Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting March 13, 2019 City Hall Council Chambers 220 Clay Street, Cedar Falls, Iowa MINUTES The Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission met in regular session on Wednesday, March 13, 2019 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 220 Clay Street, Cedar Falls, Iowa. The following Commission members were present: Giarusso, Larson, Leeper, Oberle, and Wingert. Adkins, Hartley, Holst and Saul were absent. Karen Howard, Planning & Community Services Manager, was also present. 1.) Acting Chair Leeper noted the Minutes from the February 27, 2019 regular meeting are presented. Ms. Oberle made a motion to approve the Minutes as presented. Mr. Wingert seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 5 ayes (Giarusso, Larson, Leeper, Oberle, and Wingert), and 0 nays. 2.) The first item of business was amendments to the Zoning Code text. Acting Chair Leeper introduced the item and Ms. Howard provided background information. She explained that in January the Commission forwarded a recommendation to the City Council for certain zoning text amendments to the College Hill Neighborhood Overlay Zoning District. She explained that the changes would eliminate the confusing language about principal, accessory and secondary uses with regard to mixed-use buildings that made it difficult to determine which dimensional and parking standards applied. It will also add a definition of a mixed-use building and distinguish it from the definition of a residential building. The parking requirements for the uses would be clearly stated and changed for multiple dwellings to match the proposed parking requirement for residential units within a mixed-use building. Minimum and maximum setbacks would be established for mixed-use buildings to ensure a main street character as envisioned for the College Hill Business District, as well as building design standards to address safe and prominent building entries, quality storefront design, and standards for high quality building materials and articulation to match requirements for multiple dwellings. The language will also be cleaned up for terms used for different types of dwellings to match Section 29-2, Definitions. Ms. Howard explained that City Council voted to refer the proposed ordinance back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for modifications so that the change to the parking requirements would only apply in the C-3 District. She discussed the modifications made to the proposed text amendments to address the City Council request. She explained that the parking requirement for dwelling units in mixed-use buildings in the C-3 District would be distinguished from the parking requirements for dwelling units within mixed-use building located in other zones within the College Hill Overlay. She noted that the only other zone in the Overlay that would allow mixed-use buildings would be the R-4 District, since the R-4 Zone allows a few commercial uses as well as residential dwellings. She also explained that the parking requirement for multiple dwelling buildings would remain the same as in the current code. Kathryn Sogard, 330 Columbia Circle, Executive Director for the College Hill Partnership, stated that the Partnership had three main points for their recommendations, which they forwarded to the Commission in a letter they submitted to staff. They urged the Commission to approve the changes; requested that the parking study not hold up the code changes; and they believe that if enforcement of current time limits and policies in the City’s public lots were improved that a lot of the parking concerns in the business district would be alleviated. 1  Mr. Wingert made a motion to approve. Ms. Oberle seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 5 ayes (Giarusso, Larson, Leeper, Oberle, and Wingert), and 0 nays. 3.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a site plan for River Place II in the Central Business District Overlay District. Acting Chair Leeper introduced the item and Ms. Howard provided background information. She explained that the property is located in downtown Cedar Falls at the site of the former Wells Fargo Bank at the corner of 3rd and Main Streets. The current zoning is C-3 and is covered by the Central Business Overlay District. She noted that the applicant has worked with staff to meet the recently adopted downtown design standards in the code and has met twice with the Community Main Street Design Committee review and also participated in a conference call with the Iowa Main Street office regarding the design. She noted that the applicant had refined the design based on the input received from staff and from Community Main Street. Ms. Howard described the uses and parking proposed for the new buildings at 302 Main Street and 123 E. 3rd Street. She noted that the building proposed for 302 Main Street will be three stories tall, have 1st floor retail space and two floors of office. The proposed building at 123 E. 3rd Street will be a 6-story building with underground parking accessed from the alley, 1st floor retail space, 2nd floor parking and office, and 4 floors of residential condominiums. The building will have 50 structured parking spaces, which satisfies the parking requirement for 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Eleven additional on-street public parking spaces will be created for visitor parking. Howard also summarized the parking impact analysis completed by WGI, the parking consultant. WGI concluded in their report that there will be sufficient developer-controlled private parking to serve all the proposed uses in the two buildings and that the 11 additional on-street parking spaces will benefit the entire area. Ms. Howard discussed other requirements including open space/landscaping, sidewalks and streetscape, as well as the proposed drive-through. She covered staff concerns regarding additional traffic in the alley and potential mitigation options and additional conditions to be added to the Development Agreement. She also showed images of the proposed building and spoke to the design standards, including building height and how the upper floor stepbacks would help to visually reduce the perceived height from a pedestrian perspective. She described how the proposed building designs meet the design standard in the code for building proportion. Ms. Howard provided building composition details and provided drawings of the proposed layout for each building. She discussed design standards, such as windows and transparency, materials and textures, and how each side the proposed buildings meet the requirements. She also discussed the proposed colors, architectural features and building entries. Requirements for trash dumpsters, stormwater management, signage and utility easement vacations have been considered and will be met. Staff recommends review and discussion of the site plan and continuation to the March 27 meeting for final review. Taylor Morris, Eagle View Partners, 200 State Street is the project manager. He read a statement describing the project and the demand for the mixed use buildings. He noted that previously the area has catered to millennials, but he noted there is a significant demand for for-sale units by the 50+ age population, which they are trying to meet with the proposed building. Tim Schilling, 3434 Tucson Drive, stated that he has no issues with the mix of the buildings, but he feels the building is too tall. He feels it will not be within the character of downtown and the residential use will take up too many parking spaces. 2  Jenny Bagenstos, 220 Main Street, the owner of Here’s What’s Poppin, stated her concern with the office uses creating parking issues. She believes that employees will use the parking spaces for long periods of time preventing customers from parking. Ivan Wieland, 2216 W. 3rd Street, noted his parking concerns in the area, as well as his belief that this kind of building doesn’t fit downtown. He feels that it doesn’t have the small town feel that has always been in that area. Chad Smith, Taylor Veterinary Hospital, thanked the Commission for hearing his concerns. He noted his concerns with the parking issues that will be created. He explained that there are already problems with people parking in their parking lot, which makes it difficult for clients to get their pets into the office. He also noted issues with pet elimination as there will not be adequate space. He doesn’t feel the building blends in with the surrounding buildings and it will be forcing out non-traditional buildings. He stated is desire to have input on the mural that is proposed for the south side of the building since it will be highly visible from their property. Ms. Oberle asked Ms. Howard to speak to the parking study and address questions regarding business use and how it plays into the calculations for retail versus residential space. Ms. Howard stated that there is no parking requirement downtown for commercial uses, however the parking consultant used a compilation of other parking studies to estimate parking demand from both the commercial and residential uses proposed in the building. They used shared factors for downtown locations to estimate the maximum amount at peak times. They also studied the existing River Place private parking lots during different times and different days to determine how much parking is available that could help serve the needs for commercial tenants of the new buildings. Ms. Giarusso asked if the study provided for the current buildings on State Street as well as this proposed building. Ms. Howard stated that it was considered. Mr. Leeper asked about the timing for the proposed changes with the parking study. Ms. Howard summarized a number of the recommendations from the parking study in the short term. She noted that all the parking consultant’s recommendations and the final study report is available on the City’s website. She noted that one of the recommendations was to add on- street parking spaces wherever possible downtown in the near future. A primary recommendation is also to make arrangements with private lot owners for sharing their lots in the evening. There are currently discussions are in the works, but will depend on the private owners. There will also be increased enforcement in public lots, which will be metered and also provide opportunities for long term parkers to purchase permits. Acting Chair Leeper expressed concerns with the potential drive through and the stacking space requirements. Mr. Wingert stated that he has the same concerns. He feels it is a beautiful building but thinks that there will be traffic issues with the drive through. Ms. Howard discussed the compromise made for the current plan and that staff is also concerned and will include provisions in the Development Agreement that would allow the City to impose additional conditions or modifications to the drive through in the future if it causes traffic circulation or safety issues. Mr. Wingert asked if there is a system in place for parking for the office spaces. Mr. Morris stated that they have extra parking in their existing River Place lot and would offer permits for business owners and employees. There are also requirements in the commercial and residential leases that specify that tenants should park in their provided parking lot. There was further, brief discussion regarding drive through and the parking issues. The item was continued to the March 27, 2019 meeting. 4.) The Commission then considered amendment to the MPC Development Procedures Agreement. Acting Chair Leeper introduced the item and Ms. Howard provided background information. She explained that it is proposed to amend an MPC Development Procedure 3  Agreement at 2910 and 2920 McClain Drive and 5609 University Avenue. She stated that the proposed plan would allow three residential buildings to continue as single-unit dwellings or be wholly or partially converted into commercial businesses or offices. Access would be limited to one driveway per property with no new access to University Avenue. Cross access drives between properties may be permitted. Site changes necessary to serve commercial uses may be allowed, such as widening curbs, adding parking and landscaping to meet zoning requirements. If changes are proposed beyond what is allowed in the agreement, a new site plan and agreement must be reviewed and approved through Planning and Zoning and City Council. Also, at the time of the development, missing public sidewalk segments must be constructed. Staff views the change to the MPC master site plan as positive, since re-using the existing residential buildings will ensure that the area remains in scale with the surrounding residential neighborhoods and will provide opportunities for small businesses. Staff recommends review and discussion of the amendment by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the public and to continue discussion to the next meeting for final review. Mr. Wingert asked what the allowable uses are in the MPC. Ms. Howard stated that it is a variety of commercial and institutional uses, such as office uses, professional office, small retail and service businesses, and similar. The item will be continued at the March 27, 2019 meeting. 5.) Ms. Howard mentioned the upcoming Planning and Zoning for Local Officials course and reminded the Commission that the registration is coming soon for anyone interested. She also noted that there will be a Public Kick-Off meeting for the new Downtown Visioning Project on April 2, 2019 from 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. at the Cedar Falls Community Center. 6.) As there were no further comments, Ms. Oberle made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Wingert seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 5 ayes (Giarusso, Larson, Leeper, Oberle, and Wingert), and 0 nays. The meeting adjourned at 7:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Clerk 4