Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting May 22, 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, May 22, 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, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert. Adkins and Prideaux were absent. Karen Howard, Community Services Manager, and Shane Graham, Economic Development Coordinator were also present. 1.) Chair Holst noted the Minutes from the May 8, 2019 regular meeting are presented. Ms. Saul made a motion to approve the Minutes as presented. Ms. Giarusso seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 7 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 2.) The first item of business was a HWY-1 District Site Plan for Gateway Business Park Subdivision. Mr. Holst stated that he will have to abstain from the item and that Mr. Leeper will be the Acting Chair. Mr. Leeper introduced the item and Mr. Graham provided background information. He explained that this is a continued discussion for the HWY-1 District Site Plan Review for Lot 2 of the Gateway Business Park at the northeast corner of West Ridgeway Avenue and Hudson Road. He provided renderings that displayed the elements of the site plan, including entrances, the proposed Dairy Queen, and the service and convenience stores. He also discussed the stormwater detention basin, trash enclosure, trail connections and sidewalks. He presented the landscape, signage, and stormwater management plans, noting that all requirements have been met or exceeded. Mr. Graham showed the overall layout of the site and building design for the proposed buildings. He noted that there was discussion regarding a landscape island that the developer asked to remove and he stated that staff recommends that it not be removed. Staff recommends approval with any additional comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Brad Best of Peters Construction and Aaron Lee of US Oil came forward to speak on behalf of the project. Mr. Best formerly requested that the island be removed from the project, as well as the cornice on the south side of the building. They feel that the island may create pedestrian issues. Mr. Lee added that US Oil supplies roughly 650 independent gas stations throughout the Midwest. Market studies have showed that there is a need for fueling station at that location. Mr. Wingert stated that he has no issues with the proposed modifications. Ms. Saul, Mr. Larson and Ms. Giarusso agreed. Mr. Graham stated that staff would like an updated landscaping plan before the project goes to City Council so points can be recalculated for an accurate staff report. Mr. Wingert made a motion to approve with modifications. Mr. Hartley seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 5 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), 2 abstentions (Holst and Leeper) and 0 nays. 3.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a College Hill Neighborhood Overlay District – Site Plan review for 2119 College Street. Chair Holst introduced the item and Ms. Howard provided background information. She explained that the item was delayed until the 1  College Hill Overlay Ordinance was updated. As the new standards are now approved by City Council, the item is being brought before the Commission again for consideration. Ms. Howard explained that it is proposed to replace the current building located at 2119 College with a mixed-use building with storefronts on the ground floor and residential units on the upper floors and presented the changes between the previous code requirements and the current code standards. She noted that the building meets requirements for mixed-use buildings and the new parking requirements for mixed-use buildings. She displayed renderings of the proposed buildings and break-down of the proposed exterior building materials. She presented a comparison of building heights in the area, landscaping plan, dumpster enclosure, underground detention and bike racks. She noted that the proposed building is consistent with the comprehensive plan goal to encourage additional storefront mixed-use development to tie the lower Hill and upper Hill together into a more cohesive business district. The current older residential building is not consistent with character envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that Staff recommends approval of the proposed site plan as it is complies with the requirements in the zoning ordinance. Kathryn Sogard, Executive Director of the College Hill Partnership, stated that the Partnership supports the development. The Partnership believes the project will grow College Hill, offer additional jobs near campus, encourage walkability and link the upper and lower hill. Eashaan Vajpeyi, 3831 Convair Lane, stated that this shouldn’t be seen as old business and feels that the item should be deferred until the parking study is completed. He is concerned with the possibility that the parking study will not agree with the project upon completion. He doesn’t believe the project needs to be approved right now. He also voiced his issue with the fact that Mr. Wingert has not recused himself from the matter. Dave Diebler, President of the College Hill Partnership, is in support of the project. He believes infilling will create responsible growth. He feels the project should move forward at this time. Mr. Holst asked for clarification of the parking study and whether it is looking at private parking. Mr. Howard stated that the study is focused primarily on the policies for the public parking system. The parking study will not give any specific recommendations with regard to the requirements for private, off-street parking. She noted that the parking impact analysis currently being completed by the parking consultant will provide information about how a project of this type may affect the public parking available in the area, but similar to the parking impact analysis completed for the recent downtown projects, will not provide a recommendation for whether the project should be approved. Mr. Hartley stated that he likes the proposal and is happy with the compromise with the parking. Mr. Leeper stated that he is in support of the project as well. Ms. Saul stated that she struggles with the decision, but feels that it meets the current ordinances and it’s not fair to make the developer wait. Mr. Wingert noted his concern that UNI has lost enrollment and believes that projects like these help UNI and the community grow and compete with other communities. Mr. Holst believes that it’s time to move forward with the project. Mr. Hartley made a motion to approve. Mr. Larson seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 7 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 4.) The Commission then considered a rezoning request from R-2, Residential, to C-2, Commercial, at 2600 Grove Street. Chair Holst introduced the item and Ms. Howard provided background information. She explained that the boundaries were drawn incorrectly in the 1970’s, excluding part of the property as a commercial property. Staff is recommending approval to rezone the area to correct the issue. 2  Ms. Saul made a motion to approve. Ms. Giarusso seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 7 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 5.) The next item of business was the preliminary and final plats of the replat of Lot 16 and Tract “B” of West Viking Road Industrial Park Phase IV. Chair Holst introduced the item and Mr. Graham provided background information. The property is located along Technology Parkway west of the intersection with Production Drive. The replat will combine the lot and tract into one lot. A company is interested in this lot and has indicated the need for the additional land for a driveway for truck traffic. Staff recommends approval of the project. Mr. Leeper made a motion to approve. Mr. Wingert seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 7 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 6.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was an MU District Site Plan Review for Lot 2 of Pinnacle Ridge 1st Addition. Chair Holst introduced the item and Mr. Graham provided background information. The property is near the intersection of Faithway Drive and Oster Parkway, just south of Greenhill Road within the Pinnacle Prairie development. One two-unit and one three-unit dwelling are proposed at this location and site plan review is required. Building and landscaping requirements are met. Mr. Graham provided a rendering of the proposed building design for the units, and showed photos of comparable building designs. Staff recommends approval with conformance to any comments or direction from the Commission. Sam Runyan, developer, (4010 W. 1st Street), stated that the project is very straightforward and would be available for any questions. Ms. Saul made a motion to approve. Ms. Giarusso seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 7 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 7.) Terra Ray, Engineering Tech, gave a presentation with regard to the downtown parking study recommendations and implementation. She touched on time limits, fines, monitoring lots and proposed new payment technologies that include meters that can be paid by mobile app. She also discussed the implementation recommendations and plans, as well as ordinance amendments being proposed. Mr. Holst asked about the proposal to keep on-street parking free. Ms. Ray stated that at this time that is the case and it will just be monitored by time. Ms. Howard then discussed the upcoming Imagine Downtown! Community Design Charrette and all the opportunities for the public to attend and provide input, which will be held the first week of June, with a public design workshop on June 1 and the open design studio the following week. 8.) As there were no further comments, Mr. Wingert made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Leeper seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 7 ayes (Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Larson, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 3 Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Clerk 4