Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting March 25, 2026 Cedar Falls, Iowa MINUTES The Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission met in a regular session on March 25, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall. The following Commission members were present: Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins. Henderson was/were absent. Karen Howard, Planning and Community Services Manager, Jaydevsinh Atodaria, Planner II, Chris Sevy, Planner II and Michelle Pezley, Planner III, were also present. 1.) Chair Stalnaker noted the Minutes from the March 11, 2026 regular meeting are presented. Hartley made a motion to approve the Minutes as presented. Johnson seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins), and 0 nays. 2.) Chair Stalnaker asked if there were any public comments for the Commission. Matt Hein, 511 Alvarado Avenue, spoke about Simple Mining in an attempt to give context to who they are. 3.) The first item of business was a College Hill Design Review for a new duplex at 2110-2112 Iowa Street. Chair Stalnaker introduced the item and Mr. Sevy provided background information. He explained that the applicant is proposing to construct a two-family duplex with four bedrooms in each unit and attached garages at the rear. He spoke about the design of the project and noted that staff recommends approval of the site plan with any comments or direction from the Commission and conformance with all City staff recommendations and technical requirements. Moser asked how much of the recommendations for the new zoning code were used in consideration of this item. Sevy said the new code was considered and there may have been a few minor changes that the new code would have required but overall, the emphasis on the residential character presenting to the street with the garages to the rear is in line with the intent of the new code. Hartley made a motion to approve the item. Johnson seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins), and 0 nays. 3.) The Commission then considered a College Hill Design Review for a new projecting sign at 917 W. 23rd Street. Chair Stalnaker introduce the item and Mr. Sevy provided background information. He noted that the petitioner is proposing a new projecting sign for Bing Ladies just under the sign for Greenhouse Kitchen. Staff recommends approval subject to any comments or direction specified by the Commission. Fischer made a motion to approve the item. Moser seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins), and 0 nays. 4.) The Commission next considered a preliminary plat for Greenhill Village Commons. Chair Stalnaker introduce the item and Ms. Pezley provided background information. She explained that the applicant proposes 16 lots for single-units and a storm basin. The applicant also proposes to remove the access easements recorded on the plat as well as providing a fee in 1  lieu of a neighborhood park dedication. She gave brief background of the Master Plan progression details. She discussed design standards, landscaping plan, lot configurations, setbacks, and easement vacation. Staff recommends discussion at this time and continuing the request to the April 8, 2026 meeting to allow the Parks and Recreation Commission an opportunity to consider the proposal. Watkins asked about the fee in lieu of a park as there is a park currently in the neighborhood. Ms. Howard explained that the fee would go toward adding additional amenities to the existing park. Robin Frost, 4718 Addison Drive, spoke about concerns with the truck traffic during construction. Kevin Fittro, petitioner, stated that most of the traffic will be from Algonquin to Loren Drive and doesn’t see an issue during street construction and there shouldn’t be heavy traffic. They will be asking the companies to keep traffic to the north as much as possible. As there were no further comments the item was continued to the next meeting. 5.) The next item considered by the Commission was a request to rezone 38.25 acres within West Viking Road Industrial Park from M-1-P, Planned Light Industrial District to M-2 Heavy Industrial District. Chair Stalnaker introduced the item and Ms. Pezley provided background information. She explained that Cedar Falls Utilities is proposing to build a new major power generation facility called Viking Energy Center to meet the needs of the community. Ms. Pezley discussed criteria including changing the current zoning (M-1-P) to the M-2 Heavy Industrial District with increased setbacks to height and change to the Master Plan. Other criteria include compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, access to public services and access to adequate street network. Staff recommends that the Commission discuss the matter and set the public hearing for April 8. The Commission had questions about the differences in the uses and where this facility fits in. Tom Risse, CFU project manager for the energy center, spoke about the proposed project and questions that were brought forward by Commissioners. He explained that CFU has an aging electric infrastructure generating facilities and it would be costly to replace it all at once, so they are working to keep costs down by gradually making changes as able. He specified that this project is completely separate from the cryptocurrency mining text amendment item. Andrea Kettle, 5315 Red Oak Lane, asked about restrictions to be placed on Cedar Falls Utilities and how the rezoned land will be used and who it could be leased to. Charity Nebbe, spoke on her parents’ behalf who live a 2027 South Union Road. She stated that the Industrial Park has really engulfed the land around their home and the City has annexed their land. She gave background on her family and noted concerns with noise, heat, and environmental impact, as well as the value of the land. Nathan Nebbe, 2027 South Union Road, noted concerns about the rezoning and potential impacts in the future. Dennis Nebbe, 2027 South Union Road, stated his concerns with property value and the environmental impact. Dillon Southall, 510 Franklin Street, asked if the project had any engineering considerations for any possible future leased spaces on the properties. 2  Mr. Risse noted that there was nothing associated with cryptomining at the time decisions and plans were being made. He also explained that his current understanding is that there is currently nothing being discussed about leasing some of the land. Ms. Howard stated that leasing would only be allowed where it is appropriate for that particular zoning. Mr. Risse stated that the heat will be handled by a stack. He explained that there also will not be any wells or discharge of any water or oil. Rob Zey, 6827 Viking Road, stated that the proposal will be out his front window. He asked if there are any preliminary plans giving an idea of the layout as well as information about decibel levels. Andrea Kettle asked if an environmental impact study been done and whether the plant could be operated under a light zone. Bill Skubal, Director of Energy Resources at CFU, spoke about conversations where the actual facility will be and that they don’t have a site plan at this time. Many decisions will be made down the road. They just wanted to ensure that they owned the property. Moser stated that she would like to see more environmental impact studies done looking at resource needs and water impacts before a decision can be made on the zoning. Stalnaker noted that he would like to see more about the differences between the allowed uses in the M-1-P and M-2 zoning types. Johnson asked if there would be potential for the community and the Commission to see plans for the Viking Energy Center and understand what the noise generation may be from the facility. Tom Risse answered that CFU will have a community information meeting when they are closer to the site plan stage of the planning process. Stalnaker asked about moving the public hearing to April 22. Watkins made a motion to set a public hearing for April 22. Moser seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins), and 0 nays. 6.) The Commission then considered zoning text amendments regarding cryptocurrency mining; Utilities and Public Facilities. Stalnaker introduced the item and Leslie Oberholtzer from Codametrics gave an overview of the code regarding cryptocurrency. She gave a presentation that addressed project scope and common concerns, which include energy and water usage, multiple accessory structures and noise. She provided definitions with regard to cryptocurrency. She discussed the permitted zones and the review process, speaking to the required submittals. Ms. Oberholtzer also provided setback information, separation distances and noise mitigation. She spoke to buffers and landscaping as well. Hartley asked how many locations are currently mining cryptocurrency. CFU stated there are three. He clarified that the current locations would be grandfathered in, but any new locations would need to go through the Commission. Hartley also asked if there have been complaints 3  regarding other locations. Ms. Howard stated that there have been but plans are in place to address and mitigate the issues. Moser asked if there were communities that have banned cryptocurrency mining. Ms. Oberholtzer stated she had not heard of any. Fischer asked if there is a list of communities that crypto mining is running. Ms. Howard stated that there is and that staff has researched and visited one of the locations. Watkins asked if the energy facility would be coming regardless of the crypto mining company. Ms. Howard stated that that is the plan. The Commission asked further questions of CFU regarding the difference between cryptocurrency mining and data centers and how the closed loop liquid cooling system works. Stalnaker clarified that there is not a specific cryptocurrency mining center being proposed at this time. The item is just text amendments to any potential crypto mining down the road. Devon Reynolds Reinhart, 1127 Maplewood Drive, stated concern with environmental impacts, as well as financial impacts. Mike Peters, 1117 Warwick Drive, spoke in favor of the amendment. Mike Miller, 1319 Walnut Street, stated concerns with water, power and noise, and asked about research into how many jobs will be created. Brett Jaden, 4127 Maryhill Drive, owner of Air King Filtration, stated concerns with the aesthetics and noise. Dillon Southall commented on the proposal and spoke against crypto mining. Matt Hein of Simple Mining spoke to comments and concerns. He also voiced concerns with the proposed amendment language. Laura Roman, 204 Magnolia Drive, asked about the different kinds of cryptocurrency and how each will affect e-waste. She stated that she is opposed to the mining. Dillon Southall asked for CFU to come forward to put it on the record that Simple Mining is paying the same rates as residential customers. Mr. Skubal on behalf of CFU stated that the rate is different as Simple Mining is willing to shut down for extended periods of time to help conserve energy, whereas the residential customers cannot. Therefore they do have a discounted rate. After further discussion, Watkins made a motion to set a public hearing for April 22. Fischer seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins), and 0 nays. 7.) As there were no further comments, Hartley made a motion to adjourn. Moser seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 8 ayes (Fischer, Grybovych, Hartley, Johnson, Koger, Moser, Stalnaker and Watkins), and 0 nays. The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. 4 Respectfully submitted, Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Assistant 5