Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting October 24, 2018 City Hall Council Chambers 220 Clay Street, Cedar Falls, Iowa MINUTES The Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission met in regular session on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 220 Clay Street, Cedar Falls, Iowa. The following Commission members were present: Adkins, Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Oberle, Saul and Wingert. Hartley was absent. Karen Howard, Community Services Manager, Shane Graham, Planner II, Iris Lehmann, Planner I and Jon Resler, City Engineer, were also present. 1.) Approval of the October 10, 2018 Minutes was missed and will be considered at the next Planning and Zoning meeting. 2.) The Commission moved to the first item of business, a Central Business District Design Review for a sign band at the LBL store at 321 Main Street. Chair Oberle introduced the item and Ms. Lehmann provided background information. She explained that the tenant would like to use a sequined wall panel to act as a sign band on the top half of the storefront. The wall panel has already been installed without proper permits or approval and upon contact from staff the tenant did submit a plan for review to address the violation. Ms. Lehmann provided renderings of the prior storefront and the current storefront and discussed the design criteria. She noted that the code does not address this type of material so this will set a precedent for future cases. Ms. Lehmann explained that the material section of the design review also requires that materials and textures of buildings in the surrounding area be considered. There are no buildings in the immediate surrounding, or in the downtown overlay, which use similar materials as part of their facade. Conversely, Ms. Lehmann noted that sign bands and signage in general are intended to be elements of a storefront that are unique and draw attention to a business, so it is not unusual to use creative approaches to create visual interest or use color or materials that differ from the primary and more permanent wall materials. City staff does not believe using a unique material on the sign band should be grounds for denial, unless there is evidence that the material will deteriorate quickly, will damage the façade of the building, or will be the predominate material on the façade. In this case, there is no evidence that the material is deteriorating, the installed panel can be removed without damage to the primary materials used for the façade of this building, and will not be used on areas of the façade outside the sign band. Staff feels that the proposal is not counter to the primary intent of the code section regarding materials. In terms of color, the installed wall panel does meet the design standards. Staff recommends approval for the submitted sign band but encourages discussion as this is a unique situation. It was noted that there has been correspondence received as a complaint. Ms. Saul noted that she likes the project and feels it adds to the downtown. Mr. Arntson asked what staff would have done differently if the project had been proposed properly as opposed to being completed before approval. Ms. Lehmann stated that their stance would have been the same. Ms. Saul made a motion to approve. Ms. Adkins seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Adkins, Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Oberle, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 3.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a HWY-1 Site Plan Amendment for 1  Raising Cane’s Signage. Chair Oberle introduced the item and Mr. Graham provided background information. He noted that the Raising Cane’s project was approved by Planning and Zoning and City Council in August, however at the time of site plan submittal there was no plan for free-standing signage. The original plan was to have wall signage and signage at the main entrance in the monument sign. There have been changes made since then and they will not be using the main monument sign, but they would propose to use a free-standing sign at the northeast corner of the parking lot. Mr. Graham provided renderings of the proposed signs and noted that staff recommends approval as all requirements are met. Mr. Holst made a motion to approve. Mr. Leeper seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Adkins, Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Oberle, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 4.) The next item on the agenda was the Park Ridge Estates Preliminary Plat, which was deferred to the next meeting as the petitioner is still working on the design of the stormwater management for the subdivision. 5.) The next item of business was a HWY-1 District Site Plan Review for the Fleet Farm Retail and Convenience Store. Chair Oberle introduced the item and Mr. Graham provided background information. He explained that the proposal was brought before the Commission on October 10 for introduction and comment. He noted that it is located at the southwest corner of W. Ridgeway Avenue and Highway 58 and is approximately 50 acres. The site plan displays a main retail store along the west side of the property with three future retail stores to the north and a convenience store at the northeast corner of the property and two buildable lots south of the convenience store. He also displayed aerial renderings of the property, landscaping, open space, signage, stormwater management and building design plans, noting that all requirements are met. At the last meeting, staff recommended approval subject to several conditions: 1. All street, intersection, traffic control improvements and any additional right-of-way necessary to provide for safe and efficient traffic control and circulation to serve the long term needs of the subject development at full build out of the Property without causing undue traffic circulation and congestion problems along the adjacent public street corridors must be dedicated, constructed, and accepted prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for any portion of development on the Property. 2. The area shown as “Future R/W (right-of-way)” on the concept site plan shall remain as open space and shall not be developed with any structures, fences, buildings, hard surfacing, driveways or sidewalks. 3. If and when the property to the west ever redevelops with commercial uses, a 20-foot wide cross-access drive shall be constructed by the property owner at their expense within a 30-foot wide cross-access easement that will be established at the time of site plan approval. 4. A 5-foot wide sidewalk shall be installed along the entire frontage of the property along W. Ridgeway Avenue. The City will work with the developer to determine the best location for the easternmost sidewalk segment to avoid the wetland and provide for safe pedestrian access to the corner of Ridgeway and Hwy 58. 5. Sidewalks shall be installed throughout the interior of the development site to provide a continuous sidewalk network between all the commercial buildings on the site. Mr. Graham showed the proposed roadway improvements at full build out and stated that the roadway improvements would be completed in two phases. In general, the Phase I Roadway Improvements would include a roundabout at their main entrance west of Nordic Drive, upgrading the intersection of Nordic Drive to a fully signalized intersection where their entrance #2 is located, and installing a sidewalk from the northwest corner of their property to 2  Nordic Drive. The Phase II Roadway Improvements generally include improvements from Nordic Drive to Highway 58, which include adding additional turn lanes, reconfiguring the signals at Highway 58, installing any retaining walls, reconstructing culverts, and completing the sidewalk along W. Ridgeway Avenue. Mr. Graham indicated that staff is also working with the developer to enter into a development agreement that would spell out all of the specific traffic improvements, timing of the improvements, and cost share. He discussed the current staff recommendations and stated that staff recommends approval of the site plan at this time, subject to approval of a development agreement by City Council that details the public improvements necessary along adjacent public roadways to safely and efficiently accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development at full build out and outlining the timeline and responsibility for construction of these improvements. Nicole Chimento, Midland Atlantic, 8044 Montgomery Road, Cincinnati, Ohio, came forward to explain that they have submitted updates and hope the Commission likes it. Mr. Holst asked about the roadway and sidewalk as it feels it is still up in the air. Ms. Howard noted that Jon Resler, City Engineer, was also present to answer any questions about the traffic study recommendations and the proposed road improvements necessary to support the proposed development. Mr. Holst asked Mr. Resler about traffic backup and any potential problems. Mr. Resler explained that this is a difficult situation as there is not an option to move Nordic Drive further from Highway 58. The Engineering Division has worked with the developer to accommodate the potential issues and the proposed solution of a roundabout at the main entrance and full access with a traffic signal at Nordic Drive should work to accommodate the traffic at full build-out of the development and also handle growth in traffic in the area for a significant amount of time. The traffic signal would be a temporary signal initially and additional work would be done in the future to widen the Ridgeway Avenue from Nordic Drive to Highway 58 to accommodate the turn lanes identified in the traffic study. In 2022 the DOT has plans to make improvements to Highway 58 that will coincide with the City’s improvements on Ridgeway Avenue to accommodate traffic flow into the future. The rate of development in the area and the DOT’s interchange concept will also play a part in the how the proposed solution will work. Ms. Howard noted that a public meeting was held with neighboring property owners and businesses and staff has received positive feedback on the proposal to keep the intersection at Nordic full access with a signal. The new retail store and gas station will create a significant increase in traffic, so the roadway improvements noted in the traffic report and as described in the City Engineer’s report will be needed to support the development of the property. Mr. Leeper asked what the approach will be if the traffic backup develops. Mr. Resler doesn’t believe there will be a great deal of issues, but the signal timing could be adjusted if needed. Mr. Leeper made a motion to approve. Ms. Saul seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Adkins, Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Oberle, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 6.) Ms. Howard let the Commission know that the City is installing new agenda management software that will most likely be in use at the next meeting. There will be information coming in the near future regarding the changes and the steps for uploading packets. 7.) As there were no further comments, Mr. Holst made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Saul seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Adkins, Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Oberle, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 3 The meeting adjourned at 6:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Clerk 4