Planning and Zoning Meeting

Cedar Falls Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting May 23, 2018 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 23, 2018 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 220 Clay Street, Cedar Falls, Iowa. The following Commission members were present: Arntson, Giarusso, Hartley, Holst, Leeper, Saul and Wingert. Adkins and Oberle were absent. Karen Howard, Community Services Manager, David Sturch, Planner III, Shane Graham, Planner II, and Iris Lehmann, Planner I, were also present. 1.) Acting Chair Holst noted the Minutes from the May 9, 2018 regular meeting are presented. Ms. Giarusso made a motion to approve the Minutes as presented. Mr. Leeper seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. 2.) The first item of business was a rezoning amendment to a zoning agreement for Lots 7 and 8 in Midway Business Park. Acting Chair Holst introduced the item and Mr. Sturch provided background information. He explained that this is a request to amend the zoning agreement that applies to the Midway Business Park off Greenhill Road. He discussed the history of the property and the zoning. The property is zoned R4, but due to the zoning agreement, the allowed uses of the property are restricted to professional offices. The applicant is requesting to amend the agreement to allow an assisted living facility on Lots 7 & 8. Currently it is proposed to build a single-story senior housing facility with 16 residents and 4 employees. The location, parking, and landscaping meet the standards of the R4 Zoning District. The concerns about traffic circulation and congestion that were largely the impetus for the additional restrictions have been resolved because the cul-de-sac prevents traffic from this development from flowing through nearby single-family neighborhoods. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of rezoning and recommends scheduling a public hearing to consider the amendment to the Zoning Agreement and Deed of Dedication. Eric Blakesley, 4037 Scenic Drive asked whether the trees will be removed along back of the lots being discussed. The petitioner, Luke Moore, stated that they are not planning to remove trees for the sake of privacy. If necessary, the trees would be trimmed back or replaced with something to maintain the current level of privacy. Jerry Henninger, 4031 Scenic Drive, asked about the easement in that area and whether there would be things dug up and/or placed there. Mr. Sturch stated that there would be no development in that area. Mr. Henninger stated that he was mostly concerned with keeping the privacy. As the item was just being presented as an introduction, the item was continued to the next meeting. 3.) The next item for consideration by the Commission was Floodplain Ordinance Amendments. Acting Chair Holst introduced the item and Mr. Sturch provided background information. He explained that this is part of the follow-up to the annual discussion the City has with the DNR regarding the floodplain sections of the Code. He noted that the DNR made recommendations for amendments during their Community Assistance Visit in 2017 and that Cedar Falls is considered to be in good standing with the National Floodplain Insurance Program. Mr. Sturch 1  also discussed the Community Rating System (CRS) Program and what it means for the community. Mr. Sturch discussed the potential creation of a new subsection under Definitions to distinguish which are general zoning terms and which relate to floodplain management. Definitions being considered include: appurtenant structure, base flood elevation, factory built home park or subdivision (mobile home parks), highest adjacent grade, repetitive loss, and start of construction. At this time staff would like to hear any comments or changes recommended by the Commission and to schedule a public hearing and continue the discussion at the next Planning and Zoning meeting on June 13, 2018. Mr. Arntson asked about revisions made in 2008 regarding fill and asked if there was any conflict with the changes made at that time. Mr. Sturch stated that the changes will have no conflicts with prior changes. 4.) At this time, Karen Howard gave a presentation with regard to zoning codes and an overview of various types of zoning. Ms. Howard discussed the benefits of zoning and the use of a good zoning code, as well as briefly describing the types of zoning: use-based, performance-based, incentive-based, form-based and hybrid. Use-based zoning is essentially the separation of incompatible land uses with a set of basic dimensional standards that splits each zone. Performance/Impact-based zoning adds in performance standards to a use-based zoning ordinance to make uses more compatible. While zones may be more mixed, standards are created to make them work well together. Incentive-based zoning is a use-based principle, but it enables projects to exceed the base standards if some form of benefit is provided to the local community. Form-based zoning is based on the form and placement of the buildings, including parking and how the private space meets the public space at the street. Uses can be mixed and there is less focus on the specific land uses. Hybrid zoning incorporates different parts of the zoning types. Since form-based zoning is one of the newest types of zoning and is being adopted in more and more communities across the country, Howard went into some depth regarding the distinguishing elements of a form-based code versus other types of zoning. Form-based codes are customized to address the local context of an area, allowing coding for each area to have a specific, desired character for that location. It always has a regulating plan. This plan identifies on a map how the code is applied to a particular area of the city, including designating primary street frontages, building heights, parks and open space and any specific frontage conditions or special requirements for the area. Building and parking location is more strictly controlled, and density is controlled by height and parking requirements. There is a broad range of commercial or residential uses allowed, setting it up for different uses to be able to move in and out. Form-based zoning codes also contain frontage standards, which are standards that address the transition from public to private space, indoor to outdoor at the main entrance, the design treatment of first story building façades, the configuration of façade projections, and the 2  disposition of improvements within required setbacks. How the building meets the street strongly influences the quality and character of public streets and spaces. Ms. Howard showed examples of different storefronts, forecourts, stoops, terraces/door yards and porches to show different kinds of frontages that could be utilized on different building types. She also discussed the concept of Missing Middle Housing, which is a range of multi-unit or clustered housing types compatible in scale with single-family homes that help meet the growing demand for a variety of housing types in walkable urban neighborhoods, showing different examples of such housing. Ms. Howard discussed the general requirements (streetscape and setbacks), building design standards (building articulation, entranceways, window coverage, building materials, roof design and signage standards), pedestrian streets, and special provisions (useable open space requirements and flexibility to allow exceptions to the rules). She summarized that the basics of good zoning apply regardless of the type of zoning. Mr. Holst asked if the form-based zoning is being considered in the discussion of code updates. Ms. Howard stated that there have been questions about it and discussions about the possibility using this type of zoning, and noted that it could be applied in a small area of town to test out how well it works. Ms. Saul suggested that College Hill would be a good place to start. 5.) As there were no further comments, Ms. Saul made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Giarusso seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with 6 ayes (Arntson, Giarusso, Holst, Leeper, Saul and Wingert), and 0 nays. The meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Howard Joanne Goodrich Community Services Manager Administrative Clerk 3