right-of-
way so property owner permission would not be necessary. Payne asked how wide the
proposed sidewalk would be. Kuecker said that because the sidewalk on the south side of
Muscatine is 8-feet wide, the proposed sidewalk would be 5-feet wide, per City standards for
arterial streets.
Eastham asked if the applicant has indicated what the phasing of the plan would be; Kuecker
said that the applicant had not.
Busard asked if it was correct that the applicant was only donating additional right-of-way and
not actually paying for improvement to the intersection of Scott and Muscatine, and Miklo said
that was correct.
Freerks opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak.
Terry Lavery, TNT LLC, said that he has been developing for over 25 years. He said that he is
currently finishing a geo-thermal townhome community in Coralville similar to the one proposed
here. Lavery explained that this particular project was going to be an all geo-thermal heat pump
community. He said that the price point for the homes will be $200,000 to $300,000, making
them very affordable for a zero-carbon footprint community, something very difficult to find in the
Midwest. Lavery said that there is no phasing for the project; both single and multi-family homes
will be built simultaneously.
No one else wished to speak to this issue and the public hearing was closed.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of REZ10-99916, a rezoning of approximately
2.84 acres locates at the northwest corner of Muscatine Avenue and Scott boulevard
from RS-5 to RM-12 and SUB10-00014, a preliminary plat of Terra Verde, a 22-lot,
approximately 12.48 acre residential subdivision located at the northwest corner of
Muscatine avenue and Scott Boulevard be approved with the following conditions:
. The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine Avenue being extended from
Juniper Drive to Scott boulevard;
. The sidewalk on the north side of Muscatine Avenue and along Terrence Lane
adjacent to 3330 Muscatine Avenue being installed concurrently to the
construction of Terrence Lane;
. The multi-family buildings being substantially compliant with the submitted site
plan and building design. If the developer wished to change the design, the new
design must be approved by the Staff Design Review Committee.
Weitzel seconded.
Eastham said he felt this project was fairly straight-forward and consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. He said that he felt the developer had done a good job of addressing any
concerns expressed by staff.
Busard said he was glad to see the higher density housing, but he did have a couple of
concerns. He said that he would like to know specifically how long "temporary" meant in regard
to the temporary dead-end. He said he also would have liked to see some kind of connecting
trail to Muscatine in order to provide residents easier access to the services and transportation
on Muscatine Avenue. He said he was okay with the project other than those concerns.
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 2, 2010 - Formal
Page 4 of 8
Weitzel agreed with Busard that the temporary nature of the street was perhaps not ideal;
however, he said that it might be the best solution in this particular case. He said the project
makes good use of the land in an area that is somewhat difficult to develop.
Koppes said that one of her main concerns is the traffic on Muscatine and Scott. She said that
knowing that the improvements to the intersection are scheduled to be funded in 2013, she will
support the application. However, if the funding for improvements gets pushed back then she
thinks the Commission should address that with the traffic planners, as this project will add a lot
of traffic to an already busy intersection. Kuecker noted that the City only budgets for one traffic
signal a year and the priority is given to those areas with highest collision rates. Koppes said
that she agreed with that prioritization. She said she would vote for the project but she wanted
the traffic improvements there as soon as possible.
Freerks said that she felt the project offers something to that area and to the city as a whole
because of the geo-thermal features. She acknowledged the traffic concerns but expressed
confidence that they were being appropriately addressed.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
CODE AMENDMENT:
REZ10-00017: Discussion of an application by Billion Motors for a request to amend the
Zoning Code to allow taller signs in the CI-1 zone near Interstate Highways.
Miklo said that Billion Auto has requested this amendment to accommodate an existing sign that
is located at Highway 218 and Highway 1, just west of Mormon Trek Boulevard. Miklo said that
this property was zoned Highway Commercial (CH-1) until just recently. That zone allows signs
up to 65 feet tall in areas that are within 1,000 feet of a divided or interstate highway. Miklo said
that in most cases, the maximum sign size is 125 square feet; the Highway Commercial zone
allows 250 square foot of signage. Miklo noted that the sign is question was in conformance
with code until the area was rezoned from Highway Commercial to Intensive Commercial (CI-1).
Miklo said the rezoning was necessary for Billion Auto to expand. Miklo explained that auto
dealerships had previously been allowed in Highway Commercial zones, so that when a Ford
dealership was established at that property both the use and the sign were in conformance with
code. When the zoning code was amended in 2005, the Highway Commercial zone was
amended to be in more in keeping with its original intent, which was to provide and area where
those traveling along highways could stop for necessary services, such as restaurants, gas
stations, and hotels. At that time, auto dealerships were disallowed in the Highway Commercial
zone, and were allowed in the Intensive Commercial zone. This made the car dealership a non-
conforming use. Miklo said that it is important to note that the sign was established in and
invested in as a conforming use, and that it only became non-conforming recently when the City
changed its code. Miklo explained that under current code, any changes to the sign -such as
changing it to reflect the auto dealership that is actually there rather than the previous
dealership-would require the sign to come into conformance with current code. This would
essentially require the original sign to be completely removed, and the owner's investment in the
sign would be totally lost. Miklo said that the application submitted by the dealership requests
that the zoning code be amended to allow for larger signs in the Intensive Commercial Zone.
Staff advises against that approach as it would open up interchanges for many more signs for
uses that do not necessarily need to draw highway users. Miklo said that staff feels it is
reasonable to amend the non-conforming provisions to allow for limited re-use of taller signs if
and when they become non-conforming. Miklo said that one justification for this is because it is
reasonable to allow the great expense involved in the construction of these signs to be
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 2, 2010 - Formal
Page 5 of 8
recouped or amortized when they become non-conforming. Miklo said that it is also important to
note that part of the non-conformity is the indirect result of a change in City policy. Miklo said
staff feels it would be reasonable to amend the existing sign code to allow existing signs that are
taller than the height limit to be reused and refaced as long as certain criteria are met.
Eastham asked whether or not the applicant is being required to correct any other non-
conformance issues on the property. Miklo said there had been some landscaping details that
needed to be brought into conformance, and are being corrected as a part of the dealership
expansion.
Eastham asked whether or not other property owners in the city had been required to change
their free-standing signs because of non-conformance issues. Miklo said that has happened in
some situations, but he did not think it had happened with a sign of this type.
Weitzel asked if staff had any idea how many other signs would be affected as a result of these
changes. Miklo said that there is only one other non-conforming sign of this type, and about a
half-dozen of these signs in the city as a whole.
Payne asked if this would have been an issue if the sign face had been changed prior to the
recent rezoning, and Miklo said it would not have been. Miklo said that it would have been a risk
for the dealership to invest in changes to a sign prior to the rezoning as there had been no
guarantee that the rezoning would go through.
Eastham asked if there were other dealerships and businesses along Highway 1 and 218 that
have conforming free-standing signs. Miklo said that there were.
Freerks opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak.
Jim Price with Billion Automotive said that Payne had precisely illustrated Billion's problem: they
would have changed the sign had they had the expansion platted, but could not put the cart
before the horse. Price said that they had to be re-platted to do the expansion, but by doing the
re-plat they had rendered their sign non-conforming. He said they simply wanted to do what
they had intended to do all along, which is to reuse the existing sign.
No one else wished to speak to this issue and the public hearing was closed.
Payne moved to approve REZ1 0-00017 an application by Billion Automotive to amend the
zoning code per staff recommended changes to Non-Conforming Signs, Section C of 14-
4E-8C-3.
Busard seconded.
Payne said that it makes sense to have a tall sign that is visible from Highway 218, and it does
not make sense to remove an existing sign only to put up another. She said that while she can
see both sides of the issue, she does think the visibility issue wins out.
Koppes stated that the same argument could be made for any business along Highway 218;
most of those properties would also like to have signs visible form the highway but are not
allowed to.
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 2, 2010 - Formal
Page 6 of 8
Weitzel noted that the rezoning was not necessarily the applicant's idea; it was a necessity, and
as a result of fulfilling one requirement, their sign became non-conforming for another
requirement.
Freerks noted that the sign was established lawfully and was made non-conforming after that.
She said the primary question before the commission is whether or not to make an exception in
this instance - though she noted that the applicant was actually requesting a broader change.
Busard said that he had originally leaned toward a "no" vote as he is not a fan of changing code
just because someone wants it to be changed. However, because of the circumstances of this
particular case, the compromise proposed by staff seems reasonable.
Weitzel said that the compromise does a good job of accommodating this particular issue while
retaining reasonable limitations on signs.
Plahutnik said that the zoning for that area had been pretty carefully considered. The decision to
limit tall signs in that area to businesses that are useful to travelers on the highways was a very
conscious one. Plahutnik said that the zoning was approved unanimously, and the intent of that
zoning was specifically intended to limit signs along highway corridors. Plahutnik noted that the
particular site in question is one of the highest spots in the county so even a very short sign is
still highly visible. Plahutnik said that while he did not wish to see anyone spend money
unnecessarily, he did not think this instance warranted doing backflips to change a code that
was a very good and positive one. Plahutnik said he would be voting against this application.
Busard said that Plahutnik's points were well taken, but that he was swayed by the fact that
allowing the change to the sign would also encourage the maintenance of it. Payne noted that
the code changes were concerned with new signs; the sign will not have to be taken down
regardless of what the Commission recommends. Freerks said that the practical reality of the
situation is that this limited amendment will pertain to only two signs in the city, and that she is in
favor of reusing and recycling the existing signs rather than having them torn down to create
newer, smaller signs. Payne said she would not be in favor of changing the code to allow new
50-foot signs, only in allowing for pre-existing signs.
Eastham said that this sign is definitely higher and more prominent than the other car dealership
signs in that area. He said that he had reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning code
as it pertains to this issue. He said that part of the code is intended to provide fair and equitable
treatment for all sign users, which is currently not the case since the other businesses along the
highway have much shorter signs. Eastham said that while he is sympathetic with the financial
concerns of the dealership, he does not think it is an unreasonable expectation for businesses
to examine all aspects of the affects that zoning changes they request might have on their
interests. Eastham said that while changing the sign might be a bit annoying it is not necessarily
onerous. He said that it is his understanding that the cost of something should not be a factor in
a zoning discussion.
Greenwood Hektoen clarified that financial considerations can be taken into account in terms of
ensuring that a zoning code is not so onerous that there can be no return on investment.
Freerks said that she does not feel there is a fairness issue in terms of signage as the sign had
been lawfully established.
Koppes asked if the applicant would be required to remove the sign if the application was
denied. Miklo said that the applicant could leave the sign in place, but could not make any
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 2, 2010 - Formal
Page 7 of 8
changes to it. Koppes asked if they would be required to maintain it. Miklo said that he believed
there were some provisions that would apply once the sign became hazardous.
Koppes said that while she agrees with Plahutnik for the most part, she will support the
application because the only changes being made are to the face of the sign. She noted that
she did see a fairness issue since dealers that are right across the street cannot have signs of
the same height.
,
Weitzel said that the reasons the sign became non-conforming are very compelling issues for
him.
Koppes said she would support this because it is very limited in scope, but she would not
support anything broader.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-2 (Eastham and Plahutnik voting against).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: NOVEMBER 15 AND 18. 2010:
Koppes moved to approve the minutes.
Payne seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
OTHER:
There will not be a January 3rd meeting unless something pressing comes up.
There will be no December 8th meeting on the Riverfront Crossings project. The meeting will be
schedule for Jan. 2ih.
ADJOURNMENT:
Koppes motioned to adjourn.
Payne seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 7-0 vote.
s/pcd/mins/p&z12010/p&z 12-02-1 O.doc
z
o
f/)
f/)
::Ec
::E~
00
00
C)~
~WO
Zo-
OZO
N<cN
CC
zz
<cW
C)....
Z....
_<c
Z
Z
<c
...J
a..
:...;: >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
N
"I""
co
"I"" >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
"I""
"I""
"I"" W
N >< >< >< >< >< ><
- .....
0 0
"I""
to- W
- >< >< >< >< >< ><
0 -
"I"" 0
CD W
"I"" >< ..... >< >< >< >< ><
- 0
en
N >< >< >< W >< >< ><
- .....
en 0
en
"I"" >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
co
It) >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
co
"l:t W W
"I"" ..... >< >< >< >< >< .....
- 0 0
CD
0 W W
N ..... >< >< >< ..... >< ><
- 0 0
It)
CD >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
It)
It) W
"I"" >< >< >< ..... >< >< ><
- 0
"l:t
"I"" >< >< >< >< >< >< W
- .....
"l:t 0
co W
"I"" ..... >< >< >< >< >< ><
- 0
C")
:! >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
N
"I""
N >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
"I""
tIJ
:iiW ...... ...... ('f) N LO LO ('f)
0:::0::: ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
Wa. LO LO LO LO LO LO LO
1->< 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
W ::J: ~
I-
<C ..J W W
:J 0::: m ..J ..J
::J: <C z <C ..J ~
W
tIJ ::J: Z N ::J: :ii
0 () <C ::i ~ ':i: i=
.., :E W
c u) :ii z J
<C ~ tIJ I- W
0::: ::J: 0::: W W :J N
W <C I- W a. Z ::J: I-
:ii tIJ tIJ W a. ~ <C jjj
<C :J <C 0::: 0 ..J
Z m W LL. ~ a. a. 3:
C)
z
i=
W
W
:ii
..J
<C
:ii
0:::
o
LL.
en W
N >< >< >< >< >< ><
- .....
"I"" 0
"I""
It) W W W
"I"" >< >< >< ><
- ..... ..... .....
"I"" 0 0 0
"I""
:! W >< W >< W >< ><
0 ..... ..... .....
"I"" 0 0 0
CD W
"I"" >< >< >< >< ..... >< ><
- 0
co
N >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
co
CD W W
N >< >< >< ..... >< >< .....
- 0 0
to-
to- W
"I"" ..... >< >< >< >< >< ><
- 0
CD
to- W W
"I"" ..... >< >< >< >< >< .....
- 0 0
It)
C") >< >< >< >< >< >< W
- .....
It) 0
N W W W
"I"" ..... >< >< ..... ..... >< ><
~ 0 0 0
en W W
N >< >< >< >< ..... >< .....
- 0 0
C")
"I""
"I""
-
N
tIJ
:iiW ...... ...... ('f) N LO LO ('f)
o:::~ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
Wa. LO LO LO LO LO LO LO
1-)( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
W ::J: ~
I-
<C ::i W W ..J
:J 0::: m ..J ..J
::J: <C z <C ..J ~
W
tIJ ::J: Z N ::J: :ii
0 () <C ::i ~ ':i: i=
.., W
C :ii u) u) :ii z J
0::: <C ~ u.i I- W
::J: 0::: W :J N
W <C I- W a. Z ::J: I-
:ii tIJ tIJ W a. ~ <C jjj
<C :J <C 0::: 0 ..J
Z m W LL. ~ a. a. 3:
C)
z
i=
W
W
:ii
..J
<C
:ii
0:::
o
LL.
Z
E
:J
....
o
:J
,,0
Q) 0
~z ....
u - Q)
X O>..c
UJ~E
~Q)Q)
S::Q)OO::::
c.....Q)EO::::
Q) s:: en C1l
en~..c<(o.....
Q)..c ZO
0:<(11 IIZ
II II ~:2 II
><OOZ
:>.:
UJ
~