Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting October 9, 2024 Cedar Falls, Iowa MINUTES The Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission met in regular session on October 9, 2024 at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall. The following Commission members were present: Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker. Watkins was absent. Karen Howard, Planning and Community Services Manager, Thomas Weintraut, Planner III, Jaydevsinh Atodaria, Planner II, and Chris Sevy, Planner II were also present. 1.) Chair Hartley noted the Minutes from the September 25, 2024 regular meeting are presented. Alberhasky made a motion to approve the Minutes as presented. Sorensen seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker), and 0 nays. Ms. Howard clarified a typographical error in the agenda, noting that the public hearing date for item number five should be October 23 instead of October 9. 2.) The first item of business was the vacation of a utility easement at 1907 Valley High Drive (VAC24-002). Chair Hartley introduced the item and Mr. Sevy provided background information. He explained that the property owner would like to vacate a five-foot-wide utility easement that divides their property at 1907 Valley High Drive. They would like to construct a raised deck over the utility easement. He discussed the factors that need to be considered, including whether the easement is needed for public use, whether it is needed for access to other easements and utility lines and if there are utilities within the easement that will need to be retained. As the criteria is met for this request, staff recommends approval. Sorensen made a motion to approve the item. Grybovych seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker), and 0 nays. 3.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a PC-2 District Site Plan Amendment for 924 West Viking Road (SP24-00x). Chair Hartley introduced the item and Mr. Atodaria provided background information. He explained that it is proposed to amend the PC-2 district site plan to allow an already constructed retaining wall to remain on-site and bring the site into compliance with City Code requirements. During the construction, a 9 ft. high retaining wall was constructed to create a level soccer field, as there was not enough room to create a gradual slope. A minimum 42-inch guardrail/fence will be added 21 feet north of the retaining wall to comply with building code, as well as the addition of Austrian pine trees between the fence and retaining wall for a more substantial buffer. Staff recommends approval of the proposed PC-2 site plan amendment subject to any comments or direction from the Commission. Alberhasky made a motion to approve the item. Sorensen seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker), and 0 nays. 4.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was and R-P District Master Plan Amendment and Site Plan for the Cedar Falls Bible Conference Building Addition (SP24-003). 1  Chair Hartley introduced the item and Mr. Atodaria provided background information. He explained that the proposal is to amend the RP Master plan to reflect existing development and a proposed new building addition, as well as approve a site plan for a new event center. He explained that the property was originally part of the Riverview Park subdivision that was platted in 1920. In 1987 it was rezoned from R-2 to RP with a Master Plan and a Developmental Procedures Agreement. Many of the anticipated changes on the Master Plan have not been realized and the site has remained mostly unchanged. Any significant future development on the campus will require another amendment of the Master Plan and a detailed site plan review. Mr. Atodaria discussed the proposed master plan that shows existing development on campus and the proposed new building addition. Mr. Atodaria discussed the proposed building addition, as well as the parking requirements, the stormwater detention facility and the proposed building design. Staff recommends approval subject to any comments or direction by the Commission. Johnson asked about the parking and the walking distances, and Moser asked about the ability to accommodate large groups. Dan Levi, Levi Architecture, explained that it is an unusual site and that while there are two events each year that draw large numbers of people, typically that is not the case. For the large events, the parking will be extended throughout some of the greenspace and graveled areas. Typical usage entails people renting out the cabins, which have parking with each unit. However, when there are larger events there is a cart that shuttles people to the event center who are parked further away. Cody Haman, 625 Baker Drive, spoke about the parking during the larger events and how people park on both sides of the road on North Division and South Park, making it nearly impossible to traverse those roads. He stated that some of those problems could be alleviated by adding no parking signs. Moser asked if it should be a recommendation to have public safety direct traffic. Ms. Howard stated that as a private entity, this is something that Riverview Ministries should take into account and reach out to the City to coordinate the necessary traffic control measures during the large events. Sorensen made a motion to approve the item. Alberhasky seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker), and 0 nays. 5.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was a rezoning request for 2.68 acres located south of 1st Street and 350 ft. east of Winding Ridge Estates from A-1 Agriculture to R- P Planned Residence (RZ24-003). Chair Hartley introduced the item and Mr. Weintraut provided background information. He explained that the property is currently zoned A-1 Agriculture. The Future Land Use Map shows the area as a Medium Density Residential. The site is in an area that has access to public service, however a subdivision would be required to extend the water and sewer into the development site. The rezoning site does not have access to a public street, so a subdivision would be required to establish right-of-way for the extension of Lake Ridge Drive to the south property line. An easement plat and agreement will need to be prepared and agreed upon for the area where the extension of Lake Ridge Drive is to be extended before the rezoning can be set for a public hearing. A final draft of a developmental procedures agreement for the R-P District, including provisions for the construction of Lake Ridge Drive, will need to be prepared and agreed upon before the rezoning can be set for public hearing as well. A subdivision will need to be required to divide the R-P portion of the property from the A-1 portion to the north, to 2 establish Lake Ridge Drive and the necessary utilities to support the development of the Meadow Ridge development. Staff recommends gathering any comments from the Commission and setting a date for public hearing for the rezoning request at the next Commission meeting on October 23, 2024. Mr. Weintraut spoke then about the R-P District Master Plan Amendment and for Meadow Ridge (MP24-004x), explaining that the proposal is to amend the plan to allow for commercial at the north end of the property and build seven multi-unit buildings on the site. He discussed the proposed setbacks, buffers, and the gazebos amenities that will be placed in the area. He noted the wetland areas and stream corridor on the site. He noted that the applicant has received a Army Corps of Engineers permit to mitigate for the loss of wetlands and stream corridor that will be caused by the development. He also showed a rendering of what the buildings will look like. Mr. Weintraut then discussed the next steps necessary to develop the property. A subdivision will be required to combine the property with the property rezoned from the A-1 to R-P to the north and establish the right-of-way for Lake Ridge Drive, which must be constructed from 1st Street to the southern boundary of the property prior to development of the subject property. Detailed site plans will also be required prior to development on the R-P site and must be reviewed and approved by the Commission and City Council. Staff recommends gathering comments from the Commission and continuing the discussion at the next Planning and Zoning meeting on October 23, 2024, the recommended date for the public hearing for the rezoning from A-1 Agriculture to R-P Planned Residential. Mr. Weintraut answered Commission questions. Wendell Lupkes, VJ Engineering, spoke as the project engineer and noted that their company has been affiliated with this project since 1996. He explained the three different kinds of wetlands on the property and that they are all being addressed. He spoke about the section of the City’s subdivision code that protects wetlands but also offers an opportunity to mitigate them if they are deemed of lesser quality. He also discussed chronological wetland delineations and displayed a rendering showing how the wetland areas had reduced in size over the years. He explained how this is an unusual case and why it may call for exceptions and allowance for mitigation. Tom Nagle, 328 Winding Ridge Road, stated he would like to see a copy of the 2020 traffic study and asked about whether the pandemic could have an effect on the numbers. There was also a question about the school district and whether the school boundaries may be shifted to accommodate schools to avoid overcrowding. Nagle also asked about the wetlands and noted concerns with runoff, as well as the water assessment at Birdsall Creek. Nagle asked if the density is potentially too much. Taner Tuken, 218 Winding Ridge Road, provided perspective on the density between the current neighborhood and the proposed neighborhood and feels there should be a better transition between high and low density. He asked a question about how the density is calculated. Ms. Howard explained. Mark Boss, 810 Juanita Avenue, noted concerns with water runoff and worries about sediment in their neighborhood lake. Lupkes explained that there will be a detention basin that will detain runoff from Lake Ridge Drive and the development site. The runoff from south of the property will continue to run through as usual as they are not allowed to touch the stream, except where they have permission to cross it per the Army Corps permit. Genevieve Shafer, 602 Oak Park Boulevard, stated concerns with stormwater runoff. Shafer also noted concerns with the crossings on 1st Street and how pedestrians and students will be 3  affected by additional traffic. Shafer also asked about a housing needs assessment to determine if that much added housing is needed. Pete Rhee, 3105 Northridge, echoed what the previous commenters voiced and added that his concern with the aesthetics and their effect on the neighborhood. Rhee asked about the rent level of the proposed housing and details of the buffer on the west side of the property. Cameron Lee, 220 Winding Ridge Road, stated concerns about the water and elevation change, and a three story building overlooking his yard. Atul Patel, 307 Winding Ridge Road, feels there is a loss of quality of life and too much density and loss of community aesthetics and noted that there needs to be better transition between the neighborhoods. Lupkes shared final comments, noting that the RP zoning has been in place since 2003 and the area has always been set aside for this type of development and the current property owners have relied on the zoning for that area when they purchased their properties. Hartley made a motion to set a public hearing for the rezoning. Alberhasky seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker), and 0 nays. 6.) Ms. Howard noted that the November and December meetings have been changed to the first and third Wednesdays to accommodate holidays. 7.) As there were no further comments, Sorensen made a motion to adjourn. Alberhasky seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Alberhasky, Grybovych, Hartley, Henderson, Johnson, Moser, Sorensen and Stalnaker), and 0 nays. The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Assistant 4