Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-2011 Planning and Zoning Commission PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Thursday, April 21, 2011 - 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/Development Item REZ11-00001/SUB10-00016: Discussion of an application submitted by Rochester Ridge LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Overlay - Low Density Single Family (OPD-5) zone and a preliminary plat for Rochester Ridge, a 55-lot, 23.22 acre residential subdivision located at 2949 Rochester Avenue. D. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 7, 2011 E. Other F. Adjournment Informal Formal June 13 June 16 *Meeting cancelled due to holiday City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: April 21, 2011 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner RE: SUB10-00016/REZ11-00001 - Rochester Ridge The Commission reviewed this rezoning and subdivision application on February 3. At that time, the Commission voted to defer the application until a wetland mitigation plan was submitted. A wetland mitigation plan has been submitted by the applicant that addresses the off-site compensatory mitigation and the plans for the proposed storm water detention area. The Army Corps of Engineers will not allow wetland mitigation to be combined with stormwater management, thus the applicant has proposed splitting the mitigation between two off-site areas. The wooded wetlands will be mitigated on the Harvest Preserve property directly to the north of the proposed subdivision. The remainder of the wetlands will be mitigated within a wetland bank to be approved by the Corps. Below is the summary from the February 3 staff report. Given the topography and surrounding development, Staff believes that the general design of the subdivision is appropriate and is compatible with the neighborhood. However, the wetlands and other sensitive areas present a challenge. Staff believes that the overall benefit of improved stormwater management for the neighborhood, street connectivity, and infill development justifies the level of disturbance proposed. By the developer delicately balancing the infrastructure needs with the sensitive areas, this subdivision could be a good fit into the neighborhood. In the absence of a complete Wetland Mitigation Plan, it is premature to approve the subdivision and rezoning. Based on the initial review and observations, it is likely reasonable for the storm water management to be handled in the location of the wetlands, but without the Mitigation Plan a final determination cannot be made. In addition, a detailed maintenance plan and fee schedule will need to be developed and included in the legal papers for the Homeowner's Association to allow for future maintenance of Outlot A. The applicant also needs to determine a location for the remaining 147 replacement trees In Staff's opinion, the submitted wetland mitigation plan adequately addresses the needs of this area. Staff had a wetland specialist review the plan and she indicated April 15, 2011 Page 2 that the plan was sufficient, but has recommended a few minor changes to the plan so that it will function better and be more readily accepted by the Corps. These comments have been passed onto the applicant. A detailed maintenance plan and fee schedule will need to be developed and included in the legal papers for the Homeowner's Association to allow for the proper future maintenance of Outlot A. This will be done at the time of final plat. In addition, the applicant also will still need to determine a location for 134 trees. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance allows for these replacement trees may be planted to supplement reforestation of off-site woodland approved by the City. This designated off-site woodland must be either publicly owned property or property subject to a conservation easement. The applicant will need to work with the City Forester to find a location to plant the remainder of the replacement trees. Staff recommends that this be worked out prior to Council consideration Changes to the Plat Several other changes to the plat have occurred since February. These have been made to address comments made by the Commission and Staff. The changes are as follows: A third outlot has been created as a location for the mailbox cluster near lots 11 & 32. The conflict between the existing trees and new trees along Rochester Avenue has been clarified. Outlot A has been extended to allow for a drainage swale to extend from Lower West Branch Road into the stormwater basin. The boundaries of Lot 51 have been shifted so that no part of the stormwater detention facility easement is within the lot. Street grades and utilities have been changed to meet the requirements of the City Engineer. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ11-00001, rezoning of approximately 23.22 acres located at 2949 Rochester Avenue from Low Density Single Family (RS-5) to Planned Development Overlay - Low Density Single Family (OPD-5) and SUB10- 00016, a preliminary plat of Rochester Ridge, a 55-lot, approximately 23.22-acre residential subdivision with three outlots, located at 2949 Rochester Avenue, be approved with the following conditions: · The Wetland Mitigation Plan being approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; · A long term maintenance plan for the wetland/stormwater detention located in Outlot A by the Home Owners Association being included in the legal papers with the final plat; · The applicant working with the City Forester to find a location for the replacement trees that cannot be planted on site. This should be worked out prior to Council Consideration. April 15, 2011 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Plat 3. Site Plan for tree placement on a typical lot. Approved by: ~~.. Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development ~ tj ~ ~ ~ ~ tj \D .... o o o I o .... r:G :) ~ ........ .... o o o o I .... .... N w ~ (])-- ~Eg,... Q3E-eQ. =r:~~ en a: I C (J) en "'C ~ ~ (J) ~ Vl (J) ..c u ~ .. Z o .... ~ U o .... w ... .... ~ - It) c a. o <\\ ~C;0 --- nr= /~-~~) U 1Il-l ::::>ll. o ::::> <( /" ,..-- -- -., """ \'-. ? '--=-"-1( '\ \ " 11~~1II11 IQ IQ i"!51 :;in ~;~ ~~~~!i<c~i~~j j~\:l~ hd ~~, o.g3., ~5~i~3~ "co"' ~ ,< !.l z"." i:! ~ ,"I jji~ " ljlH\! iWi I !~~h m,! 1m!! I j ~ Iii ; ~ f! , !' Iii i n i ~ i ti e~~~ ,l" gql i ~~t~!i~ d!!,' I . : 1,1 ! ~ I ! :: I ~~~ l u i : I ~ ~~Il ~ I ~ Z o~g ~ 't't t ~ i! illli P Ii ~ ~o !"!l! 1,1 ~~i ~~~n ~ ~ ~ ~ E-< Z r:L1 ::g 0... o ......:l r:L1 > ~ ~ i;! ~ 0 ~i!~ ~ a ~ ~i'~ ~~2 r:L1~ " >~~ >--< E-< E-< >--< U3~U z~~ ~VJ~ Qr., >--< 3 ~ !;~~ -- ~ ~~~, s U 8~~ __ ii!~ ~O ~~ ~"l ~ I B ~ Z ill ~. I'd ~ G sg Il!l ;Illiih ~. ~ >--< III' ~ 'Ill! ;J,g ......:l 1111111,11 ~~'O r:L1 i"llil,l~1 S ~ g: l;lj :j'lili ~ G !lil illill! +n I ih ~ ~ 8G: ~.: ~~~~ SG~~ ~Ii!~~ I~~~ li:~ ~~~ ~~~ i~Ui!g: ~,~""l!' !:..~;lc' j~~~~~~:l :.gn~!~=~ ~~"l!:~l~ al~"'~l" ~..~!..r~..:: 'l-~'~ H ~:~i.!-l~ ','d!h- "!2~:hd~~ ~U~d,,.aw :sti I "I. 12! ~ ; ~i ..It! 'I I ., ~i '" N' ~l I: Olj" ~j" ;::j II \:\\ D !!',! n II "1 U II '\'10 I I II \ \ , ' D II ,I' ! ~~~ ' .; liii lip ~ I " Ii unM,~ il ~" "" ",' ",,"" "'''",'''''' ; ! III! JtftwO_cljl III! \ ~ II ..~~ I ..~..\ ~ i III i - !m....~..[ I III) "II ,i I,: q' i! ,,1.1, 'III' L.'iL "'Iii I Ii leI. /10 ~I' o ",' 'I; N' 16; LO! ~i" I "", [ ~; - ~i" ~;" <->I-! , \ '00,""" hill;' IlIid IN i\:!i .( ,...,: C")~ I! i u l/ll1 ~l~l<i!l~" [g iin:lr.fj;;i~nU~! I ~~II)I ~~~~hH h! ::i '" Sd ~ .~o I ,~o a. " "'" " u~ ~in.~'&~ r!ll!!!~ o ,h 11111 !m,S !Ill! llim ;:-..:.::.~-",--.....~ -"-'7.-. I i---u-q I I 1---------. .",_ I I - - -"'-. ~ 1\'1"", ...-IM ,/ ~ ih ~ ~ 8~: ~.: ~i~~ ~~~~ ei~~ B~~~ ,"<'i',:?7?' ,':: ,'--. " -,---".'1 ih~.li:~ ~~5 .9" m ~~~ '- ' , " '\ . ,-- - - " ' l"'~'j~~~ - I' j~ ! II i Ii II i Ii m Ii' il :11 II Ii Im:llH i I II i "1 , ., """"""'.""":' '" gill ! ..tfHl,_cijllli!! lid III; n - jtfH*"~"r Illll! :m LJ i~ ~m ~ I 11~~1Jl11 ~~~~mu~~ z ~ ~ ~~~ 1 !~~ j",~~ "50! "~o ~ ~ ~ ~ go( ~ a """ '" ~ ~ " 'I jj8~ " ~;:; E-< Z w ~~H ~0 Q~ ,,~ lfl ~ I;~ ~ ~ .~g ~ ~ ~ ~IH w~2 i ~~ ~- ~i~ >--< L"" E-< Ii<~ lflr:../::J>--< 8ft< ~~ ~ ~i!; ~;3: ei~~ Q~O ~U>--< E-< 0 !ii~ -" ~ot ~ "J 8.u ::: ~ ~~~ ~iilll" 0:::: Ii, ll!~~ <r: Ii- ~~~~d ~ ;;1 ;i;~ll' ~ il: 1~'ls :5 I;! ,1M, W II p!l!. 0 0:::: h.l':"ll ~ 0... I'll .,.l! 0 J I ii~I~!'I' ~ ~115i 1Il~ ~I Ul .l.t.... ./IM/ , ! ~~-.::: ~ " " ,-- ,'/ ",', ',', - -.--- " " . :' ' lu~ ~'< :::!~~ .- -----' " - " - - ~ - -' - - - - - ,- , \":'\\ \:,: -,---,'-~~ ~ ~~ ~-' - :,':. - :~"" '.- - -,' '/'" 1\\\\,.."" ....."... I.' '0 . //'j;',!*~,.~.. ::::::;r/ . ,,::,:c:::::.:::...., ";:'::<::::::::: ~ ; . ~ ~ ~ ~p I~ ~ ~ p ;!! . ,_ il-i ' i I,: ~!~ Ii 2!~:i2!jlli!III!!i\ II i I i )1 , , , ill!! I ill!~ili i 1l!llllilJ~ 1111' I!ll ! III:: !mw._DI~ IIII : I ;!l'. II ::.g, r -0 I o'*' II, :-:-: ill!! "!*tm'.~"llllll ) . 'i;1 W !~ i~ ~~ ! I ------ --------------- ------------- ---- --------------- ------------ -( 8W -8W c::> c::> 318818 N0131 6.00' 8W 8 8W- 6.00' 8.00' n '" '" '" '0 "' Ig L() c::> ------------~ I I I I '0 "' ;;j I I I ~ r~ ",25 ~ o~~ iIiI -~.::. ~!i3 :;;~ ; '" . >----~---~--~~_..~-_.- PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 2011 - 7:00 PM - FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes, Michelle Payne, Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Tabatha Ries-Miller, Sara Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Kirsten Frey, Matthew Lepic RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. DEVLOPMENT ITEM: SUB10-00014/SUB10-00015: Discussion of an application submitted by Craig Haesemeyer for a preliminary and final plat of Mackinaw Village Part 3, a 13-lot, 7.89 acre residential subdivision located north of Foster Road on Mission Point Road and Algonquin Road. Eastham noted that he had a conflict with this item and would not be participating in its consideration. Ries-Miller stated that the property had been rezoned in 2004 to allow for cluster development to protect environmentally sensitive areas. At that time, the preliminary plats for Parts 1, 2, and 3 were approved. In October of 2004, the final plats for Parts 1 and 2 were approved. In August 2004, the preliminary plat for Part 3 expired. Reis-Miller explained that access is provided to the site by Foster Road, with future access points routing off of Mission Point Road and Algonquin. In 2008, new subdivision regulations Planning and Zoning Commission April 7, 2011 - Formal Page 2 of 5 were approved. These regulations require 50-foot streets and five-foot sidewalks. When the preliminary plat for this property was originally approved, code required only 50-foot streets and four-foot sidewalks. Staff recommends that most of the development retain the 50-foot street and four-foot sidewalk standards. The exception to this is the north side of Algonquin where it acts as a collector street; staff recommends a 50-foot street in that area. In 2004, when the OPD5 preliminary plat was approved, staff recommended that front-facing garages be allowed due to a gas-line easement in the rear. The PUD requires that staff approve building design for those three lots. The neighborhood open spaces requirement was fulfilled during the platting of Parts 1 and 2. Freerks opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. Freerks invited a motion. Busard moved to approve SUB10-00014/SUB10-00015, application submitted by Craig Haesemeyer for a preliminary and final plat of Mackinaw Village Part 3 with the stipulations outlined in the staff report. Koppes seconded. Freerks said it is not unusual to find an application that has expired needs a little retro-fitting to be brought up to code requirements. Freerks said she thought this would be a nice addition to the area. Payne said that she likes the way Algonquin was transitioned in this application. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Eastham abstaining). REZONING ITEMS: REZ11-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa City Community School District and North Dodge Partners, LC for a rezoning from a Research Development Park (RPD) zone to Neighborhood Public (P1) zone for approximately 10.39 acres of property located at 1725 N. Dodge Street. Ries-Miller explained that this property was rezoned in 1988 for the Press Citizen. The school district is in the process of purchasing the property and plans to use it for its central administration offices, school board meeting place and a centralized food service operation. Ries-Miller explained that the zoning code states that property owned by the school district, county, city or state will be zoned P1. The current zoning allows or office, research, production and assembly services. The school district's proposed uses are consistent with that zoning designation; however, the P1 zone will allow for appropriate school-related uses. Because the development abuts residential property the zoning code requires that the maximum building height is consistent with the adjacent zone, which in this case is 35 feet. The code also requires the setbacks and screening requirements to be consistent with the adjacent residential zone. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as RPD, and if the P1 designation was approved, the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended to reflect the change in use. The Northeast Planning and Zoning Commission April 7, 2011 - Formal Page 3 of 5 and the North District plans both address this area as a corridor and entryway to the city and recommends maintaining and enhancing the area. The original rezoning in 1988 had a conditional zoning agreement (CZA) and site development standards; the purpose of which was to provide a high-quality aesthetic, enhancing the area's natural features. At this time, the school district is not proposing any major exterior changes for the site. Nevertheless, staff recommends that the rezoning be subject to a CZA that ensures sensitivity to the natural and environmental features on the site, and would require general compliance with the provisions outlined in the 1988 agreement. Specifically, staff recommends requirements that would: 1) keep the development of the site retained to the current boundaries, 2) maintain the steep slopes; 3) maintain the northern buffer, and 4) require staff approval of any future changes to the site. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning subject to the conditional zoning agreement. Freerks asked if the wording of the CZA would be more specific before it reached City Council, and Ries-Miller said that it would. She said that the school district and the City were negotiating the wording at present. Eastham asked if the school district would be required by law to comply with the conditions the City is imposing upon their zoning agreement. Greenwood Hektoen said that they would be. Eastham asked if there was not required stormwater management for the site due to the proximity of the Hickory Hill retention area. Howard explained that because this was not a subdivision, stormwater management requirements would be unchanged from what had been required at the time of the original rezoning. Freerks opened the public hearing. Kirsten Frey, 920 South Dubuque, spoke on behalf of the school district. She said that she was present as the school district's attorney and was available to answer questions. She noted that the district's repurposing of the building does not involve any large-scale construction or dirt moving. The only construction under consideration is the building of a room specifically for the purpose of holding school board meetings. Even that is being considered as a part of the existing footprint of the building. She also noted that the food service facility would not really involve cooking but more the transport of food out to schools. Frey said that she has received a draft of a CZA and agrees with the broad strokes of the agreement, though the exact wording still needs to be worked out. Frey said that she fully anticipates having a mutually agreeable CZA to take to City Council. Freerks asked if there was intention to create additional parking and Frey replied that there was not at this time. She said that the district would be amenable to having future parking additions reviewed by staff as part of site plan review and the CZA. Eastham noted that a number of school district meetings are held at night and asked if there were plans to add additional lighting in the parking lots. Frey said there was no plan for that at this time. There were no additional comments and the public hearing was closed. Weitzel motioned to approve REZ11-00006, an application to rezone 10.39 acres of land located at 1027 North Dodge from RDP to P1, subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement as approved by staff. Planning and Zoning Commission April 7, 2011 - Formal Page 4 of 5 Payne seconded. Koppes said that generally there is actual language for the Commission to review prior to voting on an application. Greenwood Hektoen said that the general parameters of the CZA have been set forth in this meeting. Koppes asked if the application would come back before the Commission if there were changes beyond the scope of what was discussed at the meeting. Greenwood Hektoen said that now would be the time for Commission input. Koppes said she would prefer not to offer blanket approval and would rather see the language worked out. Payne asked if Weitzel's motion had specifically addressed the four conditions discussed in the meeting. Weitzel said that he had worded it to include staff approval, not specific requirements. Koppes said that she just wished to ensure that the minutes reflected that the Commission had four specific requirements it wanted to see in the CZA. Freerks suggested that Koppes spell . those out for the record. Payne said that the specific requirements being discussed were: 1) that the development occur within the current boundaries, 2) steep slopes would be maintained, 3) the current buffer would be maintained, and 4) staff would approve any changes to the building or site. Weitzel said that he believed that the building footprint was still being negotiated. Busard said that he was comfortable with the City Council being left to approve the details of the plan, and noted that he believed the school district would be a good steward of the land. Weitzel noted that there was not a lot of room for the footprint to change because of the size of the plateau. Eastham said that he shares Koppes' concerns about voting on a CZA without having the specific language before the Commission. Eastham said that because the staff report indicates that the existing CZA will basically be maintained, he is more comfortable with it than he would otherwise be. Koppes said that she is not that concerned about this particular application; it is the general practice of voting without the details being worked out that concerns her. Payne said that the Commission probably would not do this in another case. Weitzel noted that the Commission should also make note of the plan to include the existing CZA as outlined in the staff report. Freerks said that the application is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Eastham noted that there are a number of other properties that have been zoned P1 that should result in Comprehensive Plan amendments. Ries-Miller said there were a couple more such properties coming before the Commission soon. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. REZ11-00007: Discussion of an application submitted by Stanley and Douglas, LLC for a rezoning to amend the Planned Development Overlay (OPD5) plan for Village Green Part XX, Lot 50 (Wellington Condominiums) to allow the addition of 3.car garages for approximately 2.35 acres of property located at Village Road and Wintergreen Drive. Howard said that this development was originally approved in December 2001 with two-car garages. The OPD was amended in January 2005 to allow three-car garages on a couple of dwelling units. This approval included a note that the third garage must be setback at least two feet from the other garage stalls in order to provide fa<;:ade articulation. Because those units sold very well, the developer is requesting permission to amend the OPD to allow for three-car garages. The OPD5 plan does allow for that kind of flexibility under certain conditions. Howard said that given that the area is already developed and the design is consistent with surrounding development, staff does not feel that allowing three-car garages will adversely affect the neighborhood or contradict the intent of the zoning code and Comprehensive Plan. Howard recommended that the two-foot setback for the third garage stall be retained. She noted that the lots are fairly wide and the development has a great deal of green space built into it. Planning and Zoning Commission April 7, 2011 - Formal Page 5 of 5 Busard asked how wide the garages are, and Howard recommended he address that questions to the applicant. Freerks opened the public hearing. Matt Lepic, 825 8t. Andrews Drive, identified himself as the applicant. He noted that the third garage stall is a one-car standard width, 12-feet. Koppes asked if the applicant had met with any of the neighbors concerning this. Lepic said that he had not as he had not really been through this process before. He said that he did speak with the homeowners' association and they were in favor of the changes. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. Eastham moved to approve REZ11-00007, a rezoning to amend the Planned Development Overlay plan of Village Green part 20 to allow three-car garages on four new units. Payne seconded. Weitzel said that the area can absorb extra cars, the articulation helps retain the attractiveness of the structures. Eastham noted that bicycles can also be stored in a third garage. Freerks said that the articulation was important and she thought the third garage would be compatible with the neighboring structures. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: February 28 and March 3. 2011: Payne moved to approve the minutes. Eastham seconded. The motion carried 7-0. OTHER: Freerks noted that Busard would be leaving the Commission, and Caroline Dyer would be replacing him as Commissioner. ADJOURNMENT: Payne motioned to adjourn. Koppes seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 7-0 vote. z Q en en :!:c :!:o:: 00 (.)(.) C)w zO:: zw~ o(.)~ NZC <eN Cc Zz <eW C)1- ~~ Z Z <e ..J Q. ,.... ~ x x x x x >< X M - X X X X X X X M ...... ..... N X X X X X X X M X X X X X X X N l/) ::;:w ...... ...... C'? C"l LO LO C'? o:::~ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... -- -- -- -- - -- -- wa.. LO LO LO LO LO LO LO ~>< 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w :J: ~ :EW (/) ~I- W Z ~ 0<( ..J <C- ~ (/)W ~..J 1->- W O::::J :J:..J 0::: Wm Ww :J..J N W <(:J: 1-0::: ttlz ~~ Z:J: :J:..J I- :E (/)(/) (/)<( ~~ <(<( W:E <( :JO <C:J: o:::z O::i ..J3: Z m.., wu u.<( ~W o.:E 0. ~ 3:i= C) Z i= W W :E ..J <( :E 0::: o u. co ~ x x x x x x X N "t- M - X X X X X X X "t- o N - X X X X X X X 0r- (/) :EW ...... ...... C'? C"l LO LO C'? 0:::0::: ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... -- -- -- -- - -- -- WOo LO LO LO LO LO LO LO 1-)( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W :J: >- I- <( ::i W W ..J :J 0::: m ..J ..J :J: <( Z ~ ..J ~ W (/) :J: Z :J: :E 0 U <( ::i u ':i i= .., W 0 :E en en :E Z ~ <( ~ u.i I- W 0::: :J: 0::: w :J ~ W <( I- W 0. Z :J: :E (/) (/) W 0. ~ <( W <( :J <( 0::: 0 ..J Z m W u. ~ 0. 0. 3: C) Z i= w w :E ..J <( :E 0::: o u. Z E ::l L- a ::l -00 Q) a ~Z L- <..l -- Q) X g>..o W:;:;E :;:'Q)Q) ..... c Q)::2: c.....Q)E Q) c (/) C1l (/)~::9a..... Q)..o......Za O:<(III1Z II II !:!:!::2: II ><OOZ )-: W ~