Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2023 Cedar Falls, Iowa MINUTES The Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission met in regular session on March 8, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall. The following Commission members were present: Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch. Moser was absent. Karen Howard, Planning & Community Services Manager, Thomas Weintraut, Planner III, Michelle Pezley, Planner III, Chris Sevy, Planner I, Matt Tolan, Civil Engineer II, were also present. 1.) Chair Lynch noted the Minutes from the February 8, 2023 regular meeting are presented. Mr. Hartley made a motion to approve the Minutes as presented. Ms. Crisman seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays. 2.) The first item of business was a zoning text amendment regarding expanding the list of potential conditional uses of defunct institutional buildings. Chair Lynch introduced the item and Mr. Sevy provided background information. He noted that this item was presented at the February 8th meeting and gave a recap of what was discussed. He discussed the current uses that are eligible for consideration in a defunct building. He also covered the pros and cons of repurposing a church for the different uses. The proposed text amendment would state “Personal service uses limited to salons, shoe repair, tailoring services, therapy-based services, and photographic studios.” Staff recommends caution when allowing the possibility of retail services in residential neighborhoods until this conditional use is more tested in the community and therefore recommends disapproval of the amendment. Chad Welsh, petitioner (6701 Strayer Road), stated that he feels that projects should be on a case-by-case basis to allow for more potential projects. Stephen Jordan, real estate agent for the petitioner, (2510 Cottage Row Road), stated his support and said that he has spoke to many people in the community and that by and large the community is in favor of it. Mr. Hartley stated his support for being more open to repurposing old buildings and using available space when possible. Ms. Grybovych asked how the original list of provisions was developed. Mr. Sevy explained that it was considered in the context of how church properties are used, considering uses that would have similar characteristics, and what has been done with them in other communities. Conditional uses are a newer concept to Cedar Falls and the goal was to be conservative with the list of uses while still allowing a reasonable avenue for adaptive reuse. He displayed some of the currently eligible uses. Mr. Larson feels that the simple change in language is adding something explicitly that has a similar impact and nature of business to the other ones on the list. He agreed with Mr. Hartley in his support. Ms. Crisman stated that she believes that repurposing a building is, if possible, always the best choice when considering the environmental impact and cost of resources, so is supportive to a broader list of possible uses. 1  Ms. Grybovych noted concern with adding such specific uses as opposed to making a broader category. Mr. Larson made a motion to approve the item. Ms. Crisman seconded the motion. The motion was approved with 5 ayes (Crisman, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch), and 1 nay (Grybovych). 3.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a rezoning from A-1 to R-2 for 14.08 acres of land west of Cypress Avenue and north of Tomahawk Lane. Chair Lynch introduced the item and Ms. Pezley provided background information. She explained the rezoning would allow the development of residential lots of similar size to the surrounding lots. The property owner proposes to rezone the portion of the land that is known to be serviced for sewer at this time. She explained the criteria staff looks at when considering rezonings and noted that the R-2 zoning is appropriate according to the Comprehensive and Future Land Use Plans. She discussed the current access to public services and adequate street network. Staff recommends gathering comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the public, and to set a public hearing for the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on March 22, 2023. Dan Arends, VJ Engineering, (3714 Center Street), explained that they are currently working with staff on a final design of a subdivision for the property. Scott, Bonorden, 1021 Rocklyn Street, stated concerns with stormwater management and wants to ensure that it is designed correctly. John Metcalf, 3421 Cypress, also stated concerns with stormwater management and spoke to current issues they have in the area. Matthew Tolan, Civil Engineer II, discussed options for stormwater management that engineering has been working on with the petitioner, which will be addressed with the subdivision plat. Ms. Pezley noted an email that was received after the packet was published for the Commission to review, which was handed out at the meeting. Mr. Larson made a motion to set a public hearing for the next meeting. Ms. Crisman seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays. 4.) The next item of business was a rezoning from A-1 to R-1 for 3.07 acres of land west of Hudson Road along Ashworth Drive. Chair Lynch introduced the item and Mr. Weintraut provided background information. The proposal is to rezone the property to allow for residential development. He explained that staff recommends gathering comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the public and set a public hearing for the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on March 22, 2023. Adam Daters, CGA Engineers introduced himself as the representative for the petitioner and made himself available for questions. Mr. Leeper made a motion to set a public hearing for the next meeting. Ms. Crisman seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays. 2 5.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a zoning text amendment to modify sign allowance for Civic and Institutional Uses in the Downtown Character District. Chair Lynch introduced the item and Ms. Howard provided background information. She explained that St. Patrick’s School has asked to replace the existing monument sign. She stated that new freestanding signs are not allowed in the Urban General and Storefront frontages. Institutional and civic uses are different that other uses, so may need to be looked at a little differently when it comes to signage. She noted that in the Neighborhood frontages of the Downtown Character District, institutional uses are allowed signage similar to what is allowed in the R-1 Zone. Staff wants to discuss a solution that would allow signage for institutional uses in all frontage districts of the Downtown Character District according to the standards in the R-1 District, also making it clear that EMCs are allowed. The result would be that all institutional and civic uses in the Downtown Character District would be treated the same with regard to signage allowances. Staff recommends gathering comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the public and set a public hearing for the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on March 22, 2023. Mr. Larson made a motion to approve the item. Ms. Grybovych seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays. 6.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was the final plat for the West Viking Road Industrial Park, Phase VI. Chair Lynch introduced the item and Ms. Pezley provided background information. She explained that the final plat is located at the southwest corner of Technology Parkway and Innovation Drive and includes only one lot. She discussed the criteria for the final plat and provided information on the previous phases of the plat. Staff recommends approval of the plat as it is consistent with the preliminary plat. The Planning and Zoning Commission has the option of gathering any comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the public and continue the discussion at the next meeting, or to make a recommendation to City Council with the following conditions: 1) Any comments or directions specified by the Planning & Zoning Commission. 2) Conformance to all city staff recommendations and technical requirements. 3) The 30-foot temporary grading easement along Innovation Drive will be recorded with the recording of the deed to the new owner. Mr. Leeper made a motion to move the item forward to City Council. Ms. Larson seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Larson, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays. 7.) The next item for business was a site plan review for a triplex on Pinnacle Ridge First Addition, Lot 1. Chair Lynch introduced the item and Mr. Larson recused himself from the item due to a conflict of interest because he is the developer. Mr. Larson left the meeting. Mr. Sevy provided background information, explaining that the applicant is proposing a tri-plex at the southwest corner of Faithway Drive and Prairie Dock Road. He displayed a rendering of the property showing the layout of the landscaping as well as a drawing of the proposed design. Staff would like to see more variation in the design than what is proposed but the current proposal technically meets requirements. The proposed design has been reviewed by the Pinnacle Prairie Review Board and they have given their approval of the design. Staff recommends approval of the site plan subject to any comments or direction by the Commission, conformance with all staff recommendations and technical comments, and construction of the proposed development must commence one year following City Council approval. 3  Adam Daters, CGA Engineers, is representing the applicant and made himself available for any questions. Mr. Hartley stated that he feels that it fits in with well with the character of the neighborhood. Ms. Crisman noted that she would love to see more creativity in the design but understands that the design is consistent with other attached units in the area. Mr. Hartley made a motion to approve the item. Ms. Crisman seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 5 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays, and 1 abstention (Larson). 8.) As there were no further comments, Mr. Leeper made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Crisman seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 5 ayes (Crisman, Grybovych, Hartley, Leeper and Lynch), and 0 nays. The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Assistant 4