Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Agenda Packet 09.07.2022PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Formal Meeting – 6:00 PM Emma Harvat Hall Iowa City City Hall 410 E. Washington Street Agenda: 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda Development Items 4. Case No. SUB22-0006 Location: West of N. Scott Blvd and north of Rochester Avenue An application for a preliminary plat for Monument Hills, a 70.22 acre subdivision containing 65 single family lots, an existing communications tower on lot 66, and lot 65 intended to be a senior living community. 5. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: August 3, 2022 6. Planning and Zoning Information 7. Adjournment If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact Anne Russett, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5251 or arussett@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Formal: September 21 / October 5 / October 19 Informal: Scheduled as needed. STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: SUB22-0006 Monument Hills Prepared by: Parker Walsh, Associate Planner Date: September 7, 2022 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicants: Douglas Paul Monument Farms LLC PO Box 455 North Liberty, IA 52317 drpaul507@yahoo.com Joe Clark Monument Hills LLC gjc1974@outlook.com Contact Person: Michael Welch Welch Design and Development michael@welchdesigndevelopment.com Owner: Douglas Paul Monument Farms LLC PO Box 455 North Liberty, IA 52317 drpaul507@yahoo.com Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc. 3402 Rochester Ave Iowa City, IA 52245 Requested Action: Approval of preliminary plat Purpose: Construction of 64 single-family detached residences, 12 senior single-family units, 3 duplexes, and 29 senior multi-family units Location: West of N. Scott Boulevard and north of Rochester Avenue. Location Map: 2 Size: 70.22 Acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Undeveloped/Vacant Open Space, Low Density Single Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) and Interim Development - Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/ID-RS) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: ID-RS, Interim Development -Single- Family Residential South: RS-5, Low Density Single Family Residential East: ID-RS, Interim Development -Single- Family Residential West: RS-5, Low Density Single Family Residential Comprehensive Plan: Conservation Design, Single-Family, Townhome, and Small Apartment District Plan: Northeast Neighborhood Open Space District: NE1 Public Meeting Notification: Property owners within 500’ of the subject property received notification of the Planning and Zoning Commission public meeting. Subdivision signs were posted on the site at Rochester Ave. File Date: August 3, 2022 45 Day Limitation Period: September 17, 2022 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicants, Douglas Paul of Monument Farms LLC and Joe Clark of Monument Hills LLC, are requesting approval of a preliminary plat of Monument Hills (Attachment 3), a 70.22 acre plat containing 65 single family lots, one being the existing 3106 Rochester Avenue home referred to as lot 67, lot 65 intended for a senior living community, and lot 66 an existing communications tower. The subject property is located west of N. Scott Boulevard and north of Rochester Avenue. The plat shows the creation of Allison Way and Heron Drive off of Rochester Avenue, as well as a trail connection to Calder Park. On August 16, 2022 the City Council approved a rezoning for approximately 64.38 acres of the property to OPD/RS-5 and 0.31 acres to OPD/ID-RS to accommodate the existing communications tower. The rezoning included the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Owner shall: i. Dedicate a private access easement to the property hereby zoned OPD/ID-RS; ii. Dedicate a public access easement to allow a public trail from the proposed development to Calder Park in a form of agreement approved by the City Attorney and install a 10’ wide trail therein; iii. Dedicate to the City, without compensation, right-of-way along Rochester Ave and N. 3 Scott Blvd. b. The final plat for any of the above-described land shall incorporate traffic calming generally in locations shown on the attached Overall Concept Plan. The preliminary planned development overlay plan and sensitive areas development plan was approved as part of the rezoning. The preliminary plat includes approximately 5.54 acres as Outlot E located at the northwest corner of the property. This area was not included in the rezoning and is zoned Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID-RS). Due to the presence of sensitive resources on Outlot E the preliminary plat includes a preliminary sensitive areas development plan for this portion of the plat. The applicant conducted a Good Neighbor meeting on May 25, 2022 for the rezoning. ANALYSIS: Compliance with Comprehensive Plan: The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Northeast District Plan encourage conservation design in order to protect and preserve the natural features of Iowa City. They also have similar goals to enhance and provide pedestrian connections, such as bike paths, trails, and sidewalks, provide safe and pedestrian friendly street systems, and encourage housing diversity. The preliminary plat demonstrates a commitment to these goals by providing wide interconnected sidewalks, a roundabout to calm traffic, and a trail to connect residents to parks and open space. The subject plat proposes the creation of Allison Way and Heron Drive extending north off of Rochester Ave and intersecting at the roundabout. Lot 65 contains a private street for the proposed senior living community. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map identifies the subject property as appropriate for conservation design development. The Northeast District Plan identifies conservation design for residential development as a key feature of the Bluffwood Neighborhood. The project area is approximately 70.22-acres and roughly half of the area will remain undeveloped to preserve and protect woodlands, wetlands, and sensitive slopes. The Northeast District Plan also identifies this area appropriate for single-family residential, duplexes, townhouses, and small scale apartments located along arterial streets. The proposed development would provide pedestrian friendly connections and streets, connect the neighborhood to Calder Park, preserve natural features, and provide housing diversity consistent with the visions and policy of the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and Northeast District Plan. Subdivision Design: The proposed subdivision contains 65 single family lots, including the existing 3106 Rochester Ave home, an existing communications tower as lot 66, and lot 65. Lot 65 will be the senior living community, which was approved during the planned development overlay rezoning and contains 12 single-family units, 3 duplexes, and 29 multi-family units. As required by the conditional zoning agreement, the applicant proposes a 20’ private access easement to lot 66, the existing communications tower, in order to maintain access with the construction of a new street network. The preliminary plat proposes the creation of Allison Way and Heron Drive, which will connect at a roundabout and proposes no stubs for future connection opportunities. Extending east off of Heron Drive will be a private street for the senior living facility. The applicant also proposes a loop street located in the northwest corner of the development. A 10’ wide trail within a 20’ public access easement is identified on the plat between lots 33 and 34 at the end of the loop street and runs through Outlot E to Calder Park. As outlined in the conditional zoning agreement the developer will be required to build the trail connection to Calder Park. The conditional zoning agreement also requires the dedication of right of way as shown on the preliminary plat along 4 Rochester Ave and N. Scott Blvd, with the vision of a future roundabout at this intersection being constructed by the City. Additionally, the conditional zoning agreement requires traffic calming features with the intention of maintaining a pedestrian friendly street due to Allision Way exceeding the subdivision preferred range of 300-600 feet without an intersecting street to break up the block length. The subject plat shows two traffic calming features in the form of raised crosswalks on Allison Way to break up the length of the street prior to intersecting with Heron Drive. The subject plat also proposes an interconnected sidewalk system and the extension of a sidewalk stub located west of the subject property constructed along the north side of Rochester Ave to N. Scott Blvd. The subject plat notes that conservation easement areas will be located within Outlot A, B, C, and E to protect existing sensitive areas such as wetlands, woodlands, slopes, and Ralston Creek. Approximately 50% of the development area will be placed in conservation easements, preserving existing sensitive areas. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The preliminary plat includes a preliminary sensitive areas development plan for Outlot E due to the presence of wetlands, woodlands, slopes, and a stream corridor. Again, this area was not included in the preliminary sensitive areas development plan approved at the time of the rezoning. Additionally, an archaeological survey of the subject property did not recommend further archeological work on the site. Outlot E will include the construction of a trail to provide access to Calder Park, including the stream crossing, and sanitary sewer. No other development will be allowed within Outlot E. Per 14-5I-2D of the City Code certain uses are allowed within sensitive areas and sensitive areas buffers including trails, stream crossings and essential public utilities when the improvements are not detrimental to the functioning of the sensitive areas. The stream crossing impacts will be analyzed as part of the construction documents at final platting. Reducing impacts to sensitive areas will be part of staff’s review. The sanitary sewer will connect to the Ralston Creek Trunk sewer. The portion of the sanitary sewer that will pass under Ralston Creek will be bored in order to reduce impacts. Again, this will be reviewed at the time of final platting. The proposed trail and sanitary sewer line will also minimize impacts to sensitive features because it avoids an existing conservation easement area that contains protected wetlands. Neighborhood Open Space: According to section 14-5K of the City code, dedication of public open space or fee in lieu of land dedication is addressed at the time of final platting for residential subdivisions. Based on the 64.37 acres of RS-5 zoning, the developer would be required to dedicate 1.38 acres of land or pay a fee in-lieu. Staff originally requested that the applicant dedicate land to expand the size of Calder Park. The applicant was not interested in dedicating that land, changed the boundary of the proposed rezoning, and requested to pay a fee in-lieu instead. However, the portion of land that was excluded from the rezoning has been included as Outlot E in the subdivision and is the location of the trail connection to Calder Park. The applicant will still be required to pay a fee in lieu of a public open space dedication. Stormwater Management: The storm sewer system will capture runoff and convey this runoff to existing drainage ways. Public Works has reviewed and approved the stormwater management plan. Water Distribution System: A water pressure analysis was done (Attachment 4) for the subject property at the recommendation of Public Works due to relatively low static pressure in this area. Public Works approved and agreed with the analysis that the current system would be capable of providing the necessary flows and pressure needed to accommodate the new demand of Monument Hills development. Infrastructure Fees: Required fees include a water main extension fee of $503.57 per acre and a 5 sanitary sewer tap on fee of $1,796.50 per acre for the 70.22 acre subdivision. SUMMARY: As conditions of the rezoning, the owner will be required to dedicate a private access easement to the communications tower on lot 66; dedicate a public access easement to allow a public trail from the proposed development to Calder Park and install a 10’ wide trail, including the stream crossing; dedicate additional right of way at the intersection of Rochester Avenue and North Scott Boulevard for future public improvements by the City; and incorporate traffic calming features in general locations as shown on the preliminary plat. The Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan incorporates all of these conditions. NEXT STEPS: Upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the preliminary plat will be considered by the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SUB22-0006, an application submitted by Douglas Paul of Monument Farms LLC and Joe Clark of Monument Hills LLC for a Preliminary Plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for Monument Hills, a 70.22 acre subdivision containing 65 single family lots, one being the existing 3106 Rochester Avenue home referred to as lot 67, lot 65 intended for a senior living community, and lot 66 an existing communications tower located west of north Scott Boulevard and north of Rochester Avenue. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Preliminary Plat and SADP 4. Preliminary Plat Narrative and Water Pressure Analysis Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services NMOUNT VERNONDRHICKORY TRL LOW E R WEST B RANCH R D T A MAR A C K TRL ALLEY ALLEY WINDMILL PLLARC H L N EVERGREE N PL LA K E FORE S T A V EVAILCIR WESTBURY DRGREENM OUNTAIN D R M I DDL E BU R Y R D OBERLIN STTETON CIRHI C K O R Y P L ROCHESTER A V EAUDUBON P L H ER O N CI R WESTBU R Y C TEASTBURY DR N WESTMINSTERS TEVERGREENCTBOYD CT TUL A N ECTAMHURSTSTGOLDFINCHCIR GLASTO N BU R Y STBLUFFWOODDRLOWERWEST BRA N C H R DST THOMASCTB L UFFWOOD LNCOLUMBIA DR TULANEAVE HARVEST RD SEN S CO T T BLVDSUB22-0006 Monument Hillsµ 0 0.1 0.20.1 Miles Prepared By: Emani Brinkman Date Prepared: August 2022 An application submitted by Welch Design and Development, on behalf of Monument Farms LLC. for a preliminary plat of approximately 70.22 acres of property located west of N. Scott Boulevard and north of Rochester Avenue. Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 3, 2022 – 6:00 PM – FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Nolte STAFF PRESENT: Emani Brinkman, Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett, Esther Tetteh OTHERS PRESENT: Conner Moellenbeck, Jason Walton, Brian Vogel, Dan Fishburn, Mark Gedlinske RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-0 the Commission recommends approval of the application submitted by Connor Mollenbeck for a rezoning from High Density Multi-Family Residential with a Historic Preservation (OHD/RM-44) to Neighborhood Commercial with a Historic Preservation Overlay (OHD/CN-1) for a 1,470 square foot property located at 518 Bowery Street be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. Any commercial use may not be open to the public between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. By a vote of 6-0 the Commission moved to recommends approval of REZ22-0001, a proposal to rezone approximately 27.68 acres of land located east of Camp Cardinal Blvd and west of Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development - Research Park (ID-RP) zone to Low Density Multifamily Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) zone subject to the following condition: 1. Prior to issuance of building permit, Owner shall contribute 50% of the cost of upgrading Camp Cardinal Road to City standards. This contribution shall include 50% of the cost of construction of the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. The Commission also recommends approval of SUB22-0001, a preliminary plat for Cardinal Heights. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CASE NO. REZ22-0010: Location: 518 Bowery Street An application for a rezoning of approximately 1,470 square feet of land from High Density Multi- Family Residential zone with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/RM-44) to Neighborhood Commercial zone with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/CN-1). Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 2 of 15 Brinkman began the staff report showing an aerial map of the property for the proposed rezoning and also the zoning map to show how this fits in the surrounding area. The applicant is seeking a rezoning from High Density Multi-Family Residential with a Historic District Overlay to Neighborhood Commercial with a Historic District Overlay and the applicant intends to open a coffee shop at the subject property. The building was originally constructed sometime between 1856 to 1864 as a grocery store, and the property has continued to be used for nonresidential purposes on the ground floor throughout its existence. In 2012 the historic designation was designated for the building and that protects the building from demolition as well as exterior modifications that would diminish its historic integrity. Also in 2012 it was granted a special exception to allow for sales oriented retail uses. In 2013 a special exception application was submitted to convert the sales-oriented retail use to a coffee shop but that application was ultimately withdrawn. In 2016 it was granted a special exception for general office and commercial retail. Today, since the building has remained vacant for over a year, the property has lost its non-conforming use status and can’t receive a special exception for a different non- conforming use. The current zoning is High Density Multi-Family Residential, which allows multi-family dwellings and group living quarters near the University and downtown, but the zoning does not allow any single family or duplex dwellings. The zone allows, as provisional use, hospitality-oriented retail such as hotels, guest houses, meetings or event facilities, but does not allow any other retail or commercial use. This property does not meet any of the minimum dimensional standards for lot requirements, or front setback or side setbacks. The proposed rezoning is Neighborhood Commercial with a Historic District Overlay and encourages neighborhood shopping areas that are conveniently located and allows uses that are restricted in size to promote smaller neighborhood serving businesses and to limit adverse impacts on nearby residential areas. Unlike the RM-44 zone, the CN-1 zone does not have any minimum lot area requirements nor a minimum frontage requirement. For the Historic District Overlay the property is a local historic landmark and is listed in the National Historic Registry of Historic Places and so any changes to the exterior would require review by the Historic Preservation Commission. The Historic District Overlay will still apply if the underlying zone is changed to CN-1. Brinkman shared a list of the allowed uses for CN-1 zones and noted the property could have provisional uses such as group households or multi-family dwellings, general animal related commercial use, indoor commercial recreational use, eating or drinking establishments, office use for both general and medical, retail uses including alcohol sales oriented retail, hospitality oriented retail, personal services oriented and sales oriented retail, also basic utility uses, daycare uses, specialized educational facilities, parks and open spaces uses, or communication transmission facility uses. Brinkman next reviewed the rezoning criteria and how the proposed development fits in with the policy vision at the City. The rezoning review criteria is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with existing neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan shows this as an area with 25 and over dwelling units per acre, but there's also language that encourages sustainable and walkable neighborhoods and envisions Neighborhood Commercial uses as contributing to the quality of life within neighborhoods and the growth of existing locally owned businesses and infill development. {Padron joined the meeting} Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 3 of 15 The Central District Plan Future Land Use map shows the area as high-density multifamily redevelopment but due to this subject property’s local landmark status demolition of the building will not happen unless the building was structurally unsound. The Central District Plan does acknowledge several properties were originally developed with buildings that served as Neighborhood Commercial such as grocery stores and have remained over time as non- conforming commercial uses. The Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan also has language to support this, specifically goal two and goal five of their plan states to protect historic resources through efficient legislation and regulatory measures and adopt strategies to conserve historic neighborhoods with reflecting their organic development, historical roles and traditions, modern needs and economic health and stability. Regarding compatibility of existing neighborhoods, this property has contained a grocery store, retail businesses and offices, all of which are non-conforming uses. These previous uses were compatible of the surrounding neighborhood character, and the building being in a high-density area allows for pedestrian traffic for people who live in the immediate area. Given its closeness to residential uses, staff does recommends a condition that commercial uses may not be open to the public between the hours of 10pm and 7am and this will help to ensure the commercial use of the property remains compatible with nearby residential properties and to minimize activities that may be injurious to the use and enjoyment of residential uses in the vicinity. A similar condition was also recommended for Deluxe Bakery’s rezoning and the applicant has agreed to these conditions. As for parking, the property has two parking spots and depending on the floor plan, which is yet to be determined, the proposed use could require four off street parking spaces. Staff has notified the applicant that the property is eligible for a parking reduction via a special exception due to the local historic landmark status and one may be needed for the proposed coffee shop. As for traffic, any business on this property will have to rely on customers coming on foot or bike from the surrounding neighborhood. The neighborhood has easy pedestrian and biking access and is close to the University and downtown. Upon recommendation for next steps upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission is a public hearing will be scheduled for consideration by City Council. Staff recommends that the application submitted by Connor Mollenbeck for a rezoning from High Density Multi-Family Residential with a Historic Preservation (OHD/RM-44) to Neighborhood Commercial with a Historic Preservation Overlay (OHD/CN-1) for a 1,470 square foot property located at 518 Bowery Street be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. Any commercial use may not be open to the public between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Hensch began with a couple of questions, first is the time limitation of 10pm to 7am statutory, or just something staff proposed because for coffee shop 7am seems a little bit late in the morning and people heading off to work might want coffee at 6am. Brinkman replied that yes, that time limitation was following the noise ordinance that the City uses and then the applicant agree to those times. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 4 of 15 Hensch asked regarding the parking lot that's located due north of there, is that owned by the applicant and is that parking available for this business or is that for different use. Brinkman stated that parking lot is not owned by the applicant. Elliott asked if there is sufficient open space to allow for an outdoor café and is the applicant planning on that. Brinkman will allow the applicant to answer that. Hekteon stated in regard to Hensch’s question on the noise issue, the Code says that no person shall load/unload, open/close, handle boxes, crates, containers, etc. outdoors between the hours of 10pm and 6am so as to create noise disturbance across the property line in a residentially zoned property. And then it states no construction activity between 10pm to 7am as well as no garbage collection before 7am. Townsend noted there was a good neighbor meeting but no one attended, so she is assuming that the folks around it were okay with this. Padron agreed 6am seems to be a better opening time for a coffee shop. Hekteon noted if the Commission wants to change the condition to 6am that could be a recommendation. Hensch opened the public hearing. Conner Moellenbeck (Daydrink Coffee) came forward to answer questions. Hensch asked about the time and would they rather open at 6am or 7am. Moellenbeck replied that is a great question, they currently open at 8am at the Ped Mall location, however 7am to 7:30am is ideal. They are not against opening after seven as they don’t see a lot of business until 8:30am or 9am because it is mostly students and some retired people. Elliott asked about outdoor space noting right in front of the building there is a little bit of outdoor space. Moellenbeck noted they would like to have between four and six seats right in front of the building depending on what they can do. There is also some potential in the back, but they front is their main objective right now. Hensch closed the public hearing. Craig moved to Staff recommend that the application submitted by Connor Mollenbeck for a rezoning from High Density Multi-Family Residential with a Historic Preservation (OHD/RM-44) to Neighborhood Commercial with a Historic Preservation Overlay (OHD/CN-1) for a 1,470 square foot property located at 518 Bowery Street be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. Any commercial use may not be open to the public between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Elliott seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 5 of 15 Craig stated if there is support, she would like to amend her motion to allow more flexibility for other businesses that may come in and include an allowable opening time of 6:00 a.m. Elliott seconded the amendment. Craig is very excited to see something going back in this building, it was sad to see it sit empty. Hensch agreed noting it's a perfect use to have as Neighborhood Commercial and supports it. A vote was taken and the motion with amendment passed 6-0. CASE NO. REZ22-0001 & SUB22-0001: Location: East of Camp Cardinal Blvd and west of Camp Cardinal Rd An application for a rezoning of approximately 27.68 acres of land from Interim Development- Research Park (ID-RP) zone to Low Density Multi-Family zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) and an application for a preliminary plat of Cardinal Heights, a residential subdivision with 22 duplex lots and 1 multi-family lot. Tetteh began the staff report showing the area of the site which is east of Cardinal Boulevard and west of Camp Cardinal Road. The subject property is currently zoned ID-RP which allows only plant related agriculture or hold a property until it is prepared for a use to be identified. North of the site is zoned RS-8, to the east is RS-5 and ID-RS and west is RM-12 with a Planned Development Overlay. The applicant is proposing to extend Duck Creek Road to provide access to the development. The proposal is to rezone 27.68 acres of land to Low Density Multi-Family zone with a Planned Development Overlay. The RM-12 zone provides for high-density single- family housing and low-density multifamily housing. It also provides for diversity in the housing types. The Planned Development Overlay allows a mixture of uses; however additional criteria set forth in the multifamily sites development standards must be met. The preliminary OPD and Sensitive Areas Development Plan proposes a total of 23 lots and the applicant is proposing 22 duplexes, 4 townhomes and 30 multifamily units. The 4 townhomes and 30 multifamily units will be located on lot 23 and the 22 duplexes will be located on lots 1 to 22. The development is also proposing a cul-de-sac and one loop street for traffic circulation on the site. The preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan also includes woodlands, wetlands and slopes. Tetteh stated Planned Development Overlay applications are reviewed in compliance with the following standards according to Article 14-3A of the Iowa City Ordinance. The first standard is the density and design is compatible with and/or complementary to the adjacent development, second is the development will not to overburden existing streets and utilities, third is the development will not adversely affect views, property values and privacy, fourth is the land use and building types will be in the public interest. The rezoning is also reviewed according to two criteria, first consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and two, compatibility with the existing neighborhood. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 6 of 15 The first criteria as density and design is compatible with adjacent development. The OPD/RM- 12 zone allows 15 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is proposing 3.1 dwelling units per acre with 78 dwelling units for the entire site. They are also proposing two family uses which are duplexes and multifamily uses which will be an extension of the existing duplex and multifamily developments in the area. The preliminary OPD also shows garage fronts in the front facade of the of the duplexes. The OPD requires that access to garages needs to be from an alley or the rear of buildings, however if the garages are accessed from the front of the buildings, they need to be recessed in order not to dominate the streetscape. The applicant is aware of this and this will also be checked at building permit and site plan stages. Tetteh showed a rendering of the proposed 30-unit multifamily building. The development is proposing 10,000 square feet of private open space on site for the townhomes and the 30-unit multifamily which exceeds the required 580 square feet. They are also providing 300 square feet of onsite open space for each duplex. The applicant is also proposing to construct Maclan Court and Maclan Loop to provide access to the site. The development will be accessed of off Camp Cardinal Blvd through an extension of Deer Creek Road. A secondary access will be provided by Camp Cardinal Road in future when it is constructed, and a traffic circle will also be constructed at that time. As a condition of the rezoning staff is recommending that prior to the issuance of building permits the owner contributes 50% of the cost of upgrading Camp Cardinal Road to City standards. This 50% will include the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. Regarding the second criteria, the subject property is serviced by both sanitary sewer and water. The stormwater management requirements are being met in the existing stormwater regional detention basin west of Camp Cardinal Boulevard. The development is also proposing a new stormwater management detention basin in outlot B. The development consists of two outlots, approximately 16.61 acres of land, to be placed in a conservation easement. For the third criteria Tetteh noted the closest neighbors will be to the north and southeast of the subject property. To the north they are separated by approximately 13.7 acres of woodland in outlot A. Southeast of the property is also separated by woodland in outlot B. This development will not impact neighboring residents more than any conventional development. Moving on to criteria number four, land use and building types will be in the interest of the public. The applicant is not requesting for any waivers from the underlying zoning requirements. The proposal also incorporates two-family uses and multifamily uses which will provide housing diversity in the housing types. They are also proposing 60% of the site area will be contained in the outlots A and B. The proposed developments balances environmental protection with the need for increased housing. Tetteh stated there is not a district plan for the proposed site and the Future Land Use map of the Comprehensive Plan allows 8 to 16 dwelling units per acre. As noted earlier, the applicant is proposing 3.1 dwelling units per acre, which is below what is allowed. The Comprehensive Plan also encourages diversity in the housing types the applicant is proposing 2-family uses and multifamily uses. The Plan also encourages the preservation of sensitive areas and guide developments away from such areas. As noted the development is proposing to preserve 60% of the site area. The Plan encourages pedestrian oriented development and attractive and functional streetscapes that make it safe, convenient and comfortable to walk. This development Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 7 of 15 proposes sidewalks around the proposed streets and also connects to the existing sidewalk system around Camp Cardinal Boulevard. The Comprehensive Plan discourages cul-de-sacs however, the due to sensitive features on the site it is necessary. Regarding compatibility with the existing neighborhood, to the north the sites there are duplexes, which the applicant is proposing as well. To the east there are multifamily uses and to the west are growth sites which will provide for new multifamily buildings. Tetteh noted the proposed development will impact wetlands and man-made slopes, hence the level two sensitive areas review as required by the Commission and City Council. The sensitive areas ordinance requires 100 feet buffer between wetlands and developments, wetland buffer averaging may be permitted when necessary, and as justified by a wetland specialist. The applicant is proposing a wetland buffer averaging to the northeast wetland to accommodate leveling of some lots. The applicant is also proposing a wetland reduction buffer for the southeast wetland which also needs to be justified by a wetland specialist. The size consists of approximately 0.90 acres of wetland and 0.059 acres are proposed to be disturbed. The applicant is proposing to mitigate the wetlands on site by the ratio of 1:2 for the northeast wetland and 1:1.5 for the southeast wetland. The site also consists of critical slopes of which there are 7.55 acres of critical slopes, of which 1.46 acres are proposed to be impacted, which is 19.3%. The City Code allows up to 35% of disturbance. There are also 1.26 acres of protected man-made slopes of which 0.13 acres will be impacted. The site has 22.9 acres of woodland, the proposed development will impact 12.78 acres, which is 55.8%. An additional 3.43 acres will remain unimpacted but will be located in a 50-foot wetland buffer area. A total 10.12 acres of woodland would be preserved which is 44.2%. The required woodland retention rates is 20%, which this development is above. Staff reached out to the state archaeologist, and it was noted that a study was conducted in 2004 and there are no current concerns with the site. Russett stated related to the preliminary plat portion of this application, Tetteh covered most of that, but Russett wanted to summarize what the applicant is proposing with the platting. Again, it's 22 duplex lots and one multifamily lot. Outlot A to the north of the site is around 13 acres and that will be for open space which will be maintained by the homeowner’s association. Outlot B to the southern end of the site will be for stormwater management and open space to be managed by the homeowner’s association. There will be a conservation easement area which will be land that will be protected from development in the future. Staff has received several questions on how stormwater will be managed, stormwater will be accommodated by the existing regional basin located on the west side of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and by an onsite stormwater basin on the southeast corner of the site and outlot B. Russett showed an image that was prepared by Hall & Hall Engineering to show the location of the site that will drain to the onsite basin and the general direction of water flow. The regional basin was designed to accommodate future development in this area including the site of the proposed rezoning. The City stormwater specialist visited the site this afternoon and he noted that all basin inlets structures are open and their discharge drainage ways show no signs of erosion. He also took a look at the creek at the northern end of the site to examine any signs of erosion and did note that the slope north of the basin there's about 15 feet of the area that does show signs of erosion on the north end of the creek. He was only able to make it in about 150 feet from Camp Cardinal Boulevard because the area is heavily vegetated but for the most part, the creek is heavily vegetated and there weren't any signs of erosion except for that portion on the north end. Public Works staff has reviewed the Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 8 of 15 preliminary stormwater management plan as well as the plat and those have been approved. In terms of neighborhood open space, the City does require the dedication of public open space or a fee in lieu at the time of planning. Based on the 27 acres in the RM-12 zone, the developer would be required to dedicate 1.87 acres of land to the City or pay a fee in lieu of land dedication, and in this case that fee in lieu would be appropriate. Russett noted staff received several pieces of correspondence from neighboring residents. This information has been passed on to the Commission. There were two letters expressing support for the rezoning and preliminary plat. There were several pieces of correspondence that expressed concerns related to traffic, impact on property values, stormwater, woodland impacts etc. Staff recommends approval of REZ22-0001, a proposal to rezone approximately 27.68 acres of land located east of Camp Cardinal Blvd and west of Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development - Research Park (ID-RP) zone to Low Density Multifamily Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) zone subject to the following condition: 1.Prior to issuance of building permit, Owner shall contribute 50% of the cost of upgrading Camp Cardinal Road to City standards. This contribution shall include 50% of the cost of construction of the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. Staff also recommends approval of SUB22-0001, a preliminary plat for Cardinal Heights. In terms of next steps, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission staff will request that Council set a public hearing for September 6. Hensch asked if for the erosion on the north creek, can there be some requirements made to a restoration of that erosion. Russett noted the sanitary sewer is going to run along the creek and needs to be constructed. Public Works staff has approved to provide sanitary sewer to the west side of Camp Cardinal Boulevard and when that gets installed and the City receives construction drawings for the layout, Public Works will be looking at things like erosion and what needs to be mitigated. Hensch asked if there will be a sidewalk on the east side of the development, particularly from the new street with the proposed roundabout down to where Gathering Place Lane would be so if somebody lived there and wanted to walk to that church they could. It seems like a good idea if they're going to build a road there to put a sidewalk. Russett said they are asking the applicant to contribute to the construction of Camp Cardinal Road so it would be a City project and at that time the City would install a sidewalk. Hensch asked about the measurement from the north property line to the closest residential lot in the development north of there. Russett replied it is 408 feet. Hensch noted he was out there today and actually saw the inspector, he was looking around at elevations and it looks like north looking south there's a decrease in elevation, then it goes back Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 9 of 15 up. So if someone is a resident on the north side in the existing houses what they would see now there is mature trees. Hensch noted in the landscaping plan they will put in coniferous trees along where that sanitary sewer is, but the brush is so thick there, will the trees go in after the sanitary sewer goes in. Russett confirmed that was correct. Hensch noted there wasn’t a grading plan so it can be assumed that no area outside of the 23 lots will be graded, Russett confirmed that. Hensch noted regarding the topography and the flow of water, it doesn't seem like water can flow uphill so how is that storm drainage going to occur. Russett noted it is higher in that area and to the northwest it gets lower so water will be flowing north and then west and into the basin. Craig stated the plan keeps referring to 22 duplex lots and one multifamily lot but what about those townhouses, are they on the multifamily lot. Russett confirmed they are included in the multifamily lot. Craig asked just for a little bit of history because she is always sympathetic to people and it was evident from some of the comments that they got that say homeowners were told certain things when their homes were built about zoning, and why things are zoned in sort of a holding place for development to come. Russett noted it is because the area wasn't ready because of infrastructure for development at the time. Most of the interim development zones ultimately get rezoned at the time of development. Craig had a question about the creek and the erosion, after the sewer line is put in and any mitigation is done for the creek erosion, after that if more erosion were to occur, it is the homeowner’s responsibility to fix it. Russett noted if the creek is on private property then the private property owners are responsible. Hensch noted in one or two of the letters there's concern about trees that were cut down and were never removed, are those in areas that are controlled by the HOA's. This Commission always has concerns about HOAs who don't take care of their outlots and do the preventative maintenance that needs to be done in these areas. Padron asked about the multifamily building with 30 units, on the floorplan it shows like a three- story building, but then on the elevation it shows as a four-story building. Russett noted it would only be allowed to be 35 feet which would be no more than three stories. The maximum height in the zone is 35 feet. Townsend asked if any of those 78 units will be affordable housing. Not that Russett is aware of. Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 10 of 15 Elliott asked will people in on Ryan Court be able to see these buildings. Russett is not sure, they don't really have a any type of visual study that was done. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jason Walton (Director of Development, Navigate Homes) has read the report prepared by the staff and agrees and on behalf of Navigate Homes would ask the Planning and Zoning Commissioners to approve this plan as followed by the City's zoning ordinances. Signs asked about the proposed multifamily building, it's proposed as a 30-unit complex with 43 total bedrooms, so he is assuming a bunch of one-bedroom units being proposed. Are these units going to be rental units or owner-occupied units. Walton is not sure at this point, it depends on what the market shows but it could be a variety of both. Signs noted on the backside of that multifamily building there seems to be some slope adjustments being done there. Will there be a fairly substantial retaining wall there. Walton confirmed there will be a retaining wall on the backside of the building where there parking. He believes it will be an 8-foot wall. Brian Vogel (Hall and Hall Engineers) answered the question regarding elevation, that cul-de-sac on the north end will be around 755 elevation, and the south property line is around 695 so there's about 60 feet elevation difference from the property line to that cul-de-sac. Hensch asked what the distance from the multifamily structure to those houses on the north side is. Vogel replied it will be at least 800 feet or so. Hensch asked that because the concern for neighbors and understand this is always their view. They're very used to the view they've had for years. People are vociferously opposed to development because of their view shed changes. Elliott asked what the people on Ryan Court will see, these buildings or trees. Vogel explained Ryan Court is 50 feet lower than this development area but there is woodland between them and the development. Hensch asked regarding the trees they're going to plant after the sanitary sewer is put in. The landscaping plan notes coniferous trees but how tall will they get. Vogel responded they will be full trees that should get fairly tall. Dan Fishburn (832 Ryan Court) and his wife Cindy reside in a duplex that would be the closest to the development on Ryan Court. He also wrote a letter but wants to review some of their concerns. First a couple of comments on the testimony, that 400 feet is going to be affected by elevation. He doesn’t know exactly how far above them those those northerly duplexes are going to be in the development but it's not a flat surface, they're going to be significantly higher than his home and he is sure in the wintertime after the leaves come down, there's going to be definite sight to those northerly units and they're asking that those two lots that contain two buildings be eliminated from the plan for that reason. To conclude that there isn't going to be any effect on privacy rights or property values is incorrect. The issue with the trees that were cut down, that was not an HOA issue. Southgate came in on their property three and a half years ago and took Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 11 of 15 all the trees down in the area where they're going to put that sanitary sewer in, and they're still there. These are large, mature trees. They don't feel that Southgate has been a particularly good steward of the environment. They promised at the HOA meeting two and a half years ago that those trees would be removed, particularly in the wintertime they are very unsightly. The creek erosion, Fishburn is not sure if this creek is on the new HOA property or if it's on theirs but believes it will be on the new Property Owners Association. That creek is served solely as drainage for the regional basin on across the street. Fishburn noted in his letter they're concerned about drainage and staff indicated that they're relying on a stormwater management plan that was done quite some time ago and he wonders does that take into consideration all of the development at Cardinal Point West, which has taken place across the street and has been entirely recontoured. And the other parcel that was recently rezoned, which will be for Growth Condominiums LLC, with two large buildings, all of that slopes downhill to that regional basin. Fishburn’s concern is coming down that hill and they think that green space to the top of the hill should be preserved and those two units on the north end should be eliminated because they're going to be within their view as that's a very steep hill there. They'd like to see that green space preserved, it has all mature trees on it, as far as putting these new trees in that may help somebody 50 years from now when those trees grow up to be 50 or 60 feet tall but in the short run, new trees aren't going to block their view at all. He will be long gone before those new trees they that they're putting in will provide any privacy, but they do appreciate it. Their area that adjoins the outlot, that outlot does not have any trees, that's just bare land and it’s kind of developed into a natural prairie. They're concerned about the sightlines. Fishburn also did say something in his letter about the traffic situation, which he realizes isn't really their issue but sooner or later, Camp Cardinal Boulevard traffic is going to need to be addressed in terms of speed limits with bicycle riders and heavy construction traffic. Overall they are concerned about the sightlines and concerned about the stormwater management plan. Fishburn pointed to what happened in St. Louis and Kentucky the last two weeks and if they have a rain event like that, is that basin going to be able to handle it or are they going to be in a situation where they could potentially have water come over that road. On Ryan Court there are seven buildings with 14 owners, they're all duplexes in that circle there, are all adjacent property owners. They would ask that the Commission take all these matters into consideration, and at the very least modify the plan. Mark Gedlinske (834 Ryan Court) stated he is in the same duplex that Dan Fishburn is in and agree absolutely with all of his comments and notes. Gedlinske would like to highlight a couple things, his concern, just like Fishburn’s, is on the northern end. Those in that part of the cul-de- sac that he’ll be looking at from his house. He can stand out on his deck right now and look straight across at the base of those trees, the trees that will be gone, and duplexes will be built there. So he will look out the back of his house, look up the hill, and he'll be able to see the people sitting on their decks in their backyards, and they'll be able to look and watch everything he's doing in his house. So from a privacy perspective, he certainly thinks this is reducing his privacy, his view, probably his property values. So the statement that was made that this is not going to have an effect, he just doesn’t understand that at all. Anytime there is that drastic removal of the trees, it's just a painful to see. He also would like to see if those duplexes on the north end could be moved back or eliminated or something just to get them off that downward Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 12 of 15 slope, that would be much better, it'd be easy to hide things behind trees up there. The other thing with that downward slope is everything from those northern duplexes he doesn’t know how can possibly drain across Camp Cardinal and into the pond, it's going to run right down and follow gravity down into the creek and further cause either some erosion of that area or run offs of whatever fertilizer and pesticides that's all going to come right down the hill. There isn’t any way to defy gravity. Gedlinske has this image of houses on a hillside out in Los Angeles, and they're overlooking everybody else and that's what they're going to end up with here. He’d like to see if that that plan could be moved a little bit or those properties move back south to get them off that downward slope. The one thing that hasn't been brought up is they've heard over the years that there is an Indiana bat that is an endangered species that's on that property. Gedlinske is unsure if it’s still there and doesn’t know who monitors that or what the effect of this development is. They heard that brought up in the past when that swath of a 40- or 50-foot area of trees was cut down, the trees that are still lying there. The timing had to be right to not disturb the Indiana bat. He doesn’t know if they have resources to take a look at that but it's a concern that was brought up and then never mentioned. Otherwise he agrees with all Fishburn’s other points. Hensch closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommends approval of REZ22-0001, a proposal to rezone approximately 27.68 acres of land located east of Camp Cardinal Blvd and west of Camp Cardinal Road from Interim Development - Research Park (ID-RP) zone to Low Density Multifamily Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) zone subject to the following condition: 1.Prior to issuance of building permit, Owner shall contribute 50% of the cost of upgrading Camp Cardinal Road to City standards. This contribution shall include 50% of the cost of construction of the traffic circle at the intersection of Deer Creek Road and Camp Cardinal Road. Signs also recommends approval of SUB22-0001, a preliminary plat for Cardinal Heights. Townsend seconded the motion. Signs began by reiterating a statement he has made many times, if you don't own the property, you don't have control of property. That's the mantra he has espoused in the six some years he’s been on the Commission. He also finds the view shed argument questionable and noted that the poor people on top of the hill in the new duplexes will have to look down the back of duplexes at the bottom of the hill so how is that any different. Regarding the removal of trees, he agrees with the concern, and has noted it before, of Southgate’s stewardship of some of the properties they have, and in some of the disturbances they do, but it is probably within their right as a property owner to do it. He also wanted to note the distances here are 400 to 1000 feet of distance between the new units and the in the old units is a huge amount of distance, he has about 40 feet between him and his neighbor in the back. The property owner or developer are already sacrificing, rightfully so, and developing in the manner of a conservation development that is usually looked favorably upon, where they try to condense construction into smaller areas to in Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 13 of 15 order to preserve larger areas of natural space and he thinks that they're doing that to the tee on this development. Regarding the stormwater access to cross Camp Cardinal, he hears what they're saying, but there's already an existing stormwater connection underneath Camp Cardinal Road, from the east side to the west side, towards the bottom of the hill, so he doesn’t think it's going to be running over land, it's going to be going into stormwater sewers and channeled through the sewer system into that basin. As far as the capacity of that basin, it’s his understanding and belief that was designed as part of the entire master plan of that whole area, which was considered to be developed at some point, so he would assume that it was designed to hold the capacity and if it wasn't, then someone will have to take care of correcting it at some point. The only other issue Signs would have is on the property value issue that came up on several points. He is a realtor in town and can say this won’t have any impact on property values, absolutely zero. This is a different development and property values are really much more related to development in like kind, so he doesn’t think that that's a relevant issue. Craig supports the proposal, she drove out there today and it feels like this has the potential to be almost identical to the Ryan Court development, it's sort of a mirror of that as it has a multifamily section, and it has beautiful houses. The area has developed differently than maybe the City thought it was going to 20 years ago, but it's developed with beautiful residential homes and she expects that these will be more beautiful residential homes. She is sympathetic to people who want to stand on their deck because that's the way they bought their property but this is in the City and they can see from Deer Creek Road there's a stub in on the other side of the street which means something's going to go in there. She thinks this is an appropriate development for that area and is in favor of it. Padron is also in favor of development and basically agrees with everything Signs said and every time there's a development a neighbor complains about the views from their house being affected and she finds it very selfish, to be honest. Townsend noted it amazes her the way that whole development has come up, she can remember when there was nothing out there and to see a subdivision like this being developed in that area, it's what's needed so will be agreeing. Elliott does support the application, stating it does meet all the City requirements. Hensch noted he does have three concerns, one is he is completely sympathetic to people who feel like their realtor told them one thing but looking right at a realtor for he has great respect for, their job is to sell the property. They're not going to mislead someone, but they're not fortunetellers and can't for 100% certainty tell someone what the zoning is going to be in the future. The second thing is, he has a growing sensitivity to viewsheds, before his eight years on this Commission it was something he didn't give much thought to because he lives in town and his view shed was 20 feet to his neighbor. But he is sympathetic to that and does understand that. However, since the nearest property is going to be 400 feet, in town that's almost unheard of. Nobody's that far away from each other in town. All the properties on Ryan Court are just beautiful and he had the exact same feeling that Craig had driving through there that this development is going to mimic largely Ryan Court, and overall is going to be a great development. Hensch’s only negative concern is that water is a big deal to him, especially erosion, so he has concerns about that unnamed creek on the north edge. He is asking the Planning and Zoning Commission August 3, 2022 Page 14 of 15 neighbors to keep the City and the developers feet to the fire about that and if there's erosion occurring hold people responsible to fix that. When the sanitary sewer goes through, that's when there's disruptions that occur and it has to be put back together in a way that is natural and aesthetic and doesn't have erosion. Townsend noted the other thing really talked about were trees that have been there for ages that haven't been taken away and there's several places here in Iowa City where the trees fell down during the derecho and they're still down. So she is hoping there's a way that as good neighbors, they could get whoever is in charge of doing that to get rid of those. Hensch noted it was brought up the question about the Indiana bats, there is a limitation on when their habitat can be disrupted or when trees can be cut down, there's some periods of times where trees can’t be cut down because of breeding season. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JULY 6, 2022: Elliott moved to approve the meeting minutes of July 6, 2022. Townsend seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett noted that at last night's City Council meeting they approved the historic preservation code amendments which the Commission saw a couple of months ago. Elliott noted regarding the coffee shop on Bowery, she has been to the one downtown and they use all glass, nothing is a single use utensil, so that is really nice. Townsend noted she was concerned when they built the coffee shop across from HyVee on North Dodge but now sees how packed it is and well utilized, so nice to see. ADJOURNMENT: Townsend moved to adjourn. Craig seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2022-2023 7/6 8/3 CRAIG, SUSAN X X ELLIOTT, MAGGIE X X HENSCH, MIKE X X NOLTE, MARK O/E O/E PADRON, MARIA X X SIGNS, MARK X X TOWNSEND, BILLIE X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member