Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Planning & Zoning Minutes 01/15/2014 MINUTES CITY OF AMES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Date: January 15, 2014 *Debra Lee, Chairperson 2015 Julie Gould 2016 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. *Jeff Johnson 2014 Troy Siefert 2014 Place: Ames City Hall Rob Bowers, Vice Chairperson 2015 Council Chambers Yvonne Wannemuehler 2015 John Tillo 2016 Adjournment: 9:11 p.m. *Absent MAJOR TOPICS DISCUSSED: 1. Public Hearing for Rezone and Master Plan of 321 State Avenue, Breckenridge Group Ames Iowa, LLC (Old Ames Middle School Site, Middle Parcel) ___________________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER: Rob Bowers, Vice Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: (Wannemuehler/Siefert) to approve the Agenda for the meeting of January 15, 2014. MOTION PASSED: (5 - 0) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2013: MOTION: (Gould/Tillo) to approve the Minutes of the meeting of November 6, 2013. MOTION PASSED: (5 - 0) ____________________________________________________________________________ PUBLIC FORUM: Leslie Pensack, 317 South Wilmoth Avenue, stated that Rev. Douglas Haviland passed away. She stated that funeral arrangements will be listed in the newspaper. ____________________________________________________________________________ PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONE AND MASTER PLAN OF 321 STATE AVENUE, BRECKENRIDGE GROUP AMES, IOWA, LLC (OLD AMES MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE, MIDDLE PARCEL) Karen Marren, staff planner, explained the request before the Commission for the rezone of the middle parcel of the old Ames Middle School property. She explained the current zoning for each of the three parcels and the uses that are currently allowed. Ms. Marren stated that the applicant wishes to change the zoning for the middle parcel from S-GA to Residential Low- Density. She stated that as part of the rezoning request Council has requested that a master plan be submitted. Ms. Marren stated that the Council has requested a list of conditions. She reviewed various aspects of the proposed master plan with the Commission. Ms. Marren stated that public streets are not required to be shown on a master plan; however, if approved as shown on the plan, they would be a requirement for future development. She stated that staff has recently received the Traffic Analysis and technical data that is part of the Traffic Study that the Commission requested at their November 2013 meeting. Ms. Marren stated that staff has not yet had an opportunity to complete their review of the technical data. She stated that after looking at preliminary conclusions of the study staff has noticed some delay at some of the surrounding intersections in this area. Ms. Marren stated that staff has concerns about any significant increase at these intersections due to potential development. She outlined certain aspects of the City’s current Long Range Transportation Plan. Ms. Marren explained that CyRide has stops along Lincoln Way and are currently operating at capacity. She stated that there is no intention of increasing routes or stops in this area due to budget restrictions. Ms. Marren outlined several alternatives before the Commission tonight. Troy Siefert asked staff to review the conditions that the City Council requested of the applicant that have not been fulfilled. Ms. Marren stated that the Council determined that they would require a master plan to be submitted with the applicant’s rezone request. She stated that those conditions have been outlined in the staff report. Mr. Diekmann stated that the applicant has submitted everything that is required by the Municipal Code. He stated that the applicant has chosen not to respond to conditions at this time but will possibly look at items that are still relevant during the subdivision phase. Mr. Siefert asked for a review of the processes involved if zoning is approved. Mr. Diekmann explained that if the rezone is approved the next phase would be the subdivision phase. He outlined various elements of that process. Mr. Diekmann stated that the potential number and size of the lots is unknown at this time pending the layout of the streets. Mr. Siefert asked how the south parcel was going to be developed. Mr. Diekmann stated that the applicant plans to request an FS-RM zoning classification for the south parcel. He said that the traffic study does include the south parcel. Mr. Diekmann stated that the Commission is only acting on the middle parcel tonight. Charlie Vatterott, Executive Vice President of Development for Aspen Heights, explained that Aspen Heights is a national full service development construction and management company. He said that they specialize in cottage-style development which is what is proposed for this property. Mr. Vatterott outlined several developments that they have completed across the country. Mr. Siefert asked whether the demographic that they market to are students and whether the units are rental units. Mr. Vatterott stated that they are rental units and they market exclusively to students. He stated that they lease by the bed. Mr. Siefert asked for clarification as to the number of students that would occupy each unit. Mr. Vatterott stated that in the RL zone the maximum is three residents. Mr. Siefert asked staff for the maximum number of unrelated people that are allowed per unit. Ms. Marren stated that the Zoning Code definition of family allows for up to three unrelated persons. John Tillo asked if there was any public use space that was going to be included in this project. Mr. Vatterott stated that he wasn’t sure if there was any public space planned in the middle parcel but that there is a bike path that goes through the south parcel. Mr. Tillo asked about the easement for the bike path. Mr. Diekmann stated that the City owns interest in the bike path. Julie Gould asked about the potential layout and density of the units. Mr. Vatterott stated that their units are two-story. He said that their typical apartment density can be 22 or 23 units per acre. Mr. Vatterott stated that they have had some that are eight units per acre, this project will be less. Mr. Vatterott stated that with that density there will be a lot of green space. Scott Renaud, FOX Engineering, further explained that the allowable density for this parcel, in an RL zone, is 7.2 units per acre. He stated that the density is based on several requirements that will affect the lot layout. He stated that a lot of the issues that were brought up by the City Council will be addressed but there isn’t a good way to show them on the Master Plan. Mr. Renaud stated that the school was included in the traffic study. He stated that they would like to have the Commission approve Alternative #1. Brian Torresi, Davis Brown Law Firm, stated that he is t he attorney for Breckenridge Group Ames Iowa, LLC. He stated that the property must be rezoned to RL in accordance with the Land Use Policy Plan. Mr. Torresi stated that they are not a government entity and any failure to rezone will result in a constitutional violation. Warren Madden, 2815 Oakwood Road, senior vice president of business and finance at Iowa State University stated that the University is an adjacent land owner to this parcel. Mr. Madden stated that the University has raised questions that have not yet been addressed. He stated that the University is concerned about traffic flows in this area. Mr. Madden stated that substantial areas of Mortensen Road, State Street, and the intersection of Mortensen and State are institutional roads which places some of the responsibility for road maintenance and improvements on Iowa State University, not the City of Ames. He said that proposed plans have not addressed who will be responsible for whatever improvements, if any, that are needed for this project. Mr. Madden stated that they have not yet had an opportunity to review the traffic analysis. He explained the route of the bike path. Mr. Madden said that the bike path crosses University property. He outlined the concerns that the University has in regard to the bike path. Mr. Madden said that he hasn’t seen any materials so far that addresses who is responsible for the improvements to the bike path. He stated that initially it was thought that these parcels would be developed as one tract. Mr. Madden said that the University would support either Alternative #2 or Alternative #3 that would impose some conditions on the applicant. He stated that they do not have an issue with the rezone but they do have an interest in the long-term commitments that entities, such as Iowa State University, will be facing. Mr. Madden stated that the University feels that it is important to complete the information for this project for the surrounding property owners. Sharon Guber, 2931 Northwestern Avenue, stated that she is a member of the College Creek/old Ames Middle School Neighborhood Association. She outlined several Master Plan proposals that the neighborhood association has reviewed. Ms. Guber outlined conditions of the sales contract between Breckenridge and the Ames Community School District. She stated that Breckenridge has asked the District for an extension of the demolition deadline and the School Board denied their request. Ms. Guber outlined multiple concerns of the surrounding property owners. She stated that they were originally supporting Alternative #2 (Residential Low-Density (RL) zoning with conditions). Ms. Guber stated that since the Traffic Impact Analysis review is not complete, questions about how the master plan will be applied in light of the range of units that exceeds Residential Low-Density (RL) zoning and given the 90-day deadline for a Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation to the Council which will terminate before their next meeting, it would seem more appropriate for the Commission to reject the rezoning application due to insufficient information received at this time. Michael Petersen, 3302 Morningside Street, stated that he is a member of the College Creek/old Ames Middle School Neighborhood Association. He said that he and his immediate neighbors have had their basements flooded at least three times in the last 30 years . Mr. Petersen spoke about traffic delays at the intersection of Lincoln Way and Wilmoth and concerns that he has with the addition of a new development. He explained that the applicant’s plan is to increase the amount of impervious surface by about 10% on the middle parcel. Mr. Petersen stated that he is concerned about the increase in storm water runoff during heavy rains with the proposed increase in impervious surface. He stated that there are trees and brush along the south portion of this parcel that provide excellent wildlife habitat. Mr. Petersen stated that according to the applicant’s plan a large portion of this habitat will be removed. He stated that he urges the Commission to recommend to the City Council that the middle parcel of Breckenridge’s proposed development be zoned Residential Low-Density (RL) with the added condition of subdivision compliance, one single-family house on one lot. Mr. Petersen stated that it will promote a more predictable development process that achieves greater compatibility within the neighborhood. He stated that this would be in line with the intent of the Land Use Policy Plan Visions and Goals. Julian Birch, 2925 Arbor Street, stated that he lives 300’ feet from the old Ames Middle School property. He stated that the property owners in the neighborhood have spent countless hours planting and tending trees that they have planted in the neighborhood in order to make it a pleasant and agreeable place to live. Mr. Birch stated that he endorses the rezone of the Old Middle School property to Residential Low-Density (RL) and looks forward to the development of this land being compatible with the character, balanced diversity, and quality of life they now enjoy. He stated that this is an opportunity to supply much needed single-family homes. He stated that single-family homes would be least disruptive to the neighborhood. Duffie Lorr, 233 Hilltop Road, stated that she lives in the area impacted by this development. She stated that Residential Low-Density (RL) is the best zoning for their neighborhood and that the requested zoning is in agreement with the Land Use Policy Plan. Ms. Lorr stated the roads within the middle parcel are listed on the applicant’s master plan as alleys. She outlined concerns that she has with no road access to each unit. Ms. Lorr outlined her concerns with the range of the number of units that the developer is proposing to build on this parcel. Robert Lorr, 233 Hilltop Road, stated that after the development of the land south of the west side Hy-Vee, consisting of many large apartment buildings, traffic has greatly increased on Tripp Street. He said that during that development Tripp Street was extended to Dotson Drive. Mr. Lorr stated that the increased vehicle traffic has resulted in more noise and littering. He stated that the extension of Tripp Street to State Street will greatly increase these problems. Mr. Lorr stated that pedestrian traffic will also increase on “party evenings” and will contribute to these problems also. He stated that he feels that the proposed maximum density of this development will be detrimental to their neighborhood. Leslie Pensack, 317 South Wilmoth Avenue, outlined concerns that she currently has with increased population and the number of vehicles in the area east of her home. She said that she is concerned about the lack of parking in that area, especially for those that have difficulty walking. Ms. Pensack stated that appropriate planning for these problems will help alleviate them in the area around the Old Ames Middle School property. Joanne Pfeiffer, 3318 Morningside Street, stated that she stands behind the Land Use Policy Plan. She explained the values that their neighborhood wishes to preserve. She requested the Planning and Zoning Commission accept the Residential Low-Density (RL) zoning request only with the conditions that were set-up by the City Council previously (stipulations A-F). Sarah Cady, 2812 Arbor Street, stated that she lives on the east side of the proposed development. She said that previous investigations have shown that this developer has a low regard for neighboring properties with promises of on-site management going unfulfilled and large developments becoming party destinations. Ms. Cady stated that Aspen Heights has a poor track record for holding onto their properties long term. She explained various traffic issues that are present and that need to be addressed, particularly the area of State and Arbor Streets. Ms. Cady stated that the neighborhood places the responsibility on the Commission for making sure that the appropriate conditions are placed on the rezone and that the appropriate recommendations are made to the City Council. Sharon Stewart, 437 Hilltop Road, outlined the reasons for their recent move to Ames. She stated that they are in the process of purchasing their home. Ms. Stewart stated that the proposed development raises red flags to her. She stated that she feels that this proposed development will decrease the diversity in the neighborhood which is what they wanted to experience. Ms. Stewart stated that there are only 11 homes in the Ames Community School District in their price range currently for sale. She listed additional concerns that she has if this development takes place. Ms. Stewart outlined the reviews from those that live in other communities, near this developer’s properties, of increased noise, partying, poor development, poor quality, etc. Ken Wiggers, 3208-3210 Lettie Street, stated that he is a landlord. He outlined various problems that he has experienced when renting properties in residential areas to undergrad students. He feels that it really does change the neighborhood. Mr. Wiggers stated that he would rather see residential housing rather than student housing. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:19 p.m. Mr. Torresi stated that it has been mentioned that the City Council required a master plan and placed conditions on the plan. He stated that the City Council was not authorized under City Code to require the applicant to insert anything into the master plan or provide any narrative in addition to what the City Council is authorized to instruct the applicant to do in the Code. Mr. Torresi stated that they have complied with the Code. He outlined everything that the applicant has to do to comply with Residential-Low Density (RL) zoning. Mr. Torresi said that the real issue is students living in this neighborhood. He said that Ames has a university that is trying to attract additional students and needs housing for those students. Mr. Torresi said that the developer does not have to consent to conditions per Iowa Code. Mr. Tillo asked Mr. Torresi to explain his comment that the Commission must rezone to Residential Low-Density (RL). Mr. Torresi stated that the Commission can make any recommendation. He said that the City Council will be the one to decide on the rezone. Mr. Torresi said that if the Council fails to approve the rezone there will be an issue. Mr. Tillo asked if the issue was more related to the time frame to hear the rezone, not the rezone itself. Mr. Torresi stated that the Council will hear the rezone. He said that if the Council votes against the Residential Low-Density (RL) rezone there will be a problem. Mr. Siefert asked if the developer was given any assurances that the property could be rezoned when they purchased the property. Mr. Torresi stated the developer bought the property in the Government-Airport District (S-GA) zone with the Land Use Policy Plan map saying underneath the Government Overlay that RL is allowed in this area. Mr. Siefert asked if there were any time limits on this. Mr. Torresi stated that there are no time limits for how long the property can remain zoned Government-Airport District (S-GA). Mr. Siefert asked if the Land Use Policy Plan was what was driving the request for Residential Low-Density (RL) zoning. Discussion held between Mr. Siefert and Mr. Torresi regarding the legalities of denial of the rezone request by the City Council. Mr. Bowers stated that the Commission’s purpose is to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the rezone of this property. He said that the City Council will decide whether to rezone the property. Mr. Siefert stated that this information is important to him when deciding how to vote on the applicant’s request. Mr. Renaud explained several facets of the Traffic Analysis that has been prepared (e.g. the Tripp Street connection, traffic counts, level of service, etc.). He said that the topic of students in regard to the rezone request is not germane to this discussion. Mr. Renaud outlined the reasons that certain items were not listed on the master plan. He outlined the percentages of rental properties currently in the area. Mr. Renaud stated that there are a lot of students already in the neighborhood due to the fact that the property is located close to Iowa State University. Ms. Gould asked how much of the existing vegetation will be removed on this property. Mr. Renaud explained that the north portion of the middle parcel is almost entirely mowed. He said that it is not their intent to remove any mature trees along Wilmoth Avenue. Mr. Renaud stated that discussion about alleys will happen in a future process. He said that alleys will eliminate some of the access onto Wilmoth Avenue and will preserve the trees. Mr. Diekmann reviewed various things for the Commission to consider when voting on this rezone request. Yvonne Wannemuehler asked for clarification on whether the Code allows alleys in place of streets in this development. Mr. Diekmann explained that it is determined in the evaluation of the proposal through the subdivision criteria as to whether alleys are appropriate in meeting the access needs of the project. Ms. Wannemuehler asked if parking would be taken into account. Mr. Diekmann stated that each lot will need two parking spaces per unit. He said that there is no parking allowed in an alley. Ms. Wannemuehler asked if there are three persons living in each unit where does the third person park. Mr. Diekmann stated that that will be addressed in the subdivision review phase. Ms. Wannemuehler asked how storm water runoff will be addressed. Mr. Diekmann stated that it will be part of the subdivision review and no structure will be placed in the floodway. Ms. Marren outlined the flood plain area on a map. Mr. Diekmann stated that the grading plan is also part of the subdivision review process. Ms. Wannemuehler stated that she has personally been stuck in traffic at 5:00 pm at Mortensen Road and State Avenue for 20 minutes. She said that there is a huge problem in this area. Mr. Siefert asked about the minimum street width that would be allowed in this type of development. Mr. Diekmann reviewed the approximate width required in a residential neighborhood. . Mr. Siefert asked for clarification of the requirement of a Major Site Plan review outlined in Alternative #3. Mr. Diekmann stated if the Council chose this alternative for approval they could zone the property Planned Residential Development (PRD) but no subdivision could occur until a Major Site Plan was also approved by the City Council. He outlined various requirements that are required for a Major Site Plan. Mr. Siefert asked for clarification on the determination for Residential Low-Density zoning. Mr. Diekmann explained how the Code determines this classification. Ms. Gould asked what would happen with this property if it was zoned Planned Residential Development (PRD) and the developer decided to sell or dispose of the property. Mr. Diekmann explained that a Planned Residential Development (PRD) establishes a density range for evaluation. He said that the Commission would look at the Land Use Designation when determining the density of a Planned Residential Development (PRD). MOTION: (Siefert/Gould) to accept Alternative #3, which states: that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council rezone the 10.8 acres of land located at 321 State Avenue from “S-GA” (Government/Airport) to “PRD” (Planned Residential Development) to require a Major Site Plan review prior to subdivision. Discussion was held, among the Commission members and staff, regarding the motion on the table and differences between the Residential Low-Density (RL) and Planned Residential Development (PRD) zones. MOTION FAILS (2 - 3), voting against the motion: Tillo, Wannemuehler, Bowers Discussion was held on other alternatives and conditions that might be placed on approval. Mr. Diekmann explained additional facets of a Planned Residential Development (PRD) zoning district. He stated that the applicant does not have to agree to any conditions that the Commission might place on the rezone. Discussion was held on the types of units that the developer plans to build. Mr. Diekmann reviewed several items that would be addressed in the subdivision review process. MOTION: (Tillo/Wannemuehler) to accept Alternative #1, which states: that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the request for rezoning of approximately 10.8 acres of land located at 321 State Avenue from “S-GA” (Government/Airport) to “RL” (Residential Low Density). Mr. Tillo stated that he hopes that several items of concern to the Commission can be addressed during the subdivision review process. Discussion was held about the desires of the majority of the neighbors that spoke at this meeting for a rezone to Residential Low-Density (RL). MOTION PASSED: (4 -1), voting against the motion: Siefert Mr. Diekmann stated that the next phase is for this rezone request for 321 State Avenue to be placed on a City Council agenda. He said that the exact date has not yet been set. Mr. Diekmann said that notice of this meeting will be sent to the surrounding property owners. ____________________________________________________________________________ COMMISSION COMMENTS: Mr. Bowers thanked those in attendance for their comments and input. ____________________________________________________________________________ STAFF COMMENTS: Staff will poll the Commission to check their availability for an alternative Planning and Zoning Commission meeting date of Monday, February 3, 2013 as budget hearings will be held in the Council Chambers on Wednesday, February 5, 2014. ____________________________________________________________________________ MOTION TO ADJOURN: MOTION: (Wannemuehler/Siefert) to adjourn the meeting. MOTION PASSED: (5 - 0) The meeting adjourned at 9:11p.m. _________________________________ ____________________________________ Rob Bowers, Vice Chairperson Lorrie Banks, Recording Secretary Planning & Zoning Commission Department of Planning & Housing S:\PLAN_SHR\Council Boards Commissions\PZ\Minutes\2014 Minutes\P&Z Minutes-01-15-14.docx