HomeMy WebLinkAboutA032 - Minutes from February 14, 2006 Council Meeting Avenue,would be moved back from the street and reduced in size from a three-story building
to a two-story building. Building B would contain a total of 36 bedrooms, instead of 45. An
additional row of 13 parking spaces is being proposed east of Building B, and the drive aisle
connecting Buildings A and B is proposed to be reconfigured to minimize the impact of exiting
mature oak trees.
Mr. Heiland pointed out that the previously approved Plan from 1992 could be developed
today. The modifications proposed reduce the density. He stated that neighbors have a
recollection of a requirement from the previous approval for signage restricting left-hand turns
or straight-ahead turns. The only reference Mr. Heiland found with regard to signage was a
stipulation in the 1992 case that required a sign that said"Private Drive."Another issue that has
been brought up relates to sidewalks. There is a sidewalk on the east side of Marshall Avenue
and one on Lincoln Way. The third issue that he has heard expressed by the neighbors pertains
to landscaping shown on this Plan compared with the 1992 Plan. The proposed modifications
were done in an attempt to save many of the existing oak trees. City Manager Schainker
pointed out that there were no stipulations in the 1992 approval of the Plan pertaining to
signage;but,the minutes indicate a statement made by a traffic analyst from Huxley,Iowa,who
represented the developer at the time,that the developer was willing to use traffic signage,such
as "no left-turn" signs, one-way street signs, stop signs, etc.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. It was noted that letters from Deb Carnine, 3654 Story
Street, Ames, and the Edwards Neighborhood Association Board (represented by Robert Sill
and Judy Trumpy)had been received. Ms. Carnine asked the Council to consider the hazards
of adding another driveway off Marshall Avenue. The Edwards Neighborhood Association
believes that traffic problems would be exacerbated by the proposed modification. They are
also concerned that sidewalks are not required along Lincoln Way and there is no indication
of plantings.
Council Member Popken asked if the driveway radiuses could be reduced. Mr. Heiland
indicated that they could if the driveway widths would still meet the City's minimum
development standards.
Sue Ravenscroft, 455 Westwood, Ames, told the Council that this modified plan is not an
improvement for this neighborhood. It is better for Haverkamp Properties; these are student
rentals that are being taxed at owner-occupied rates. The location of this development is on the
same block as Edwards Elementary, and the property abuts the playground. Ms. Ravenscroft
advised that the sidewalk actually ends at the east end of the parking lot; it doesn't run all the
way to Lincoln Way. She requested a traffic study be completed. Ms. Ravenscroft indicated
that she is worried about the traffic on Marshall, but she is also concerned about children
crossing at the intersection with Woodland.
According to Ms. Ravenscroft, the fact that the plan has not been executed for 14 years is a
testimonial that the project is not needed and it is not a good plan. She does not believe the
City needs more student rentals right now;there must be a compelling reason to move forward
19
with this Plan at this time.The Plan,in Ms.Ravenscroft's opinion,was not a good one to begin
with; the neighbors objected to it, and the original owner did not go ahead with the Plan. Mr,
Haverkamp told them that the current Plan is not marketable. The Plan should not still be valid
as circumstances have changed; the City needs a sunset clause that states PRDs or PUDs are
valid for a certain number of years. Ms. Ravenscroft asked that the concept of limiting time
(adding a sunset clause) for this type of plan be considered by the City.
Ms. Ravenscroft stated that this process had been disheartening. Mr.Haverkamp met with the
neighbors to discuss the Plan. During that meeting, he informally agreed to have one-way
traffic and a "no-left turn" sign. However, when the neighbors attended the Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting,nothing had been done with what the neighbors thought had been
informally agreed to at the meeting. Ms. Ravenscroft felt that if the neighborhood and the
developer could work together, a better Plan would result. She offered the following:
1. Mr. Haverkamp should be required to complete the sidewalk on his property, extending it
all the way to the west boundary.
2. Require the developer to post the"no left-turn"sign and post a similar sign on the existing
exit.
Ms.Ravenscroft also suggested to Mr.Haverkamp that he expand Building B footprint a little,
raise it one story, and then not construct Building A. Also, there currently is an exit onto
Lincoln Way,and Ms. Ravenscroft recommended that it be expanded,rather than have an exit
onto Marshall. She also suggested that the tennis courts be moved to where there are no trees
and put Building A there. According to Ms. Ravenscroft,the new plan has no plantings on it;
the old one showed 117 plantings. She asked for more landscaping in the Plan, not just in an
informal promise.
In Ms. Ravenscroft's opinion,the City has leverage because Mr. Haverkamp does not want to
build the old Plan. The neighbors do not think that they can stop the Project,but the City could
use its leverage to make it better, less unattractive, and less intrusive.
Deb Carnine, 3654 Story Street, Ames, stated that she is very concerned about the pedestrian
traffic on Marshall, in particular,the safety of children due to the hazards in this area. In that
area, six driveways open onto Marshall within a half-block and only one is a private drive.
These driveways handle semi-truck and other traffic into and out of Litzel's, McDonald's,
Cazador, and HyVee liquor store and residents entering and exiting the mobile home park.
According to Ms. Carnine, this area is heavily populated by pedestrians and bicyclists. She is
not opposed to the development, but she is opposed to adding more traffic to an already
congested and dangerous area on Marshall. Ms. Carnine asked the Council to:
(1) Familiarize themselves with her letter, which addresses the traffic dangers in more detail.
20
(2) Hold Mr.Haverkamp to his agreement to make the driveway intersecting Marshall one way
going in only, an idea that his landscape architect did think was a good idea at the
neighborhood meeting.
(3) Do whatever the Council can to help the drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists in the area by
finding a way to make the traffic coming out of McDonald's stop. There formerly were
lines painted in the area by the drive-thru, but the paint has worn off.
Holly Fuchs, 806 Brookridge, Ames, said she and her husband had considered purchasing a
home across the street from Edwards School a few years ago. She shared the impressions that
she and her husband had when they walked the area. Ms. Fuchs asked the Council to do what
they could to make the area safer around Edwards Elementary.
Jim Gunning, 119 Hickory Drive, Ames, advised that he had lived down the street from the
development in question for over 20 years. He echoed Sue Ravenscroft's idea that Planned
Unit Development plans have a sunset clause. Mr. Gunning was on the Edwards
Parent/Teacher Organization in 1992, and he recalls an agreement to install a "no left-turn"
sign. He pointed out that the development that exits onto Hickory Drive has significantly
increased traffic. A number of the people who live in these developments are"campus-driven"
and will use the left-hand turn out of there, go down Marshall, down Story, down Woodland,
and across to the Campus. Mr. Gunning also pointed out that Edwards School was totally
redesigned to allow traffic flow,bus flow, and drop-offs to focus on Woodland and Marshall;
that took them pretty much to their capacity. The problem now is adding 52 more automobiles.
Mr. Gunning does not believe that this plan has been reviewed thoroughly. He believes there
is a unique opportunity to review the arguments given by the Traffic Engineer in 1992 and to
prove that there will be a negative impact from traffic.
Brent Haverkamp, 4915 Timbercreek Lane, Ames, advised that he recently purchased the
property in question with the understanding that there was an approved plan. He advised that
85 -90%of the apartment units in Ames are rented by college-age people; developers attempt
to meet what the market demands.
Council Member Rice would like to see units that encourage families, i.e., two to three-
bedroom units. He doesn't believe that student housing is needed in this area, which is very
close to Edwards School. Mr. Haverkamp indicated that there are no families living in the
existing complexes even though there are two- or three-bedroom apartments.
Council Member Goodman asked the developer if he would be willing to add "no left-turn"
signs in two locations and provide additional landscaping. Mr. Haverkamp indicated that he
was willing to add the signs; however, since he had hired a landscape architect to provide
guidance, he was not willing to commit to any additional landscaping at this time. He was
willing to listen to suggestions by the neighbors, however. Mr. Goodman also asked if the
developer could design an exit from the property that would encourage a certain trajectory for
21
traffic. Mr. Haverkamp indicated that he did not think it was a good idea; however, if staff
thought it would work, he would be open to suggestions.
Council Member Popken asked if the developer would be willing to construct sidewalks. Mr.
Haverkamp indicated that if a sidewalk were installed along Building B, it would go nowhere
and is really unrelated to his project. He does not believe that,by amending the PUD,he should
be required to install sidewalks. Ms. Ravenscroft indicated that there are so many people
walking there, it is a well-worn path. Council Member Goodman indicated that the sidewalk
doesn't go anywhere if you are going west. Deb Carnine mentioned that, in talking with
various neighbors to the west of the proposed development, they indicated that their children
cut through the property in question to get to school. They would be exposed to the traffic from
the private development.
The hearing was closed after no one else wished to speak.
Council Member Mahayni asked about signage in the driveways. Mr.Heiland stated that"no-
left turn"signs could be installed. City Manager Schainker indicated that enforcement would
be a problem because it would be on private property. Signs, alone, do not always work; he
suggested that the Traffic Engineer look at the design of the street.
Moved by Goodman, seconded by Goodhue, to refer this back to staff to negotiate with the
developer to integrate "no-left turn" signs at the two exits on Marshall and a sidewalk on the
south side of the property be extended the full length of the property, and also that an attempt
be made to limit traffic on Marshall with a discussion about a one-way and intersection design.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Council Member Goodman advised that he was not including the sidewalk on Marshall because
he did not see it as an increase in safety.
Moved by Popken, seconded by Goodman, to require sidewalks on the west side of Marshall.
Vote on Amendment: 5-1. Voting aye: Doll, Goodman,Mahayni,Popken,Rice. Voting nay:
Goodhue. Motion declared carried.
Moved by Goodhue,seconded by Goodman,to continue the public hearing to a date uncertain.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
HEARING ON 2006/07 COLLECTOR STREET REHABILITATION PROGRAM
(NORTHWESTERN AVENUE FROM 6T" STREET TO 13T" STREET: The public hearing
was opened by Mayor Campbell and closed after no one came forward to speak.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Goodman, to adopt RESOLUTION 06-074 approving final
plans and specifications and awarding a contract to Manatt's, Inc., of Ames, Iowa, in the
amount of$1,070,766.72.
22