HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-15-2013 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Thursday, August 15, 2013 - 7:00 PM
Formal Meeting
Iowa City City Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
410 E. Washington Street
REVISED AGENDA
A. Call to Order
C. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
D. Rezoning / Development Item:
Discussion of an application submitted by Willowwind Properties, LLC for a rezoning from Low
Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density Multi -Family
(OPD-RM12) zone for 1-31-acres of land located at Willow Wind Place and Westwinds Drive and a
preliminary plat of The Westwinds Second Addition, a 2-lot residential subdivision- (REZ13-
00019/SUB13-00012)
E. Rezoning Item:
Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company, Inc for a rezoning from
Community Commercial (CC-2) zone to Low Density Multifamily (RM-12) zone for 2-19-acres of land
located east of Dodge Street, north of Conklin Lane and west of Dodge Street Court- (REZ13-00020)
F. Zoning Code Amendment:
Discussion of an amendment to Title 14- Zoning, to allow additional building height and floor area, and
alternative ground floor transparency and building articulation standards for properties zoned Central
Business Support (CB-2) that are located in the Riverfront Crossings District-
G. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 18 and August 1, 2013
H. Other
1. Adi . ournment
Upcoming Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings
Formal: September 5 / September 19 / October 3
Informal Scheduled as needed.
I b I
CITY OF IOWA CITY
7.b tat,
NO MEMORANDUM
Date: August 9, 2013
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: REZ13-00019/SUB13-00012 Westwinds Second Addition
We have received revised plans that have addressed some of the deficiencies identified in the
August I staff report. However the plan still needs to show a pedestrian route between the
duplex on Lot 1 and Westwinds Drive complete building elevations and a parking easement
must be provided for the existing parki�g on Lot 1, which is required to serve the existing units
on Lot 3.
The revised plan includes taller evergreen varieties to screen the proposed parking lot from the
existing duplex.
Staff recommends that this application be deferred until deficiencies and discrepancies noted
above are corrected. Upon resolution of these items Staff recommends approval of REZ13-00019
and SUB13-00012, a rezoning of the 1.31-acre area from RM-12 to OPD/RM-12 and a preliminary
plat The Westwinds — Second Addition , a 1-31-acre, 2-lot residential subdivision located south of
Melrose Avenue west of Westwinds Drive, subject to the following conditions:
• Restoration of the existing storm water detention facility on the subject property and a plan
for maintenance of the facility (Staff recommends a Homeowner's Association be required
for the proposed units to ensure that the owners will be responsible for long-term
maintenance).
• Construction drawings being submitted with the final plat and OPD plan for restoration of
the stormwater management facilities.
• An easement to share the ddveway that provides vehicular access to the subject
properties from Westwinds Drive.
• An easement to allow Lot 3 of Westwinds to use the existing parking spaces on the
proposed Lot I and 2 of the Westwinds Second Addition.
_Z =
<
4� 0
C6 �:
(L
>- LLJ
Cf)
z I om C-)
019,11
U)
w
CO
rez 0
IL
C/) 0:
Lu
3:
9a
161
8
:9
z
0
0
za �c
oz �-W- < 1!11
(-) sf -:t III
O-Lu�o
0
>-T;
z U)
ziz CO
LLJ
CL
LU
3:
w
M
m
PIN
HI
1101
fill
i If I
I
�111
9
L"U,
C'4'1!
S
liz
--:5
1 j
mm
Tool
-
w
IS
z
0
F-
zo
z
0-0
C3 (.)
(L
0 W
� U)
< I
9 U)
C)
z
(L
U)
w
w
46
c v
0
00
<
46
o = L
Z
Is
jig
jib,
P I
YIN
T 5
0
0
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 9, 2013
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: REZ1 3-00020 Dodge Street, Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court
Staff has met with the applicant to discuss additional conditions, such as a iimitation on the
types of housing (single family, duplex and or townhouse style buildings), that would be allowed
on Dodge Street Court as a condition of the rezoning proposal. The applicant is considering
these additional conditions and hopes to have a response before the August 15 meeting.
August 2, 2013
TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Re: Rezoning 1425 N. Dodge St. REZ13-00020
I spent nearly 25 years of my life attending planning and zoning commission meetings and city council meetings, mostly dealing
with land use disputes. There were many negative experiences. Since I retired from my law practice in 2000 1 never expected to
be in another such meeting. I dreaded the thought of going to last night's meeting.
Despite my trepidation the meeting was a positive experience. I appreciate how it was conducted. I appreciate the fact that you
listened and understood our concerns and our argument regarding "similar" uses. I felt a sense of peace when I left City Hall. I felt
that our system seems to be working fine.
My compliments also go out to Bob Miklo. Though I may not agree with his conclusions, i certainly appreciate the way he handles
himself and the way he works with the commission.
I wish Glenn Siders and Southgate development the best as to this project and all of their other projects. Hopefully this land can
be put to good use in the near future.
In addition to the property that we own on Dodge Street Court, my wife and I own the property at 1106 N. Dodge St., about two
blocks west of the Southgate site. It too is zoned CC-2. This fall we will be tearing down the old house on the property and building
a new small office building for our family rental business. We believe that the Dodge Street entrance to Iowa City and this entire
corridor is a community asset and we hope to see it looking better and better as time goes by.
Thanks again,
"n Cruise
5 Bluftwood Drive
Iowa City, IA 52245
CITY OF IOWA CITY
U M
Al
L MEMORAN D
Date: August 15, 2013
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Karen Howard, Associate Planner
Re: Proposed Midwest One Bank building in the Riverfront Crossings District— zoning issues
Background
Midwest One Bank is currently designing a new Class A office building that will be located at the
southeast corner of Clinton and Harrison Streets on the site of the former Sabin school parking
lot. This new building will replace the former Midwest Bank building that was located on property
near the corner of Burlington and Clinton, which was purchased by the University of Iowa to
make room for construction of the new University of Iowa School of Music. The property
formerly owned by the Iowa City Community School District was rezoned from Public (P-1) to
Central Business Support (CB-2), so the Sabin building could be converted by Midwest One into
offices and a drive -through bank, which will serve as their temporary location until the new office
building is constructed at the SE corner of Clinton and Harrison Streets. The new office building
will provide space for Midwest One Bank mortgage operations and also two additional floors of
office space that will be leased to other businesses. The building will achieve minimum LEED
Gold certification. (See attached conceptual drawings of the proposed building).
Midwest One originally anticipated starting construction of the new building in spring 2014, at
which time the new zoning provisions for Riverfront Crossings are expected to be in place.
Midwest One is now projecting an earlier start date and would like to begin the process of
zoning and building permit approvals as soon as possible. In order to accommodate the earlier
start date, some zoning code amendments will be necessary to allow the larger building they
are planning for this site. In addition, there are some design aspects that are unique to this
building that meet the vision for the Riverfront Crossings District, but will not meet the Central
Business Site Development standards as currently written.
Analysis
The property at the southeast corner of the intersection of Clinton and Harrison Streets is the
only property in the Riverfront Crossings District that is zoned CB-2. When it was rezoned from
PA the CB-2 Zone was chosen as the appropriate zone due to its location peripheral to the
central business district in an area that could accommodate an urban drive -through facility for
the bank. The CB-2 Zone is the only central business zone that allows drive -through facilities
and the Board of Adjustment has already reviewed and approved the location and design of the
proposed drive -through for the new building.
The adopted Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan acknowledges that the South
Downtown Subdistrict of Riverfront Crossings will be the most urban district outside of
Downtown Iowa City. Larger -scale buildings are anticipated. The Plan states that residential
and office uses should predominate, which will complement and support the Downtown retail
core.
August 9, 2013
Page 2
While the CB-2 Zone allows the bank to establish a drive -through facility, there are several
dimensional and site development standards that apply in the CB-2 Zone that will present a
problem for redevelopment of the property at Clinton and Harrison:
The building height and FAR allowances in the CB-2 Zone are lower than what is
planned in the South Downtown District of Riverfront Crossings. The maximum height in
the CB-2 Zone is 45 feet and the maximum FAR is 2. Midwest One Bank is proposing a
6-story office building that will be approximately 83 feet tall with an FAR of approximately
4.2, which is consistent with the Riverfront Crossings Plan.
Ground level fenestration requirements in the zoning code for the central business zones
are intended to create transparent frontages with large storefront windows and inviting
entries that are ideal for retail and restaurants and to prevent blank walls that would
interrupt the pedestrian -oriented character in Downtown Iowa City and Northside
Marketplace. However, these fenestration standards present challenges for buildings
that have ground level offices for which privacy is a consideration. With regard to the
proposed office building, Clinton Street is anticipated to be the primary pedestrian
corridor between Downtown and the future Riverfront Park. In contrast, Harrison Street
is considered a secondary street that is appropriate for access to parking, drive -through
facilities and less active building frontages. In contrast to Downtown where all streets are
considered primary retail frontages, the Riverfront Crossings zoning code will
accommodate different commercial frontage conditions for primary and secondary
streets.
The building articulation standards that apply to the central business zones are intended
to prevent visually monotonous facades that do not fit into the historic mainstreet
character of Downtown Iowa City and the Northside Marketplace. Building articulation
standards will also be important for redeveloping areas within Riverfront Crossings to
break down the scale of larger buildings and to ensure that building facades are
designed to provide visual interest and a more human -scale to create the type of
pedestrian -oriented neighborhood envisioned. However, other methods of providing this
articulation and visual interest may be appropriate in redeveloping areas of Riverfront
Crossings, where new buildings will not have to fit into the historic storefront patterns
present in Downtown and the Northside Marketplace.
Parking requirements for commercial uses in the CB-2 Zone are the same as apply in
commercial areas outside the downtown area (e.g. CC-2, CI-1, CH-1). Staff is currently
reviewing parking policies and requirements in the central part of the city, including
Downtown, the Northside Marketplace, and Riverfront Crossings and will be
recommending changes in the near future to respond to changes in demand for both
private and public parking facilities as redevelopment occurs. Midwest One is
coordinating with the City so that the parking needs for the new office building will be
accommodated in a new parking structure planned on the adjacent site. Therefore, no
off-street parking will be provided on the property at Clinton and Harrison.
Recommendations
To accommodate the proposed Class A office building that will be located at the corner of
Clinton and Harrison Streets and create consistency with the vision in the Riverfront Crossings
Plan, staff recommends amending the Zoning Code to allow for additional building height and
floor area, and alternative minimum fenestration standards, building articulation standards, and
lower parking requirements for property zoned CB-2 that is located in the Riverfront Crossings
District as set forth on the following page.
August 9, 2013
Page 3
Amend Section 14-2C-8, Central Business Site Development Standards, by adding a new
subsection R, as set forth below.-
R. Alternative Dimensional and Site Development Standards in the Riverfront Crossings
District
As envisioned in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, properties zoned CB-
2 that are located in the Riverfront Crossings District shall be allowed additional building
height and floor area, and alternative minimum fenestration standards, building articulation
standards, and lower parking requirements as set forth below.
1. Maximum building height: 6 stories, not to exceed 85 ft.
2. Maximum FAR: 5
3. Along any building fagade that faces a primary street, as designated in the adopted
Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, 70% of the ground level building facade
must be comprised of transparent windows and doors (with no more than 10% daylight
reduction).
4. Along any building fagade that faces a street that is not designated a primary street in
the adopted Downtown & Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, a minimum of 40% of the
ground level building fagade must be comprised of transparent windows and doors (with
no more than 10% daylight reduction).
5. Alternative building articulation methods may be allowed by Design Review to
accommodate midrise and high rise buildings that have a more contemporary
architectural style, provided the building is designed in a manner that provides a similar
or greater level of visual interest or relief as would be achieved under subsection 14-2C-
80, Building Articulation. Design Review may consider elements that provide visual
interest or relief, such as variations in building materials, glazing or window patterns;
extensive building transparency that allows for exceptional daylighting of interior spaces
and views into the interior of the building; canopies or awnings; entranceway features;
unique signage, artwork, or other architectural features.
5. Private, off-street parking shall be required at the same ratios as required in the CB-10
Zone, as specified in Table 5A-1.
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and Community Development
m
V
N
L
d
d
H
d
3
s
t
O
:.
E-!
El-
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
JULY 18,— 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin,
Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Darian Nagle-Gamm, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Miller Mark Schuchard, Ed Wasserman, Liz Christiansen,
K. T. Labadle, Walter Seaman, Judy Buddenbaum, James
Mossman, Liz Maas, Casey Cook
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of REZ13-00004, an
application submitted by Jeff Miller Construction to rezone 1.05 acres of property
from Low Density Multi -family (RM-12) to Low Density Multi -family residential with
a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RM-12) subject to compliance with the
submitted Sensitive Areas Plan and a Conditional Zoning Agreement to ensure
that the recommendations set forth in the goo -technical survey are followed in the
design and construction of the development, and that the building is designed
according to the submitted elevation drawings with any additional conditions
Imposed by the Design Review Committee to ensure that the building complies
with the Central Planning District multi -family site development standards; and
that the planting areas to the north of the parking [at be planted with trees,
shrubs, and ground covers as recommended in the approved list of Johnson
County Heritage Trust; and retaining walls over three feet in height located north
of the building be screened from public view from the right-of-way; and additional
trees upright in form shall be planted south of the building to provide screening,
where possible.
2. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of REZ13-00018, a request to
amend the Sensitive Areas Ordinance for approximately 7.13 acres of land located
at Mormon Trek Boulevard and Dane Road SE subject to the applicant funding an
escrow account to assure completion of the proposed wetiand mitigation
improvements. With the commencement of the mitigation plan and the
establishment of an escrow, other development with the subdivision would
be allowed to proceed.
3. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of amendments to the Zoning
Code to implement the recommendations under Bullet #2 in the staff
memorandum expanding the allowed uses in the CIA zone and allowing these
newly proposed areas under the same conditions as apply in the CC-2 zone:
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 2 of 13
Uses allowed in the CIA zone should be expanded to allow the following CC-2
uses with the same standards and provisions called out in the CC-2 zone:
* Restaurants and bars
• Medical and dental offices
• Personal services (banks, salons, dry cleaners, laundries and similar)
• Hotels and motels
• Religious and private group assembly
• All sales -oriented retail (currently limited to certain uses)
4. The Commission voted 7- 0 to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14:
Zoning Code as outlined in the staff memorandum of July 11, 2013, to delete
specific street requirements for Daycare Uses, General Educational Facilities, and
Religious/Private Group Assembly Uses.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
Rezonina Items:
REZ13-00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Jeff Miller Construction for a
rezoning of 1.05-acres of land located on First Avenue, north of Rochester Avenue from
Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone to Planned Development Overlay/Low Density
Multi -Family (OPD/RM-12) zone.
Nagle-Gamm presented a location map and pictures of the subject property that the
Commission has seen before. She said last fall the subject property was rezoned from Low
Density Single Family (RS-5) Zone to Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12). She said as the
developer moved forward with the project it determined that more than 35% of the critical slopes
on the property were going to be disturbed during construction of the proposed building. She
said in accordance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance a Level 11 Sensitive Areas Review was
required, which is considered to be a type of planned development and therefore must be
reviewed accordingly to the approval procedures for a planned development overlay rezoning
and applicable standards within the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. She said the applicant must
address how any negative effects of disturbing the critical slopes would be mitigated.to ensure
that the design and construction is safe and minimizes flooding and erosion. She said this item
has been before the Commission several times, and was deferred due to issues with storm
water management, slope stability and sub -surface water.
Nagle-Gamm said in response to questions from the Commission, that the applicant has
submitted two additional items for review. She said the first item is a certified letter and a cross-
section drawing from a structural engineer which contains an analysis of the proposed
development. She said the engineer concludes that there will be no adverse impacts to the
existing retaining wall or building to the south of the subject property if constructed as proposed.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 3 of 13
Nagle-Gamm said the second submittal is a geo-technical engineering report that contains a soil
survey and site specific recommendations for preparation on the site, earthwork, design,
construction of foundations, floor slabs and pavements based on the proposed site plan. She
said this report also addressed the stability of slopes on the property, and based on the analysis
of the development along with the site -specific soil conditions that were uncovered in the study,
the engineers did not anticipate stability issues with the slopes at the end of construction or in
the long-term if the recommendations in the report were followed.
Nagle-Gamm said Engineering and Planning and Development staff have both reviewed these
documents and find that they adequately address the site -specific conditions noted. She said
the latest iteration of the site plan, met public works staff expectations for on -site storm water
management. She stated that staff now recommends approval of this rezoning subject to the
Sensitive Areas site plan and a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA).
Eastham asked staff how the geo-technical recommendations in the report will be met during
construction. Howard said the Inspection Staff will have oversight, and with any development
that has extensive retaining walls Housing and Inspection Services will require sign -off by a
structural engineer.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Jeff Miller, the applicant, said that with these reports, he has gotten a lot of good suggestions
from the engineers that will be helpful before, during and after construction. He said he has 35
years of experience behind him and has built several developments that have been as or more
challenging than this proposed one.
Eastham asked Miller if he would have gotten an analysis and engineer report even if the
Commission hadn't requested him to do so and did he discover anything from the reports that
he hadn't known before. Miller said the study was interesting but it cost a lot of money and came
out with results that he had expected.
Thomas asked how high the retaining wall was in the northwest comer of the subject property.
Miller said it was four or five feet.
Theobald said there had been some discussion about trying to save some of the trees,
particularly the small oaks located in the far comer of the property. She asked what Miller plans
to do with them. Miller said they will try to keep as many trees as possible because they are
required to replace nice trees they remove.
Mark Schuchard, the applicant's engineer from V.J. Engineering in Iowa City, introduced himself
and stated that he concurs with the findings in these most recent analyses.
Freerks asked Howard if with a Level 11 Sensitive Areas, much of this analysis would have to be
done. Howard replied that it's common on sloping sites for staff to require a soil study, and they
have done so on a number of properties so it's not that unusual, particularly when they are
building large retaining walls and disturbing a lot of the site.
Ed Wasserman of 555 North First Avenue showed slides of the subject property and some
graphics that show how virtually all the trees on it will have to be removed. He reiterated the
neighbors' concerns about potential drainage problems, the size of the retaining wall, the
amount of dirt that will have to be removed and what effect this will all have on Hickory Hill Park,
his building to the south and others in the neighborhood, the lowering of property values and the
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 4 of 13
fact that this is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He said that no reason has been
presented that this should be rezoned.
Liz Christiansen of 549 North First Avenue said that Iowa ranks among the very lowest tier of
states in terms of publically owned recreation land and is considered the most altered state in
terms of land use. She wants the Commission to act to protect the trees on the site of the
proposed development and consider the ecological services these trees provide. She said trees
and green space provide benefits and add value to developments.
K.T. Labadie of 708 Woodside said she is chair of the Board for Friends of Hickory Hill Park.
She and six other Board members decided she should come before the Commission and make
a statement about their concerns about this item. She stated their concerns about invasive
species and wants to make sure that this development has to follow a specific plant list. She
said their other concern is the amount of storm water from this site and its effect on Ralston
Creek and the park. She said they don't believe it can all be handled on site. She said they think
a smaller development would be more compatible for the park.
Walter Seaman of 551 North First Avenue quoted from the Central District Plan where it states
11 generous front yard landscaping combined with a beautiful canopy of trees create a pleasant
environment for walking and biking despite the gaps in the sidewalk network ... and
improvements and access to parks is another issue of importance to residents to this area of the
Central District." He said the removal of trees on the subject property would certainly not
improve access to the park.
Judy Buddenbaum of 557 North First Avenue said she doesn't have a lot of faith in the City
Inspectors being there all the time when things are done on the subject property. She cited
examples in her own building where things were signed off on but not done properly.
James Mossman of 535 North First Avenue said he and his wife are strongly against the
proposed development. He said it will be a negative for the neighborhood. He said the concerns
cited by other speakers tell the story very well.
Freerks closed public hearing
Eastham moved to recommend approval of REZ13-000041 an application submitted by
Jeff Miller Construction to rezone 1.05 acres of property from Low Density Multi -family
(RM-12) to Low Density Multi -family residential with a Planned Development Overlay
(OPD/RM-12) subject to compliance with the submitted Sensitive Areas Plan and a
Conditional Zoning Agreement to ensure that the recommendations set forth in the geo-
technical survey are followed in the design and construction of the development, and
that the building is designed according to the submitted elevation drawings with any
additional conditions imposed by the Design Review Committee to ensure that the
building complies with the Central Planning District multi -family site development
standards.
Swygard seconded.
Eastham asked about a comment made by Labadie about damage to a bridge. Labadie said
she was referring to a bridge in the park.
Eastham asked Howard to respond to Labadie's request that the developer use non-invasive
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 5 of 13
species from the Heritage Trust list. Nagle Gamm clarified that there were some species on the
initial site plan that were not recommended because they might be invasive and the applicant
did change those for species identified as being appropriate for Johnson County through the
Heritage Trust list.
Freerks said she's torn in some ways but feels that the applicant has done a lot to address the
issues that have been put forward, except for the trees. She said trees are important to her, but
she's not sure that all of the trees she would like saved will be saved here. She said she thinks
many people would like this land to be purchased and made part of the park. She said,
however, that someone owns this property and they have the right to do something with it, and
they have met all of the requirements that have been asked regarding storm water
management, and studying the soil and ensuring the building is constructed to prevent erosion.
She said based on that, she will be voting in favor of this application.
Martin said with regard to the question asked by one of the neighbors regarding the need for
this housing, she notes that other buildings have been built in the area, and people have bought
them, so it is really the market that determines the need for new housing. She said she is really
conflicted about this, but she said the Commission already voted to rezone it to RM-1 2.
Theobald said she thinks the builder has done everything the Commission has required. She
said she has also listened to the concerns of The Friends of Hickory Hill Park, and while there's
a minimum requirement of what the Commission has asked, it would be wonderful if the builder
would explore doing some real water management and planting some things that will take the
landscaping to the next level and helping that transition to the park even more. She said it would
be a wonderful thing to explore with some of the groups in the community that are helping
promote retaining storm water on site and the plantings and things you can do to help that. She
said it would be a wonderful marketing tool if she was looking for a property to purchase. She
said she would be supporting the application.
Thomas said he thinks part of the problem is how the building located to the south of the subject
property is sited. He said it was also a planned development overlay. In that case, to avoid the
sensitive area to the south of the building on that property, the building was placed too far north
leaving no opportunity to create any kind of landscape character to the north of the building. He
said he thinks the siting of that building with the retaining walls to the north have created
problems for any development to the north. He said that adding a condition of tree plantings to
the south of the proposed building would be one way of mitigating the relationship of the
buildings to each other. He said another aspect that could be better mitigated is to require that
the retaining walls that can be seen from the public right of way be screened from view. He said
he would propose that north of the driveway and parking bay that the landscape be developed
in a way that would be consistent with the character of Hickory Hill Park so it would be an
extension of the park landscape. He said given that the retaining wall runs through this area, it
may not be appropriate for lawn, as proposed on the planting plan.
Freerks said if trees were possible between the two buildings, she definitely would be in favor or
that, but she would not be favor of asking to screen the entire retaining wall. Greenwood
Hektoen said that any conditions the Commission imposes have to address public needs that
are being generated by the rezoning. She said some of those suggestions are good for the
developer to take into consideration but she doesn't know if the Commission can require them
as conditions for the rezoning.
Thomas argued that the public need is because of the sensitive areas that are being impacted
and the mitigation required is retaining walls. He said in other zoning codes in other towns there
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 6 of 13
is a concern with the public image of a property if the walls are over four or five feet in height.
Greenwood Hektoen asked if his condition is to screen just the portion visible from the public.
Thomas said yes, if the wall was not visible from the public right-of-way, it would not require
screening.
Howard noted that there is a property further to the north that had a similar situation where there
were large retaining walls proposed that would be visible from First Avenue. She said the
Commission recommended a CZA that required landscape screening of retaining walls to soften
the views from First Avenue. She said since this property was similarly situated a similar
condition might be imposed.
Eastham said he would support that addition. Freerks said that previous condition did not
recommend concealing it, but rather softening it.
Howard said they were required to show what the retaining wall would look like and then do
plantings to soften the view of the wall. Freerks said she would be okay with that but would not
be comfortable going into great detail but rather assigning to design review.
Freerks said the transition planting to the north that Thomas recommended seems appropriate
and that staff should also review a landscaping plan to ensure compliance. She said she
wouldn't feel comfortable outlining it here.
Thomas replied the key concept there is that it integrate with the landscape north of Hickory Hill
Park and that it not be planted in lawn.
Eastham said he thinks that's a good idea.
Thomas moved to amend approval of REZ13-00004 by adding
1. that the planting areas to the north of the parking lot be planted with trees, shrubs
and ground covers as recommended in the approved list of Johnson County
Heritage Trust
2. retaining walls over three feet in height north of the building be screened from
view when seen by the public right-of-way
3. additional trees upright in form shall be planted south of the building to provide
screening where possible.
Greenwood Hektoen asked if these are aspects the Commission would like the Design Review
Committee to take into consideration when doing their review. The Commission agreed that
they are
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to amend carried 7-0.
Swygard said it's been a very difficult decision to come to and she appreciates all the
neighborhood involvement that has helped her think through all the aspects of her decision. She
said she appreciates the applicant's diligence on following through on everything the
Commission has asked of him. She said she's not sure that they always have to have proof that
there is a need in the community for a property to be developed, unless it's a non-residential
type of building. She said she will be supporting this application.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 7 of 13
Eastham said the Comprehensive Plan does support this development in general. He said the
Plan talks a lot about providing multi -family residential buildings along arterial and collector
streets, which is a key point of the current Plan. He said the proposed building is keeping in
multi -family character with what's on the west side of North First Avenue in this area. He said he
appreciates that the staff and the developer invested in a thorough engineering analysis and
their reports indicate that there are insignificant hazards to the building or the retaining wall to
the south. He added that the engineers had an analysis of how to construct this kind of building
on this property so that it won't cause run-off problems during the construction phase or have
water inside during the life of the building if the soil engineers recommendations are followed.
He said preserving the on -site trees is a vexing problem for this or other applications. He said
he's sympathetic to the residents of the building to the south, but asking the developer to
replace trees is a good thing. He said this development follows the current requirements for
handling storm water, and although he knows there will be additional run-off from this site into
Ralston Creek, he doesn't have a regulatory way of changing that at this time. He said he will
support the application with the added requirements.
Dyer reiterated what Thomas said in that most of the problems can be attributed to the fact that
the building to the south is built almost on the property line. She said if the applicants follow the
requirements that the Commission has established, which she thinks are substantial, they can
use their property as they choose.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Freerks reminded those in attendance that this item will go on to City Council so there will be
another opportunity to discuss it.
REZ13-00018: Discussion of an application submitted by Dealer Properties IC LLC for a
rezoning to amend the Sensitive Areas Development Plan to allow an alternative method
of establishing the required wetland mitigation rather than removing and replacing the
topsoil for property located at 2845 Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Howard said the Commission recently passed an amendment to reduce the overall size of the
wetland buffer area to 4.14 acres. She said this item is a change in the method they would like
to use to install the wetland mitigation. She said instead of removing twelve to eighteen inches
of topsoil, the applicant has developed a plan they feel will be less invasive and more successful
as described in a letter from Transition Ecology, LLC.
Eastham asked Howard what the timeline for this project will be and who will be responsible for
oversight. Howard said it will be whoever the applicant hires to install it, and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers has a timeline, and the plants have to be installed by the end of this year.
Greenwood Hektoen said the recommendation is that they commence the plan before any
construction permit would be allowed for Lot 2. Eastham asked what would happen if they don't
complete it. Greenwood Hektoen said the applicant would put up an escrow that if they don't
complete it the City would have the money to go in and do the work.
Dyer said the plan involved starting in the growing season of 2013. She said we are already
halfway through that season.
Freerks said much of the planting will take place much later, as according to the new plan, they
want to kill everything first.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 8 of 13
Freerks asked about the staff's recommendation. Howard clarified that the project needs to
commence and escrow needs to be established before a permit is issued for use of Lot 2.
Eastham asked about the Council's timeline for this application. Howard said because of the
need to start the mitigation during this growing season, Council has already set a public hearing
for this rezoning request for August 6th pending the Commission's recommendation.
Greenwood Hektoen said the key element of the plan for the Commission is not the specific
start date but that the applicant has to start before they get a building permit. Howard said that
the consequence of not approving this rezoning is that the existing Conditional Zoning
Agreement (CZA) that was adopted previously would still be in force, which would require the
applicant to remove and replace twelve to eighteen inches of topsoil and then install the wetland
plants. She said the Commission should decide which plan is better for the wetland and its
survivability. She advised that the applicant's consultant could answer any technical questions
the Commission has about the alternative method proposed.
Freerks opened public hearing
Liz Maas of Transition Ecology said she was contacted by the applicant to see if she could
devise an alternative to dredging out the soil and cutting into the area with heavy equipment.
She said this is a storm water mitigation site so removing so much topsoil would cause a lot of
erosion, and heavy equipment would compact the soil and create less benefit in that the water
will want to go off if the soil is compacted. She said her alternative involves using chemicals to
treat the invasive species that are there. She said this mitigation site is completed in the sense
that the only problem with this site is that the vegetation is not appropriate. She said it's
functioning well but the vegetation is not what was specified by the original mitigation plan that
was passed ten years ago.
Dyer asked if the correct plants weren't planted. Maas said that's part of it, and they weren't
planted at the correct ratios, but a lot of what is there could have come in naturally. She said
about half of it is invasive canary grass but half is actually decent wetland plants.
Martin said it's logical to not remove topsoil but the words RoundUp and wetlands don't seem
compatible to her. Maas said there is a safe chemical called Rodeo that is used for this kind of
work in a wetland area. Martin asked if that affects birds or other species or the native
vegetation. Maas said RoundUp is a poison and would only be used judiciously in the places it
needs to be use. She said as an ecologist she's very sensitive to trying to protect as much as
she can the existing vegetation so it can out -compete the invasive species. Maas addressed
Eastham's previous concern about responsibility. She said because this is a wetland mitigation
site the Corps of Engineers and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources are required by the
Clean Water Act to monitor the site for five years after it's been completed as well as during the
project.
Martin asked who will be doing the monitoring. Maas said it will be her or someone in her
position that is hired by the applicant.
Freerks wanted to clarify per the report from Maas that Rodeo must be used. Maas said it
would. She said they had hoped to start the mitigation this spring, but they will begin as soon as
they possibly can.
Theobald said she has been hearing a lot about RoundUp resistant weeds and wanted to know
if a test plot would be done before they spray the whole area. Maas explained that not only will
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18,2013 - Formal
Page 9 of 13
they be spaying but also tilling in order to plant other things there to compete with the canary
grass. She said the canary grass will never be eradicated completely from this site. She said the
goal of this project is to reduce the impact and size of the canary grass so that there is a
healthier mix of wetland plants that can be sustained over time.
Freerks said with by not removing the soil, Maas will be able to use a targeted approach. Maas
confirmed that that was correct.
Freerks closed public hearing.
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZI 3-00018 a request to amend the
Sensitive Areas Ordinance for approximately 7.13 acres of land located at Mormon Trek
Boulevard and Dane Road SE subject to the applicant funding an escrow account to
assure completion of the proposed watland mitigation Improvements. With the
commencement of the mitigation plan and the establishment of an escrow, other
development with the subdivision would be allowed to proceed.
Eastham seconded.
Freerks said she thinks this is a better plan, and she's glad to see that it will be started soon;
she thinks that it could be a beautiful spot some day.
Eastham said he is intrigued with this method instead of scraping and removing topsoil. He said
his only concerns have been that the work is actually done and followed through so that
eventually there are mostly non-invasive species at that site.
Thomas said it sounds like a much better approach and the devil will be in the monitoring.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
Zoning Code Amendments:
Discussion of amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code, to broaden the uses allowed
in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) Zone based on recommendations from an ad hoc
commercial zoning committee appointed by the City Manager.
Howard said that last fall a committee of private citizens was appointed by the City Manager to
work with City staff to examine the zoning regulations in several of the city's commercial zoning
districts due to some concerns that had been expressed by the business community. Howard
thanked the members of the committee: Casey Cook from Cook Appraisal Services; Jeff Edberg
from Lepic Kroeger Realtors; Anne Freerks as a representative of the Planning and Zoning
Commission; Glenn Siders from Southgate Development Services; Peggy Slaughter, Midwest
America Commercial Realty; and Joe Younker, Bradley and Riley Law Office.
Howard said the task for this committee was to discuss the issues and identify any potential
solutions regarding Iowa City's commercial zoning designations. She said there has always
been some confusion about the Community Commercial (CC-2) and Intensive Commercial (Cl-
1) zones, so the committee decided to focus on these two zones. She explained that there is
quite a bit of overlap in the uses allowed in these two zones. She said that areas in the
community change over time, but unless there's a specific request to change the zoning, the
zoning may become out of sync with the changes that have occurred over time.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 10 of 13
Howard said the committee agreed that one of the main issues is that property that has prime
retail frontage on a high traffic arterial street should probably be zoned CC-2 rather than CI-1
and that a number of properties, particularly along Highway 1 West should be rezoned to CC-2.
Howard said another finding was that property not having suitable visibility, access and traffic
count is probably more suited to CIA. In addition, she said the majority of the committee agreed
that opening up possibilities for additional uses in the CIA zone wouldn't have a significant
effect on CIA zoned properties and that the private market should decide what's appropriate
rather than restricting uses in the zoning code. She said the committee acknowledged, however,
that allowing a broader range of uses in the CIA would make it incumbent upon the buyer of a
property and their real estate agent to consider the possibility that a business might locate next
door that has some of the features that would be allowed in the CIA zone — the outdoor work
and storage areas, noise, and dust.
Howard said the Commission is being asked to consider amending the Zoning Code to
implement the recommendations under Bullet Point #2 in the staff memorandum.
Eastham asked if there was some consideration given by the committee to get an idea of what
the property owners want in those areas that are zoned CIA now before they actually change
the Code. Howard said there was no outreach to all property owners in the CIA Zone, but said
part of the problem is that unless a property owner wants to do something different with their
property, they have no reason to request a rezoning, so the City tends to get rezoning
applications on a piecemeal basis.
Dyer asked if the area between Riverside Drive and the 218 interchange almost all developed
already. Howard said many of the properties are developed but some are underdeveloped and
there are some vacant properties, so that's an area that could see significant redevelopment
over time.
Martin recalled a property on Mormon Trek that they rezoned last year so that medical offices
could be allowed. She said the market spoke, and that's where they wanted to be.
Swygard said as someone who has Highway 1 in her backyard, she has seen a lot of positives
being developed along the highway. She asked what the negatives would be, if any, to doing
this. Freerks said they felt safe with the list they made. Swygard said one area of concern for
her is bars. Freerks she thought they could still adopt it. She said it's just going to be one or the
other depending on what City Council decides.
Freerks opened public hearing.
Casey Cook of 1 Oak Park Court said he is coming before the Commission today as a
landowner on Highway I with CIA land. He said his primary reason for being here is to express
his thanks to Karen Howard, Jeff Davidson, Anne Freerks, and the City Manager. He said they
had a very good committee with lots of good discussion. He said this adds value to his land and
to the land of many other people along Highway 1, gives them more flexibility to attract
businesses to Iowa City and to build the tax base. He said as a former Commission member, he
realizes that the Commission does important work, and he thanked them for it.
Freerks closed public hearing
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 11 of 13
Thomas moved to recommend amending the Zoning Code to implement the
recommendations under Bullet #2 in the staff memorandum expanding the allowed uses
in the Cl-I zone and allowing these newly proposed areas under the same conditions as
apply in the CC-2 zone:
Uses allowed in the CI -I zone should be expanded to allow the following CC-2
uses with the same standards and provisions called out in the CC-2 zone:
0 Restaurants and bars
• Medical and dental offices
• Personal services (banks, salons, dry cleaners, laundries and similar)
• Hotels and motels
• Religious and private group assembly
• All sales -oriented retail
Eastharn seconded.
Theobald asked where payday lenders fall under this category. Howard said the Council
recently adopted very restrictive rules about where payday lenders could locate, but she did not
recall exactly how they were categorized in the zoning code.
Eastham said it was commendable of the City Manager to start this process. He said he would
like to eventually increase the number of CC-2 parcels along Highway 1, which he thinks would
increase the appeal of the entryway into the city.
Thomas said in general he's in favor of mixing uses, although there is some potential tension
that comes with that. He does think it's a good approach though.
Swygard said she thinks it's a good idea to allow for a variety of uses, and she'd like to see
some of the empty properties progress into something nice.
Freerks said she thinks the committee vetted everything carefully and it will be an excellent
outcome.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7- 0.
Discussion of amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code to delete the specific street width
requirement for Dayeare Uses, General Educational Facilities, and Religious/Private
Group Assembly Uses.
Howard noted that the current street width standard is a standard that has been in the code for
a long time, and it appears in staff's view to being an obsolete standard. There are very few
residential streets that are wider than 28 feet, so it could be a problem for people trying to reuse
or re -purpose institutional properties, such as churches. She said that traffic is typically a major
issue for neighborhoods so it is carefully considered by the Board of Adjustment if there's any
concern and they have the power to impose conditions when necessary. She said staff feels
that there's no real danger in removing the street width standard because traffic concerns are
thoroughly covered with the other approval criteria that the Board considers for every special
exception. She said it could be constraining the reuse of properties, particularly vacant church
sites.
Frearks opened public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 18, 2013 - Formal
Page 12 of 13
Freerks closed public hearing.
Eastham moved to recommend approval af amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code as
outlined in the staff memorandum of July 11, 2013, to delete specific street requirements
for Daycare Uses, General Educational Facilities, and Religious/Private Group Assembly
Uses.
Thoobald seconded.
Freerks said they always strive to make the Code better, and she thinks there are already
criteria in place to address traffic issues, safety concerns and pedestrian issues with the Board
of Adjustment.
Eastham said eliminating requirements from the Code that aren't fulfilling a useful need is
always a good thing for the Commission to do, and he appreciates the staffs openness to
considering this change.
Martin said this is great considering that there are now three large churches for sale that have
sat vacant for some time.
Thomas said this issue of street and lane width is something he's been concerned about for a
while. He said he wishes they could narrow some streets because you combine wide streets
with the alternate parking requirements in some neighbors you end up with very wide traffic
lanes which promotes speeding. He said he thinks it's great to make this change.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7- 0.
Consideration of Meeting Minutes. June 20, 2013
Eastham moved to approve the minutes of June 20, 2013.
Swygard seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0.
OTHER
The Commission discussed how to conduct their joint meeting with City Council at 5:00 p.m. on
July 23 to discuss amendments to Title 14: Zoning Code to modify the regulations regarding the
spacing of drinking establishments so that the 500-foot spacing rule would only apply to the
University Impact Area and the Riverfront Crossings District.
ADJOURNMENT:
Thomas moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 7- 0 vote.
a
z
Z
z
z
0
u
uj
w
LLI
z
in
z
LU
I-.
0
Cm
N
0
z
ui
LU
0
LL
�Xxxxxxxl
I
iz
W
)XXXX
2-
x
x
9xxx
x
x
,XXXXXXXI
LO
C,
L"Xxxxxxx
I
XXXXIX
!
XX
&xxxxxixlx
gxxxxxixx
t
m6xxxx
w
I 1
x
x
vxxxxlx
i
w
x
N
txxxxxl.xx
X xxxxxl,xx
t2xxxxx!xx
�Xxxwax'lxx
�Xxxxxlxx
U)
2LU
0
0
m
1�
U)MLO
M
w
LU
m
LU
Z,x
4
z
w
Ru<=
mzoa.m
.00—
=z
73
2
k6CL
t
0
LU
LU
u
ci
=
�-
w
uj
LU
4
2
LU
U)
LU
W
4
3020
4
z
>-
0
<
LU
m
LL
M
0
(D
z
r-
w
w
0
LL
z
la
�Xxxxxxx
oxxi3xxxx
w
"Xxxxxxx
AXXXXXXX
-e
Zbxxxxxx
W
lxxxx
w
xx
N
2-5
N
XXXXXXI
73,xxxxx
W
0
w
2-5
�,x
Bi
W
0
LU
XXXI
w
0
Cl)
�Xxxxxmw
I
0
x
x
x
x
wx—
w
o
�,Xxxx
W
0
w
66
w
x
xxxxxi
X1
jxxx
xxxx
U)
2 LU
co
(D
m
r.-
LO
LO
Ce)
IL
I
LO
I
Lf)
Lf)
LO
iLLI
�-XO4000000
C:)
LU
LLI
w
z
>-
4
Z
z
-J
0
X
Z
4�
Lu
0
IL
x
0
z
U)
x
9L
d
LU
Lu
�-OZN
ul
�
LU
'.
�
�
OX
I-.
Z
>-
0
Lu
LL.
2
U)
I--
E
w
< Z
x o LLU
6
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
AUGUST 1, — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Anne Freerks, Phoebe Martin,
Jodie Theobald, John Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: Paula Swygard
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Kent Ralston, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jesse Allen, Duane Musser, Anthony Fry, Lisa Ziniel, Jerry
Denning, Brandon Ross, Glenn Siders, Clifton Young, Lori
Dockery, Tim Furman, John Cruise, Kevin Den Adel, E. Tony
Kellems
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
1. The Commission voted 4-2 (Freerks and Dyer opposed) to recommend approval of
REZI 1-00010/SUB13-00005, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS-5) to
Planned Development Overlay -Low Density Single Family (OPD-5) zone and a
preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan of The Palisades, a 32-lot,
13.07 acre residential subdivision located at 1729 North Dubuque Road and to
remove the list of trees and have the list of trees approved by the City Forester.
2. The Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB12-00014, a preliminary
plat of approximately 4.29 acres of Walden Wood Part 10, a 20-10t, residential
subdivision located at Walden Road.
3. The Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB13-00011 a preliminary
plat of Eastbrook Flats for a 1-lot, 4.83 acre residential subdivision located at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
4. The Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB13-00013, a preliminary
plat of Brookwood Pointe third to Fifth Addition, a 61-lot, 17.15 acre residential
subdivision located north of Vest! Lane and west of Sycamore Street.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
Rezoning Items / Development Items:
REZ111-00010/SUB13-00005 Discussion of an application submitted by Allen Homes for a
rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Overlay
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 2 of 16
Low Density Single Family (OPD-5) zone for uxi-acres of land located at 1729 North
Dubuque Road and a preliminary plat of The Palisades, a 32-lot residential subdivision.
Miklo explained where the property is located and showed an aerial view of the subject property.
He showed the plat, which calls for dividing the property into single family residential lots as well
as an outlot to be dedicated to the City as a neighborhood park. He said that rezoning is
required because there are some sensitive areas on this property — critical slopes and a
woodland. He said a similar plan came before the Commission two years ago involving property
to the west, with the idea that some of the storm water management from the development
would be included on the adjacent property as it worked its way to an existing storm water basin
to the north. He said negotiations with the owners didn't work out. He said this plan puts the
water in the outlot, which necessitates removal of the woodland. He said the applicant proposes
to plant replacement trees on some of the disturbed area, the outlot and on individual lots.
Miklo said it's been the City's goal and in the Comprehensive Plan to connect Oakes Drive back
to Dubuque Road to make traffic better for the neighborhood and provide access for emergency
vehicles. He said the applicant has reached an agreement with the neighboring property owner
to allow this portion of Oakes Drive to be dedicated to the City to allow its connection, making it
comply with the Comprehensive Plan.
Miklo said the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department have agreed on a certain
portion of the development being dedicated for a neighborhood park. He said staff has received
revised plats that address all the deficiencies that were noted by staff. Miklo showed the
Commission photos of the neighborhood and the subject property. He said at this point staff is
recommending approval of the Sensitive Areas Overlay Rezoning as well as the preliminary
plat.
Dyer asked what kinds of trees will be cut. Miklo said there is a variety, including walnut trees.
Freerks said if the number was one -hundred percent for the removal for sensitive areas she was
shocked by that number and that they usually don't go to that extent and would like to see
something better happen. She said there are many lovely trees. Miklo said the area defined as
woodland is where the storm water management will need to go if it's going to occur on this
property. He said there had been an attempt two years ago with the adjacent property owner to
put the storm water on that property, which could have resulted in the preservation of some of
those trees. Freerks said it seems that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance was put in for a reason,
and this aggressively eliminates all sensitive areas.
Theobald asked if the adjacent property was wooded and would also require removal of some
trees. Miklo said that was correct.
Eastharn asked if there are other parts of the defined woodland that are not parts of the storm
water detention facility and is the applicant proposing removing all the trees there. Miklo said
there are groves of trees outside the woodland area and the applicant is planning on preserving
some of those, but they don't get counted toward the woodlands.
Freerks said she sees no protection anywhere on the plans and to her that's a red flag because
it means anything can happen.
Theobald asked how the best way to handle storm water is determined. Miklo said it generally
has to be on the low point of the property with the vegetation cleared.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 3 of 16
Freerks opened public discussion.
Jesse Allen of Allen Home, the applicant, said they put a lot of time into dealing with the
sensitive issues of this plan and had a couple of good neighbor meetings. He said there's a
strong need in Iowa City for single family housing. He said by connecting an old neighborhood
with Oakes Street is where they are impacting many of the trees as well as with the storm water
plan. He said they will try to save as many trees as possible.
Allen reiterated for Eastham that the two reasons so many trees have to be taken down are due
to the connection of Oakes Drive to North Dubuque Road and installation of storm water basins
on the subject parcel. He said the way the City calculates the woodland impact, even though the
applicant is saving trees, is that they are impacting them one -hundred percent based on the
boundaries. Eastham asked if the applicant will plant 300 trees after the subdivision is
completed. Allen said that is correct, and they would be younger and healthier than what is
currently there.
Thsobald asked where Allen got the list of trees that will be planted. Allen said MMS
Consultants put it together for him. She said there are a lot of trees on the list that will be
potential prDblems in the future so she would recommend that someone like Mark Vitosh, who is
familiar with emerging tree disease be consulted.
Greenwood Hektoen told Theobald to refrain from making recommendations on landscape
architects for the developer to use.
Miklo said the key point is that the Commission has an interest in what the replacement trees
are. Theobald said this list is not necessarily healthy. Allen said they would take a look and
make some changes. It was made clear that Mark Vitosh works for the State and would not be a
paid consultant.
Freerks said for her this is a special place, and she's not sure this plan is the best way to lay out
a development to take advantage of the site and to give people the feeling of being in the
country. She said removing all these trees is something that just annihilates the whole
landscape.
Duane Musser of MMS Consultants said one of the main things driving this project is the
requirement by the City to connect Oakes Drive. He said when they were planning the
development, they had a cul-de-sac, and the City said they were not going to approve any
subdivision without a connection. He said one of the ravines on the subject property will have to
be deforested and filled in to make Oakes Street connect, and the other ravine will have to be
used for the storm water management. He said on these infill developments you have to meet
certain requirements, and he doesn't know how to do that another way.
Thomas asked what the maintenance is on the replacement trees. Musser said it would be up to
the homeowner to maintain their trees. Thomas asked about those in Outlot A. Musser said they
would be the responsibility of the homeowners association.
Eastham asked if the City will have responsibility for some of the replacement trees. Musser
said they would in Outlot B.
Martin asked Musser why they have to fill in the ravine to connect Oakes Drive and why there
couldn't be a bridge. Musser said a bridge is not cost-effective.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 4 of 16
Eastham asked if the Commission could approve a plan that does not extend Oakes Drive and
has two smaller storm water retention areas with less impact on the existing trees. Miklo said
staff wouldn't recommend doing that because it wouldn't comply with the Comprehensive Plan
or the Police and Fire Departments' desire to get better emergency access to this area. Miklo
showed an aerial photograph of the larger neighborhood. He said that it's true that two acres of
woodland would be destroyed, but there is still an extensive woodland that remains in the
neighborhood. Freerks said but someday that too will be developed. Miklo said there is actually
little chance of that due to its protected slopes and no street access.
Dyer asked if the drainage would have to take the course that's outlined if there were fewer
house lots in the plan. Miklo said regardless of how many lots there are, the storm basins will
still have to located in the low points. Miklo said in term of doing two smaller basins and not
connecting Oakes Drive, it would still require an extensive amount of the woodland to be
removed.
Anthony Fry of 19 Caroline Court said he and his wife bought the adjacent property, labeled
IDRS on the location map, from Mr. Giblin in the interest of having no houses behind them. He
said Miklo has convinced him that they need to connect Oakes Drive for safety issues. He has
offered two inch saplings from his own property for use as replacements on the development.
Lisa Ziniel of 1620 North Dubuque Road said she thinks her driveway will intersect with the
proposed connection. She said she's concerned that the atmosphere of the neighborhood will
be lost because of doing what's most cost effective. She said she's also concerned about the
traffic flow created by thirty-two new lots. She said it's a tranquil neighborhood to live in and the
disruption from the proposed subdivision concerns her. She asks the Commission to consider
the area around the subdivision and perhaps take that into account when approving the
subdivision as it would conform to the neighborhood instead of heavier development with closer
access to downtown.
Miklo said one of the things staff looked at was neighborhood compatibility. He said along
Dubuque Road there now exist larger lots, and he pointed out on the plat how the proposed
development has spaced along Dubuque Road to be compatible with that aspect, but has more
typical sized lots more like those along Oakes Drive as you get farther back in the development.
Eastham asked how far the sidewalk will extend on the west side of Dubuque Road. Miklo said
in the future it may be possible to put a sidewalk in on that side of the road but there are no
plans for it immediately. Eastharn asked if there is a sidewalk on the east side. Miklo said one
was put in recently.
Jerry Denning of 1146 Oakes Drive asked for clarification of where the trees would be removed.
Miklo showed him where that would be on a photo. Denning said the cost of putting Oakes Drive
through is the destruction of dense, mature trees. He said he appreciates the obvious interest of
all of the Commission in the tree issue. He said he would like them to take a look at just how
much destruction is inescapable if they are going to do this. He said it would be a great world if
they didn't have to tear it up to that extent. He said he would greatly appreciate them seeing
whatever else might be done in order to avoid this destruction.
Thomas asked if there was any discussion of narrowing Oakes Drive as it passes through the
area of the ravine. Mildo said it's designed as a twenty-eight foot street, and you could narrow it
to the narrowest width allowed, which is twenty-two feet. He said that would not have much
effect on what they could avoid in terms of grading because it's so steep.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 5 of 16
Brandon Ross of 1022 Rochester Avenue said he's familiar with the area and he would like
anything to be done that can be done to protect that area. He said it's a beautiful area and
deliberation on the Commission's behalf is appreciated by everyone.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ11-000101SUB13-00005, a rezoning from
Low Density Single Family (RS-5) to Planned Development Overlay -Low Density Single
Family (OPD-5) zone and a preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan of The
Palisades, a 32-lot, 13.07 acre residential subdivision located at 1729 North Dubuque
Road.
Martin seconded.
Eastham said he's interested in the possibility of narrowing Oakes Drive so that it would have
some effect on the number of trees. He said he's not inclined not to vote for this tonight because
of this issue, but he said in the past the Commission has asked developers to look into doing
things that they weren't sure could be done. He said he's also interested how the design of the
front four lots of this proposed development could affect the appearance of the rest of the
subdivision from North Dubuque Road. He said with those things said, he is reluctantly of the
mind that the removal of trees in this heavily wooded area is in large part the result of City
imposed subdivision standards, which make a lot of sense, especially the requirement that this
site have a functioning storm water system on site.
Thomas said anything they can do even as a gesture to reduce the impact of the connection
and trying to reduce the impact on the existing conditions is something he supports. He said he
agrees with Eastham that it's worth exploring. He said the storm water management and the
connection are triggering the impact, and there doesn't seem to be any way out of that. He said
he supports the project in terms of its basic goals, but he would like to see if they can in any way
reduce the impact. He said he also likes the idea transplanting trees from the adjacent property
to the west.
Martin said she understands the need for the connection but she hesitates to entertain the idea
of narrowing a section of Oakes Street due to safety issues. Thomas responded that this would
still allow for the minimum of twenty-two feet. Martin said the plan seems well thought-out.
Freerks said she said the area really is pretty, but she's not sure how pretty it's going to be once
you put this kind of grid down on it. She understands why everything is being done but she's not
sure that this cookie -cutter is the best use of the resources here. She said if the Oakes Drive
extension was shifted down, it would eliminate lots but also keep a lot of that forested area to
the north. She said there are some beautiful trees along there and that's going to go away. She
said she just doesn't see how this does anything to embrace or even gently nudge the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance in any way and she can't support it.
Theobald said she feels better about the project after hearing from the neighbor and the
possibility of moving some of the trees from that property. She was concerned about replanting
with disease prone trees until she heard that Mark Vitosh had been out to the neighbor's
property looking at the trees.
Thsobald moved to amend the motion to remove the list of trees and have the list of trees
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 6 of 16
approved by the City Forester.
Eastham seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to amend carr ied 6-0.
Dyer said she is reminded of an article by Supreme Court Justice William Douglas called "Do
Trees Have Standing?" which refers to the ability to sue. She said this plan is a grid on a hilly,
beautiful area, and it doesn't seem to take into account the landscape at all. She said she would
be inclined to ask if they need any houses in this area. She said on the east end of Oakes Drive
there are many trees around existing buildings and if Oakes Drive was moved south perhaps
those trees could be saved. She said being able to say they are going to remove one -hundred
percent of the trees doesn't seem to be a solution to preservation of one of the few remaining
natural areas of town.
Freerks said she just can't support the project because she feels that something better could be
done that would be an asset to the community.
Eastharn said that one approach that Planning Commissions take elsewhere is to walk through
an area before they look at a formal plan for an area and talks with the developer and people
nearby and try to come up with some concept of how a parcel could be developed to include
both its natural features and meet the requirements of existing codes.
Miklo said the earlier subdivision was laid out thirty or forty years ago, and that has set the
direction for Oakes Drive. He said the City has tried to balance the needed community good of
extending Oakes Drive with a natural area. He said the concept of how to best deal with this
was addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. He said the City looked very closely at this in the
year the North District Plan was approved, and this is the best they could come up with given
what they are working with.
Eastham said he's encouraged that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires tree replacement.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-2 with Freerks and Dyer opposed.
REZ13-00019/SUB13-00012: Discussion of an application submitted by WillowwInd
Properties, LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Multi -Family (RM-12) zone to Planned
Development Overlay/Low Density Multi -Family (OPD-RM12) zone for 1.31-acres of land
located at Willow Wind Place and Westwinds Drive and a preliminary plat of The
Westwinds Second Addition, a 2-lot residential subdivision.
Miklo said the reason for the planned development is to bring an existing duplex lot into
conformance with the Zoning Code. He explained that when Lot 3 was developed this site was a
club house, a tennis court and a storm water basin. He said it was subdivided off Lot 3 without
City review or approval and two lots were created, one for the duplex and the other for the
tennis court and storm water management facilities. He said this doesn't conform with the Code,
thus the application for a planned development.
Miklo said the plan is to create two lots, one with the duplex and the other with the storm water
basin and a very specific plan for a seven unit apartment building. He said a home owners
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 7 of 16
association would be formed that would obligate the future maintenance of the basin. He said
there are still deficiencies in a new plan that the City Engineers have not been able to look at
yet, so staff is recommending deferral until the next meeting and approval of the rezoning and
the plat if all the issues mentioned are worked through. He showed photos of the existing site
and surrounding area.
Freerks asked if the storm water facilfty functions right now for any of area. Mildo said it's a
depression and it does hold water. He said the new design will have to have the capacity to
serve both the old and the new development.
Eastham asked if this developer will have to provide storm water management for other property
owners nearby. Miklo said it was originally designed thirty years ago to serve the existing area
and it will have to serve the new development as well.
Eastham asked if it was financially feasible for the required homeowners association to be
responsible for the storm water system. Miklo said it should be.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Duane Musser of MMS Consultants and representative for the applicant said they will be looking
at the storm water standards from the 1970s, what's there today, and what set of regulations
they will be required to design under today. He said they haven't done that yet pending
outcomes from the Commission meeting and the Council.
Theobald said one of the trees the applicant has selected for planting is extremely disease
prone.
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services said they own properties in this area. He said
he's not opposed to this project, but he wants the applicant to be aware of the poor condition of
the sidewalk along Melrose Avenue. Miklo said the new plans do show a sidewalk connection to
Melrose Avenue, and once this is developed with dwelling units, there will be a responsible
party for maintenance.
Freerks asked if there is any way if this doesn't go through that the City can't address all of the
issues on the property. Mildo said it's been difficult in the past to get the owner's co-operation.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to defer this item to the August I e meeting.
Martin seconded.
Thomas said one of the deficiencies that concerned him was the separation on tne north side of
the duplex where an S-2 standard required for the screening between the duplex and the
proposed parking lot to the north. He said he doesn't think the S-2 is appropriate here and
would like to ask for an S-5 standard. Miklo said he thought S-3, a dense evergreen hedge,
might work better.
Theobald said she's glad this project will create the opportunity to correct the Condition of the
poorly maintained sidewalk on Melrose Avenue.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 8 of 16
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
Rezoning Item:
REZ13-00020: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development
Company, Inc., for a rezoning from Community Commercial (CC-2) zone to Low Density
Multifamily (RM-12) zone for 2.19-acres of land located east of Dodge Street, north of
Conklin Lane and west of Dodge Street Court.
Miklo showed photographs of the property and the neighborhood. He said this property was
rezoned a number of years ago to Community Commercial (CC-2) with a Conditional Zoning
Agreement to assure that the commercial or mixed use on the property would be compatible to
the neighborhood as well as being as attractive gateway to the city.
Miklo said the applicant has marketed the property unsuccessfully with a plan for commercial or
office with apartments above and a financial institution and now wants to rezone the area. Miklo
said the Comprehensive Plan talks specifically about this intersection and the need to design
something compatible to the neighborhood as well as stating if it's not possible to develop mixed
use in this area, the residential should be compatible with the existing development on Dodge
Street Court. He said the applicant doesn't have a plan yet, but staff feels that Low Density
Multifamily (RM-12) zoning could be appropriate with conditions addressing the concern about
neighborhood compatibility.
Miklo said the other concern is that Dodge Street Court is not up to City standards and that
additional traffic shouldn't be added to it unless it's upgraded. He said staff is recommending as
a condition of development that if there is any access to Dodge Street Court that it be improved
to City standards to the point of wherever there's a driveway.
Miklo said the other concern is the odd shape of the property, so laying out a development will
take thought. He said staff is recommending conditions to get at the design and that the plan
comes back to the Commission for approval.
Miklo said there are also concerns about draining away from Dodge Street Court, where
drainage isn't adequate. He said staff is recommending approval with a number of conditions
that are listed in the staff report.
Eastham asked if staff thinks Conklin Lane is adequate to handle residential development here
and what exists on Dodge Street Court. Miklo said the City's Transportation Planners were not
as concerned about Conklin Lane as they were about Dodge Street Court. He said probably the
best place for access is off Dodge Street. Easthann asked if Dodge Street in that area is two
lanes. Miklo responded that he thinks there is a center turning lane.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services said as the applicant he would like to reserve
his comments for later.
Clifton Young of 1124 Dodge Street Court said he was informed that they are planning to build
up to thirty-two family units, and he thinks that's pretty high density for this area. He's very
concerned about the parking. He said what they don't want is very high density.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 9 of 16
Eastharn asked what the number of units will be if this is zoned RM-12. Miklo said based on
land area, up to thirty-two units could be developed depending on design review.
Thomas asked if Miklo had the numbers for RS-12. Miklo said he thinks it would allow close to
the same number.
Lod Dockery of 1110 Conklin Lane said this has always been a quiet place. She said she's
concerned about a large number of people coming into the neighborhood and disrupting their
quiet style of life.. She said that Dodge Street has become very busy lately. She said duplexes
or townhomes would fit in with the neighborhood or smaller single family homes.
Tim Furman of 1763 Dodge Street Court said he disagrees on the rezoning application and
would like to see some validation of the applicant's claim that they can't market the property. He
said they are asking $950,000 for the property and the assessed value is around $350,000. He
said this request is not compatible with the Comprehensive Plan as it reads "if it is not possible
to achieve a mixed use development adjacent to Dodge Street Court the preferred use is
residential similar to the existing residential development in the area." He said he interprets that
to mean single family as there is no multi -family in the area.
Mildo referred to a previous question from the Commission and said if this was zoned RS-12
with a planned development you could get up to twenty-eight units theoretically.
John Cruise of 905 Bluffwood Drive said his son lives at 1265 Dodge Street Court and that he is
opposed to multi -family in the area for the same reasons Furman is opposed. He sold he hopes
the Commission will look at this in light of the Comprehensive Plan. He said multi -family is not
similar to anything in this area.
Glenn Siders said they have aggressively marketed this property. He said the odd shape of the
lot makes elements of commercial development difficult, so it's most appropriate to look at this
development as all residential. He said they have no problems with adhering to any of the staff
recommendations and he doubts that they will use Dodge Street Court or Conklin Lane as
access. He said any access will come off Dodge Street.
Freerks asked what Siders feels about RS-12. Siders said they thought about RS-12, but they
like RM-12 because it offers more opportunities than RS-12.
Martin asked why they want this rezoned before the Commission sees plans. Siders said they
need some assurance that the City is happy with that zoning.
Dyer asked why he says in his written statement that the setting isn't conducive or practical for
single family living yet there's single family living on that street now. Siders said on Dodge
Street Court there is, but with the shape of the subject lot the City wouldn't allow them to access
single family homes off Dodge Street. He said providing access via Dodge Street Court would
decrease substantially the number of single family lots.
Freerks asked about a cluster of townhouses. Siders said that's a decision the Commission can
make after they go through the design review committee, and townhouses are multi -family.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 10 of 16
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ13-00020, a request to rezone
approximately 2.13 acres of land located east of Conklin Lane, southeast of Dodge Street
and west of Dodge Street Court from Community Commercial [CC-2) to Low Density
Multifamily (OPD-RM12) subject to the following conditions in the staff recommendation:
• A development plan, including a landscaping plan, building designs, and site plan
be approved by the Design Review Committee and be forwarded to the Planning
and Zoning Commission for review and approval to ensure compatibility with
adjacent residential properties;
• If development on this property has vehicular access to Dodge Street Court, the
developer shall install improvements needed to bring the street up to City
standards to the point of access (driveway location); and
• The applicant shall dedicate sufficient land along the entire property frontage to
widen the Dodge Street Court right-of-way to 50 feet.
• The applicant installs sidewalks along the Conklin Lane and Dodge Street Court
frontages, and provides pedestrian connections from the development to the
sidewalk on Dodge Street;
• Development on the subject properties shall be designed to drain on�slte storm
water away from Dodge Street Court.
Martin seconded.
Eastham said he's interested in the appearance of this development from Dodge Street as the
Commission has tried to keep in mind when considering developmental designs that Dodge
Street is a gateway to the city
Eastharn moved to amend the first condition to add "and appearance from Dodge Streer'
after "adjacent residential properties;".
Dyer seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to amend carried 6-0.
Freerks asked Miklo if he thought a multi -family building is compatible and similar to, as the
Comprehensive Plan states, the existing housing in the area. Miklo said it depends on where it's
located on the property. He said his opinion is that it would be possible to put a smaller multi-
family building on Dodge Street but to be similar to what's across the street, duplexes or
townhouses would be appropriate.
Freerks said she can understand why people have concerns about this project, as she doesn't
think the subject property is appropriate for a thirty-two unit building or in tune with the
Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said he agrees that would not be in the spirit of the Comprehensive
Plan. He said a smaller apartment or some townhouses and duplexes could be compatible.
Freerks said that's why she thinks of RS-12 being better. She said if they approve RM-12 but
they don't know what will really occur because that can be a lot of different things. Miklo said the
Commission will see this again and will have an opportunity to judge it on its compatibility.
Eastham said he thinks the Comprehensive Plan does limit the type of buildings that are
appropriate for this parcel.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 11 of 16
Thomas said he reads the language ot the Comprehensive Plan being pretty clear that if it's to
be similar to the existing residential surrounding the property that would suggest single family
residential. He said the densities would be similar to RM-12 and RS-12 would be a more
appropriate starting point.
Freerks said she it's pushing it to have that parcel full of townhouses. She said she doesn't think
there are going to be single family homes on this lot. She said she thinks something a little more
dense is appropriate, but she's not sure that multi -family is what they are looking for.
Greenwood Hektoen advised the Commission to either withdraw the motion to approve and
make a motion to defer, or they can take it on faith that this conversation will guide the next
stage and approve it knowing that they have this conversation on the record.
Thomas moved to withdraw the motion on the floor.
Eastham concurred with the withdrawal.
Eastham moved to defer this ftem until the August 15 th meeting.
Theobald seconded.
Freerks said they want to make sure that whatever comes forward and the Commission finalizes
is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and multi -family structures might not be the best
choice, but perhaps there is a way to work it in with Dodge Street Court.
Thomas said he would encourage a good neighbor meeting.
Eastharn said because there may not be access to Dodge Street Court from this development
perhaps it will necessitate some creativity to join the existing neighborhood with the new one.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 5-0.
Development Items:
SUB12-00014: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development
Company for a preliminary plat of Walden Wood Part 10, a 20-lot, 4.29-acre residential
subdivision located on Walden Road.
Ralston said this is the last remaining parcel of undeveloped land in the Walden Wood
subdivision. He said staff finds that the preliminary plat conforms to the RS-12 zoning that the
applicant currently has and meets the conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement, (CZA) by
having a configuration that clusters the units along Mormon Trek Boulevard and Walden Road;
providing no access onto Mormon Trek Boulevard; and has a provision of six visitor parking
spaces along the north side of the private drive. He said the Southwest District Plan indicates
that this area is appropdate for single family and duplex residential and specifically states that it
will "require careful design due to its topography conditions and the unusual shape and size of
the lot."
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 12 of 16
Ralston said the subject area has some steep slopes and the grading plan Shows that no more
than thirty-five percent of the critical slopes will be disturbed. He said the City Engineer has
designed a storm water management system with an on -site water detention basin that
connects by pipe to an open swale that runs toward Rohret Road and then is caught by the
City's storm water system. He said the City Engineer believes the design meets the
requirements of the CZA, one of which is that the system not exacerbate storm water issues on
adjacent properties.
Ralston said the developer has offered to dedicate a portion of the lot to meet the open space
requirements, but staff has agreed that because of so much unusable space with all the slopes,
they recommend collecting fees instead.
Ralston said there are no remaining deficiencies and staff is recommending approval of this
plat.
Eastham asked what recourse nearby property owners have if they believe that the design is
not meeting its goal and if in five years what they see running through their yards indicates that
the design and construction did not accomplish that goal. Greenwood Hektoen said they would
make a complaint which would be investigated, and if it was founded, a municipal infraction or
something of that nature could be issued, which is what happens in any other neighborhood of
the city. Eastham asked if the City then has mechanisms to require that the storm water system
be improved or altered. Greenwood Hektoen said it wouldn't be so much to change the design
but the City would investigate to see if it's functioning in the way it's designed. Eastham asked
what would happen if the City concluded that it wasn't functioning properly. Greenwood Hektoen
said then action could be taken to require compliance with the design.
Theobald asked how efficient and environmentally friendly a storm water system is that uses an
open swale. Ralston said that the City Engineer would prefer to put it in a pipeline, but because
of the slope and the grading they can't put a pipe in the area where the open swale will be.
Theobald said there are several basins on the west side that end up just sitting there with no
trees and grass, just collecting water and trash. Ralston said this would not be a very deep
basin and it would be dry most of the time. Theobald said she doesn't think this empty expanse
of lawn will be very attractive. She said her question is whether it's been explored updating
what's being done on top of those basins, like plantings.
Greenwood Hektoen said in response to Eastham's earlier question, it will have a subdividers'
agreement that will impose that requirement and the City won't release the obligations of that
agreement until it's assured that the basin has been established according to requirement and
functioning properly.
Thomas said with respect to the condition that the storm water system would not exacerbate
drainage issues, he feels that at least establishes a base line by which to evaluate any future
storm event. Ralston says he doesn't know if the City has any good, solid baselines. He agrees
with Greenwood Hektoen that there are mechanisms in place to quantify to get a baseline.
Thomas says he thinks they need a good understanding of existing conditions in order to
evaluate its performance.
Freerks opened public discussion
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 13 of 16
Glenn Siders of Southgate Development Services said they have been working on this a long
time, designing and redesigning. He said the developer and the City are satisfied, and they are
ready to move forward with the final plat.
Kevin Den Adel of 54 Coll Court asked what kind of maintenance this type of swale would need
and for assurance about the obligation for maintenance. He wants to know how the swale will
integrate with some drainage trenches in his back yard, during and after construction.
Siders said this has been thoroughly studied and vatted by his engineers and surveyors and
they are comfortable with the design. He said the homeowners' association will be responsible
for maintenance, and those will be in the legal papers and reviewed. He said they will have
conversation with the engineers about how best to plant the swale.
Freerks said there has been a great deal of discussion about this, and it's in Siders best interest
to make this work. Siders agreed.
E. Tony Kellems of 2432 Walden Court asked how wide the swale will be. Ralston said it will be
between five and six feet wide.
Siders said the depth of ditches will vary due to undulations of the ground but will be a minimum
of five feet at the bottom and he doesn't know how wide at the top.
Kellems asked how far to the west the swale will be. Ralston said he approximates twenty-five
feet, but would have to defer to an engineer to be more specific about grading and changes in
level.
Kellems asked if there will be any trees put on the south side of the swale. He said they would
need protection all along the south side of the subject property. He asked other technical
questions that would need to be answered by an engineer. He said his concern is that they have
had water coming into the homes where he lives, and they want to make sure that the problems
have been corrected. He pointed out which houses have had water in them. Ralston said the
City Engineer is satisfied with the plan, but it's actually the developer's engineers who put that
plan together. Kellems asked for a dirt berm. Ralston that's something they would definitely
work with the engineers on.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB12-00014, a preliminary plat of
approximately 4.29 acres orf Walden Wood Part 10, a 20-lot, residential subdivision
located at Walden Road.
Martin seconded.
Freerks said they have had much discussion about this property because of a number of issues
in this area. She said it's a property that's been difficult to find solutions for development but she
thinks they have something here that will be a nice addition to the area and perhaps even fix
some of the issues that occurred when the other areas were developed.
Eastham said this is a good example of how they can try to do planning and development, and it
does attempt to accommodate the externalities of development in a way that's reasonable for
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 14 of 16
the property owner ano trie nearby property owners. He said these designs are intended to
protect the properties to the north and south and they will hopefully do that.
Thomas said he agrees, but he does have some concerns about the properties in Walden
Court, as south of the detention basin there will be water running down the slope toward Walden
Court. He said he will have to rely on City staff to make sure those issues are addressed before
this project is constructed.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
Freerks called for a short break.
Freerks called the meeting back to order.
SUB13-00011: Discussion of an application submitted by 5ummit Ridge, LLC for a
preliminary plat of Eastbrook Flats, a 1-lot, 4.83-acre residential subdivision located at
the northeast corner of the intersection cyf Scott Boulevard and American Legion Road.
Miklo said there is the need for a twenty-five foot construction easement along Scott Boulevard
and American Legion Road and the applicant has agreed to put that on the plat. He said staff is
recommending approval of this application.
Freerks opened public discussion.
Jesse Allen, the applicant, presented himself for questioning.
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB13-000111 a preliminary plat for a 1-lot,
4.83 acre residential subdivision located at the northeast corner of the intersection of
Muscatine Avenue and Scott Boulevard.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
SUB13-00013: Discussion of an application submitted by Steve Kohl! Construction, LC
for a preliminary plat of Brookwood Pointe Third to Fifth Addition, a 61-10t, 17.16-acre
residential subdivision located on Russell Drive and Terrapin Drive.
Miklo said staff recommends approval.
Eastham asked if there is a sidewalk access to Weatherby Park on the western part of this
subdivision. Miklo said there is not because there is an intervening property. He said there will
be access just to the west.
Freerks opened public discussion
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 2013 - Formal
Page 15 of 16
Freerks closed public discussion.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of SUB13-00013, a preliminary plat of
Brookwood Pointe third to Fifth Addition, a 61 -lot, 17.15 acre residential subdivision with
one outlot located north of Vest! Lane and west of Sycamore Street.
Thoobald seconded.
Consideration of Meetina Minutes: July 18, 2013
Eastham moved to defer approval of the minutes of July 18, 2013 to the next meeting.
Martin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0.
OTHER
ADJOURNMENT-
Eastham moved to adjourn.
Martin seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote.
z
0
2
0
0
L)
z
Z
LU
0
Z
Cl)
Cy
04
LU
2
ad
z
19
0
z
LU
0
LL
z
axx
x
x
Lu
-xx
0
Go
zXXXXXXXI
C4
LU
x
x
x
X
xlx
w
.Xxxxxxol
�Xxxxxxxl
Lf)
IlXXXXXXXII
00
�Xxxxx,lxx
�e
4
jXXXXXIxx
e!XXXXXIXX
)o
LU
—Ixlx
xlxl
x
x
4
7 c
vxxxx
x
LU
x
N
c
t
% ixx
C
x
x
X,
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
XIX
XH
i
x
x
Z;�
x
x
x
LLI
x
x
x
x
LU
Lu
(D
ce)
r,
Lo
oD
Lr)
c,)
ui IL
Lu IL
X
LO
0
LJO
C
Lr)
C)
LO
0
0
il
Za
0
Lo
0
uj
LU
M
LU
z
w
4
Z
CO
-j
Dg
-J
Z
mzo<mxm
LU
CL
0
0
oc
M
00
U) -CL
.wx
LU
J
2
Lu
�
ww
m<
�
rolo=
LU
.4c
z
>.
a
W
LL
2
U)
I
a
z
P
LU
LUUJ
2
R
2
ix
c
LL
z
LO
�Xxxxxxx
&XX2,)-Xxxx
:!Exxxxxx
Co)
h
lxxxxxxx
c
It
Z—Oxxxxxx
W
IXXXX2)-Xx
w
c4xxxxxxx
W
xxxxx
w
�,Xlxxx
W
0
w
0
w
�Xxxxjx�xa�
;5
w
1
xxxx
w
x
w
w
U,
,
0
x
x
x
x
LL,
Lu
0
x
x
�X
XMIXI
oxxxxxxx
U)
w &
Lr)
173
0
16
LO
Lo
Lr)
�-X0000000
w
w
=i
w
Z
W
<
z
m
z
0
xzo<x7
0
4
ui
o
MEL
w
w
w!
�-
co
4
LU
w
0�
o
x
mu
LzI8w
U.
a
m
-D
a)
Ox E
W
c
co to Co
T.0 -0
< z
xow�
0
5.:
LU
�c