Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Planning & Zoning Minutes 03/06/2013 MINUTES CITY OF AMES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Date: March 6, 2013 Norman Cloud , Chairperson 2013 Julie Gould 2013 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. *Jeff Johnson 2014 Troy Siefert 2014 Place: Ames City Hall Debra Lee, Vice Chairperson 2015 Council Chambers Rob Bowers 2015 Yvonne Wannemuehler 2015 Adjournment: 9:47 p.m. *Absent MAJOR TOPICS DISCUSSED: 1. Preliminary Plat and Major Site Development Plan for Somerset Subdivision 25th Addition 2. Proposed Bella Woods Subdivision located at 3491Cameron School Road 3. Athen Annexation 4. Quarry Estates Annexation ____________________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER: Norman Cloud, 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 March 6, 2013. MOTION PASSED: (6-0) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF February 6, 2013: MOTION: (Bowers/Gould) to approve the Minutes of the meeting of February 6, 2013. MOTION PASSED: (6-0) ____________________________________________________________________________ PUBLIC FORUM: There were no public comments. ____________________________________________________________________________ PRELIMINARY PLAT AND MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SOMERSET SUBDIVISION 25TH ADDITION Jeff Benson, Planner, discussed the request for an amendment to the Preliminary Plat and Major Site Development Plan for Somerset 25th Addition. Mr. Benson stated that in 1997 Somerset’s Conceptual Development Plan was approved. He stated that there was an 11 acre school site that was a part of that plan and was owned by the Ames Community School District. Mr. Benson gave an overview of the original Plan and stated that there have been amendments to the Plan over the years. He stated that the City incorporated many of the Somerset design features as part of the design standards and requirements for that Zoning District. Mr. Benson stated that in 2012 the Ames Community School District sold the 11 acre parcel to Heartland Development, led by Kurt Friedrich. He stated that Mr. Friedrich proposes to amend the Somerset plan to accommodate 73 residential dwelling units. Mr. Benson read an email from Kurt Friedrich, who could not be present at tonight’s meeting, to the Commission members present. Mr. Benson outlined the type of structures that the applicant is proposing to build and their proposed location. He stated that the applicant is proposing to build a new public street to connect Cambridge Drive with Northridge Parkway. Mr. Benson stated that the type of dwellings and land uses that the applicant is proposing are all types that have been previously built in Somerset. He stated that there is also a Private Green being proposed in this location which will not be actively used but will be landscaped. Mr. Benson stated that one of the things that the Commission will need to consider when reviewing this proposed project is whether Somerset will still meet the zoning requirements of the Village Residential zoning district. Mr. Benson reviewed Somerset’s Storm Water Management Plan with the Commission. He stated that one of the elements of the Plan is to make adequate provisions for surface and subsurface drainage. Mr. Benson explained that one of the design standards for Somerset is to have a dwelling density of at least 8 units or more per net acre. He stated that the net density of the subject area is 8.27 dwelling units per net acre. Mr. Benson stated that when these units are added into the Somerset totals the net dwelling density will be nine dwelling units per acre. Mr. Benson explained that the Zoning Ordinance requirements for park and open space is 10 per cent of the gross area of the Village. He stated that in the original Somerset plan it only amounts to five per cent. Mr. Benson stated that in the proposed plan it will raise to 5.5 per cent. Mr. Benson stated that the new proposed public street is approximately 1,000 feet, exceeding the Village Residential zoning district maximum of 660 feet. Mr. Benson stated that the applicant has applied for a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment which will be heard on March 13th. Norman Cloud asked for clarification on whether the Commission should take the street length issue into consideration since it is going to the ZBA. Mr. Benson stated that the Commission cannot ignore the fact but that they don’t have the authority to approve the variance. He stated that they could recommend approval conditional upon the variance being granted. Mr. Benson explained that in this Zoning District single family attached dwellings are required to have access from the alley. He stated that none of the 14 single family attached dwellings in the proposed plan have access from the alley. Mr. Benson stated that this has been allowed in the Somerset area in the past. He stated that the Zoning Code also has standards that are general in nature to use as a guide. Mr. Benson stated that those standards reflect what would be the minimum necessary to safeguard the public health, safety, aesthetics, and general welfare. He stated that the Commission can use the design principles as a guide when making a decision when it is not possible to meet all the standards. Rob Bowers stated that the Commission is not abandoning the idea but that they are evaluating the circumstances and applying what is available and making the best recommendation based on the circumstances. Bob Kindred, Assistant City Manager, stated that this parcel was not originally intended to be developed for residential purposes. He stated that it was laid out and platted to be a school. Mr. Kindred stated that since the School District has decided not to build a school on this parcel that we now need to decide how to adapt the space to comply with as many of the standards as possible. Mr. Benson reviewed the alternatives available to the Commission members r egarding this proposed project. Julie Gould asked about whether there had been discussion or staff concerns about the fact that there is only one access in and out of the Village apartments. Mr. Benson stated that it has been discussed and he reviewed those discussions and concerns with the Commission. Mr. Cloud asked if the proposed Village Apartments grade levels were lower or higher than the existing parking lot to the Northeast. Mr. Benson stated that they are lower. Scott Renaud, FOX Engineering, stated that he is representing Kurt Friedrich and Reiny Friedrich, who is in attendance representing the family. He stated that he does not have any issues with the two conditions set out in Alternative #1 of the Commission Action form. Mr. Bowers asked for clarification of the Storm W ater Plan and whether having residential dwellings in the proposed area instead of a school with open space and a parking lot would improve the drainage conditions. Mr. Renaud said that it is hard to say since the school wasn’t built but feels that the net result would be about the same. He gave an overview of how the storm water is currently draining and how it will drain in the proposed plan. Yvonne Wannemuehler asked if the existing pond can handle the increased water. Mr. Renaud stated that the existing pond was not full in the 2010 flood. He stated that the pond is set-up with an overflow and the water flows down stream. Mr. Renaud stated that they checked the area down to Squaw Creek and they didn’t find any issues. Deb Lee asked about the characteristics of the proposed Country House. Mr. Renaud reviewed the differences of the single-family homes that are allowed in the Village Zone. He stated that it is the larger unit of the two that are allowed. Mr. Renaud reviewed the requirements for each style. Mr. Renaud reviewed the alternatives that they looked at when putting together the proposed plan for this parcel. Mr. Renaud stated that there is a 10-12 ft grade change at the site of the proposed Village Apartments. Reiny Friedrich, 1300 Kinyon Circle, stated he has been a part of the Somerset development since the beginning. He stated that they held a neighborhood meeting to go over the proposed plan with the surrounding neighbors. He stated that the neighbors that were present at that meeting were in full agreement with the proposed project. MOTION: (Bowers/Seifert) to accept Alternative #1, which states: the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the revision to the Preliminary Plat/Major Site Development Plan for the Somerset Subdivision 25th Addition with the following conditions: a) a variance is approved for the proposed public street with a length in excess of that allowed by the Village Residential Supplemental Development Standards; and, b) the existing approved Preliminary Plat/Major Site Development Plan for the Somerset Village is revised to incorporate the proposed Plan amendments before a Final Plat is approved for the 25th Addition. MOTION PASSED: (6-0) ____________________________________________________________________________ PROPOSED BELLA WOODS SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 3491 CAMERON SCHOOL ROAD Charlie Kuester, Planner, stated that Chris Gardner of Bella Homes has proposed a subdivision to be built on Cameron School Road. He stated that the consulting engineer, Bob Gibson, with Civil Design Advantage is in attendance tonight. Mr. Kuester stated that the property is owned by James and Karen Clark. He stated that the property is located in an area of the Urban Fringe Plan called Rural Transitional Residential. Mr. Kuester reviewed the property location with the Commission members. He stated that the applicant is proposing a residential subdivision with 15 lots, one outlot, and an existing pond. Mr. Kuester stated that there is an entrance onto Cameron School Road rising up to the north property line that is stubbed out for future extension. Mr. Kuester stated that the City Council reviewed this project in February when they were asked to grant a waiver to the subdivision standards. Mr. Kuester reviewed the requirements that the City Council wanted to retain and those that they waived with the Commission members. He stated that for everything that the City waives the applicant will still be required to meet the County’s standards. Mr. Kuester stated that the applicant is proposing a cul-de-sac with six lots that line up with the Mathews Road Subdivision. He stated that when the South Squaw Valley Third Subdivision was approved, Mathews Road had a cul-de-sac with a 60 ft easement (30 ft on each side of the property line) to accommodate the future extension of the street to the east. Mr. Kuester stated that this lot was also part of that same subdivision. He stated that it appeared that the intent, if the parcel were ever to be developed into subsequent lots, was that the street would extend and connect the two areas. Mr. Kuester said that he asked the applicant to prepare a plan to include the street extension. Mr. Kuester stated that the applicant would need to develop a plan to capture the street storm water run-off. He stated that the surrounding property owners may not be amenable to the proposed street extension. Mr. Kuester reviewed the three findings of fact for the proposed project with the Commission. He stated that the applicant feels that the street extension is unneeded and that it creates additional issues for storm water control and the unnecessary removal of trees. He stated that staff feels that the connection of the proposed road provides an additional access to a neighborhood. Mr. Kuester stated that it allows for the future inter- connection of neighborhoods allowing two ways for emergency access, it promotes strong neighborhoods by allowing free passage from one neighborhood to the other, and it meets the intent of the 1990 Plat. Mr. Kuester outlined the various alternatives available to the Commission members regarding this proposed project. Troy Seifert asked if staff had looked at the soils on the site for the proposed septic systems. Mr. Kuester stated that the County was involved in the review process. He stated that City staff has talked to the County Sanitarian and that they believe that the soils and the size of the lots would accommodate the proposed on-site septic systems. Mr. Bowers asked for clarification of Alternative #1 regarding the street extension. Mr. Kuester stated that this area is outside of our annexation and development area and that the City is unlikely to annex this area within the next 25-30 years. He stated that homeowners in South Squaw Valley Subdivision have previously asked to connect to the City’s sanitary sewer system. He stated that if those homeowners sought annexation, the City could require conditions be placed on the proposed annexation. Mr. Bowers asked if the City were to propose annexation in the future would they want to annex Pleasant View Road as well. Mr. Kuester stated that if South Squaw Valley Third Subdivision were to be annexed it is likely that it would all come in at once. Mr. Bowers stated that there would be the issue of another pre-existing cul-de-sac. Mr. Kuester stated that there is a cul-de- sac but there isn’t a street reservation easement and that it appears that there was not the intent for that street to be extended. Ms. Lee asked for clarification of the surrounding developed areas to the east and the location of the proposed Matthews Drive. Mr. Kuester reviewed the location of various developed properties in the area with the Commission members. Ms. Lee stated that if Bella Woods Drive were to be extended Mathews Drive could never go any further east. Mr. Kuester stated that that was correct. Ms. Gould asked if there was precedence when the City required a connection to an existing street, possibly within another subdivision. Mr. Kindred reviewed the situation involving several areas that were annexed into the City where the streets were below the City’s standards. He stated that the City does its best to come in after the fact to provide appropriate services. Mr. Kuester stated that in 1990-91 when the South Squaw Valley Third Subdivision came before the Commission the easement was shown as a 30 ft wide street reservation with an additional 30 ft side-yard setback. He stated that the intent was that the street would one day be extended. Mr. Kuester reviewed the appropriate covenants for this subdivision with the Commission members. He stated that to avoid having this situation in the future staff’s recommendation is that the connection be made today. Mr. Cloud reviewed the Preliminary Plat and the Alternative Preliminary Plat for Bella Woods and asked if consideration has been made to extend the road in the future. Mr. Kuester stated that they looked at that requirement but had not determined a mechanism for funding the cost of the road extension. Mr. Cloud asked about the traffic potential for the existing and proposed lots if the two subdivisions were connected by a road extension to Mathews Road. Mr. Kuester stated that there is a potential of 12-16 homes proposed for this area. Mr. Kuester reviewed the street specifications with the Commission members. Bob Gibson, Civil Design Advantage, stated that he is representing the applicant and stated that Chris Gardner with Bella Homes is also present. Mr. Gibson outlined the reasons why he feels that the street extension would not lessen the burden upon the City, future land owners, and current property owners of the South Squaw Valley Third Subdivision if the properties are annexed in the future. He stated that he thinks that it increases the burden. Mr. Gibson stated that if they build a cul-de-sac in Bella Woods it would eliminate the need for a connection and the easement would not be needed. He stated that he feels the initial reasoning for the extension easement was so that the developer could develop Lot 17 (the Bella Woods property) and have an additional access other than using Cameron School Road. He stated that Bella Woods and the South Squaw Valley subdivision are located in a Rural Transitional area and are not pedestrian oriented and connectivity isn’t a huge life style issue for the people who are buying the lots. Mr. Gibson stated that Mr. Gardner has spoken to four of the residents on Mathews Road and they do not want this connectivity. Mr. Gibson stated that none of those residents are in attendance at tonight’s meeting. He stated that Bella Woods’s interested buyers would prefer to have a cul-de-sac lot. He stated that Bella Woods is identifying a paved street connection to the north end of the property that will eliminate any issues like those in South Squaw Valley Third Subdivision where it is unclear. Mr. Gibson stated that the property owners on Mathews Road like their cul-de-sac lots and want them to remain as such. He outlined an issue for a property owner in the South Squaw Valley Third Subdivision who built his driveway into the easement. Mr. Gibson stated that if the street were extended it would require this property owner to remove two-thirds of his driveway. He reviewed a map of the proposed street extension with the Commission members present and the impacts of the street extension to the property (loss of trees). Mr. Gibson also reviewed the storm water drainage plan alternatives. He stated that another alternative is to cut a swale down to the detention pond. He indicated that this drainage plan alternative would require the removal of multiple trees. Mr. Gibson spoke about the impact of the removal of the trees to the property. He stated that Mr. Gardner wants to implement some conservation design strategies on this property and he feels that this drainage plan alternative is contrary to those plans. Mr. Gibson stated that even though they have curb and gutter on the street they want to use road ditches instead of a storm sewer to capture the storm water coming off the street and lots and create places that will slow the water so that it can infiltrate and eventually work its way to the detention pond. Mr. Seifert asked for clarification about the grade and whether curb and gutter was being proposed for the streets as well as the cul-de-sac. Mr. Gibson and Mr. Gardner stated that they were proposing curb and gutter. Mr. Gibson stated that the grade slopes to the southwest but there is about a 14 ft drop straight west of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Seifert asked if they had looked at whether they could grade it and use Bella Woods Drive to drain the storm water. Mr. Cloud asked for clarification for draining lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 into the cul-de-sac. Mr. Gibson stated that they are naturally draining towards that direction. Mr. Gibson elaborated on how the road would be graded. Mr. Seifert asked about the drainage for lots 6, 7, and 8. Mr. Gibson stated that the swale will drain the water from those lots to the detention pond. Mr. Cloud explained what the Commission needs to take into consideration should annexation occur. He stated that connectivity within neighborhoods is a concern for the City. Chris Gardner, from Bella Homes, stated that he spoke to several present and past surrounding property owners in Squaw Valley who are concerned about the possibility of requiring the street extension. Ms. Gould asked about issues regarding the swale and tree preservation and whether the preservation of trees was mentioned in the covenants of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Gardner stated that they do have covenants in place that address tree preservation. Wayne Harris, 5206 Valley Road, stated that they live next to the current property owners. He explained the location of his property and how the storm water currently flows. He expressed his concerns about how the drainage and the watershed could be impacted once the property is developed. Mr. Harris said that currently the water flows to the edge of Cameron School Road and then to the creek. He said that about 90% of the year the area along the County Road to the south of their property is completely wet where it cannot be mowed. He reviewed the placement of area culverts and how they feed drainage to other ponds in the area. Mr. Harris stated that the trees near the back of his property are just small scrub trees. He expressed his concerns as to the number of trees, animals, and birds that would be displaced by the development. Susan Harris, 5206 Valley Road, stated that it would have been nice to be contacted by the applicant prior to tonight’s meeting so that they could have gotten the association together in time to discuss this project. Ms. Harris stated that she has flooding concerns and asked the Commission to thoroughly review the proposed project and asked that additional research about applicant’s plans to divert the water be done prior to voting on this project. Mr. Harris stated that there is an underground spring that feeds into his pond. Mr. Siefert asked Mr. Harris if any conditions have changed since they moved into their home. Mr. Harris indicated that nothing has changed. Mr. Siefert asked whether more water would run off the new site after construction than prior to construction. Mr. Kuester reviewed the City and County standards for run off for post development. Mr. Harris asked where the water would go if the retention pond became filled. Mr. Kuester asked Mr. Gibson if there was enough capacity for a 100 year event. Mr. Harris indicated that it is not a 100 year event but an every other year event normally. Mr. Bowers asked for clarification regarding storm water being under the County’s or the City’s jurisdiction. Mr. Kuester stated storm water management for this project will fall to the County’s jurisdiction. Ms. Harris asked if the County would be meeting on this project. She asked the date of the meeting and expressed her desire to be notified of the meeting. Mr. Kuester stated that he will ask the County to notify everyone once the date of their meeting is set and will share these concerns with County staff. Mr. Gibson stated that the storm water management plan has been submitted to the County. He stated that they would not release at any greater amount than what is historically there. Mr. Gibson outlined how the water from the streets that goes into the ditches will be slowed down. He stated that they would not be impacting anything outside of the property to any greater ways. Mr. Bowers asked for clarification about the City’s policy on cul-de-sacs. He asked if they are not encouraged but are not prohibited in the City. Mr. Kuester reviewed criteria for approving cul-de-sacs. He stated that the size of the lots in this project might restrict road and lot placement. Mr. Cloud asked for clarification as to size requirements for building on lots in the City of Ames. Mr. Kindred stated that the minimum density of 3.75 units per acre would still need to be met for an entire development. Ms. Gould asked if there is a City policy that requires a through street connection within a particular distance. Mr. Kuester explained the standards currently in place in the City. Mr. Siefert stated that he understands the street extension; however, he is unsure about the storm water issues and asked for clarification. Mr. Kuester stated that the applicant needs to satisfy the County in regards to the storm water. He stated that the Commission needs to be concerned about the street extension and all other aspects of the development and how it will affect surrounding property owners. Mr. Siefert expressed concern that the applicant wants to cut a swale down the whole west side of the property in order to drain two lots and would affect the rate at which water left the site. Mr. Cloud stated that the City of Ames Planning and Zoning Commission reviews the project based on the City’s standards but ultimately this property is in the County’s jurisdiction. He asked if the Commission should take future annexation into account when making a decision. Mr. Kuester reviewed a section of the Code of Iowa regarding subdivision review outside the City limits with the Commission. Mr. Cloud asked for clarification as to whether the City Council has waived these criteria for this property. Mr. Kindred stated that the City Council has waived some of the City Subdivision Standards but not all of them. Mr. Kuester reviewed options that are available in the Rural Transitional Residential area as to waiving standards on a case by case basis or by providing a covenant that runs with the land. Mr. Siefert asked about the possibility of effluent issues when using septic systems in the subdivision with a spring that also drains in the area. Mr. Cloud stated that this will be under the County’s purview. Mr. Kuester stated that the minutes from this meeting will be sent to the County Planning & Zoning Commission and concerns expressed at tonight’s meeting will be set out in the staff Report going to the City Council in three weeks. Ms. Gould stated that she also has concerns about the storm water design. Mr. Kindred stated that the concerns of the Commission need to be made clear so that they can be passed to the City Council. Ms. Lee spoke about the proposed street construction. She stated that she wonders whether the proposed extension would bring about that many benefits due to other structures that have been developed in the area. Ms. Gould stated that she is concerned about the length of distance to the north if they don’t require the street extension. Mr. Bowers stated the rural area is not like a City subdivision and reviewed the reasons that property owners move into the rural subdivisions. Mr. Kuester stated that the Development Review Committee has had internal struggle on the same arguments made by the Commission tonight. He said that ultimately the DRC’s recommendation to the Commission was that the cul-de-sac should be made into a through street. Mr. Kindred stated that the reason that the DRC came to this conclusion was that the City Council did not waive the City standards for the streets. Mr. Cloud stated that another possible option would be to leave an easement for connectivity off the cul-de-sac for future development. Mr. Kuester stated that the DRC did discuss this option and they felt that the buildable area in two of the lots would be decreased as well as reducing the density standards, possibly making it fall below one dwelling per acre. Mr. Cloud asked for clarification of the density standard. Mr. Kuester stated that the density needs to be between 1 and 3.75 dwellings per acre. He said that this project, as submitted, stands at 1.07 dwellings per acre. MOTION: (Bowers/Gould) to take the recommendation of the Development Review Committee into consideration and accept Alternative #1, which states: That the City Council approve the preliminary plat for Bella Woods with the street extended to the west line of the proposed development, based upon the findings of facts and conclusions in this report, conditioned on: a) The applicant completing a number of updates to this proposed plat prior to presentation to the City Council for approval. These updates include a complete grading plan, tabular data, etc. (The applicant had limited time to draw this plat based on the direction of staff to extend the road to the west); and b) that the consideration of groundwater issues and surface water runoff be considered by the City Council. Mr. Bowers asked for clarification of Alternative #1, section a), “tabular data, etc.” Mr. Kuester stated that information on the plan needs to be completed on the sheets that were submitted by the applicant, thus the reference. Mr. Siefert asked for clarification about the groundwater issues being under the jurisdiction of the County. Mr. Kindred stated that the street affects the groundwater and the street is retained by the City Council, thus resulting in interchange between the City and County. MOTION PASSED: (5-1) (Siefert voted against the motion) ____________________________________________________________________________ ATHEN ANNEXATION Mr. Kuester stated that the City Council, at their December 19th meeting, approved the changes to the Land Use Policy Plan for the Athen property. He outlined the details of the request. Mr. Kuester stated that the Commission had various conditions that they recommended which the City Council adopted. He outlined the findings of the Council. He stated that they are working on the final language to address some of the water issues but in most respects the developer has agreed to those terms. Mr. Kuester stated that the Development Agreement will be signed before it is taken to the City Council for action to address those issues. He reviewed the steps in the process and the corresponding dates for each with the Commission members. Mr. Cloud stated that Commission member, Jeff Johnson, has a strong feeling that the Development Agreement needs to include a senior care facility. Mr. Kuester stated that it is difficult to mandate that something be built without obtaining financial security from the developer. He stated that if the developer requests rezoning for the care facility and for single family homes the Development Agreement states that no occupancy for single family homes will be given until a building permit has been issued for the care facility. Mr. Kuester reviewed additional requirements outlined in the Development Agreement with the Commission members. Mr. Kuester reviewed the map of the Urban Fringe Plan and pointed out the allowable growth area to the Commission members. Ms. Wannemuehler asked for clarification of the annexation area on the map and whether it might make several areas landlocked. Mr. Kuester reviewed the map with the Commission members and stated that no islands would be created. The applicant did not have any additional information to add. MOTION: (Siefert/Wannemuehler) to accept Alternative #1, which states: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the request to annex the two parcels known as Parcel F in Section 29 and Parcel U in Section 20, both in Franklin Township, Story County by finding that the proposed annexation is consistent with the Land Use Policy Plan and the Urban Fringe Plan. MOTION PASSED: (6-0) ____________________________________________________________________________ QUARRY ESTATES ANNEXATION Mr. Kuester reviewed the history of the classification for the parcel being reviewed as well as some history regarding other parcels in the area. He stated that last year an annexation request was received from Quarry Estates. Mr. Kuester stated that in the Allowable Growth Area the policy of the City is that all development will pay for itself. He stated that City staff has been in contact with the property owners in the area that would be impacted by annexation and development. Mr. Kuester reviewed the direction that the City Council has given staff in regards to sewer and water services for the area. He stated that staff is working on drafting Development Agreements. Mr. Kuester stated that the issues are whether the request is consistent with the implementation chapter of the Land Use Policy Plan (Allowable Growth Map) and is it consistent with the Ames Urban Fringe Plan. He stated that staff recommends that this proposal be forwarded to the City Council. Mr. Cloud said that the staff report states that 81.3% of the parcel holders are consenting for this request but there are three parcel holders that are non-consenting. Mr. Kuester cited the Iowa Code that states that non-consenting owners can comprise no more than 20% of the land area to be included in an annexation and still be considered a voluntary annexation. He stated that the Hunziker North property owners’ intent is to annex. Mr. Kuester stated that they have not filled out an annexation petition, but they will sign the annexation agreement. Mr. Cloud asked for clarification on whether relief had been offered to Harold and Bette Frame for City infrastructure costs. Mr. Kuester outlined the contents of the proposed Development Agreement and the direction that staff has received from the City Council for property owners who do not meet the 3.75 dwelling units per acre standard and do not have any intention to subdivide. Scott Williams, FOX Engineering, stated that he is representing the Quarry Estates Annexation Request. He said that the development is in accordance with City and County requirements and hopes that the Commission votes favorably for this project. Ms. Wannemuehler asked if Harold and Bette Frame have any rights regarding the proposed annexation. Mr. Kuester stated that they do have some concerns and that they are not consenting. He said that if 100% of the property owners are not consenting and the City Council were to approve the annexation request, the non-consenting property owners would still have a voice in Des Moines with the City Development Board. Mr. Cloud asked if the Frames currently have a house in the proposed area. Mr. Kuester stated that they do. Ms. Lee stated that she has continuing concerns for the homeowners on Hyde Avenue and the Bloomington Heights area. She stated that she hopes that we don’t have the same thing happen in this area. Mr. Kuester explained the situation involving the Hyde and Bloomington Heights area. He stated that staff from multiple City departments met with many of those property owners and heard many of their concerns, one of which was traffic that would be generated from this development. Mr. Kuester outlined several traffic improvements that will be made. Ms. Lee feels that a traffic signal alone will not solve the traffic flow in this area due to the width of the street. Mr. Kindred stated that Hyde Avenue is a collector street and wider than the side streets. He reviewed the previous history of street development in this area with the Commission members. MOTION: (Bowers/Siefert) to accept Alternative #1, which states: that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the request to annex the four parcels known as Parcel B, Parcel C, Parcel K, and Parcel L, all in Section 22, Franklin Township, Story County by finding that the proposed annexation is consistent with the Land Use Policy Plan and Urban Fringe Plan. MOTION PASSED: (6-0) ______________________________________________________________________ COMMISSION COMMENTS: Ms. Lee stated that she has growing concerns about Northern growth and the distance between schools and commercial areas. Ms. Gould stated that she is conflicted about the Bella Woods Subdivision and feels that there needs to be connectivity in the northern annexation. Mr. Cloud stated that he feels that it is critical that Commission issues are recorded accurately and presented to the City Council. He encouraged the Public to volunteer for a City Commission or Board. ____________________________________________________________________________ STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Kindred stated that the City hopes to be bringing in candidates for the Planning and Housing Director position. He stated that the March 20th Planning and Zoning Commission meeting will be cancelled due to lack of agenda items. He stated that the Boards and Commission Luncheon will be held on March 28th and encouraged all of the Commission members to attend. ____________________________________________________________________________ With no further business coming before the Commission, the Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. _________________________________ ____________________________________ Norman Cloud, Chairperson Lorrie Banks, Recording Secretary Planning & Zoning Commission Department of Planning & Housing S:\PLAN_SHR\Council Boards Commissions\PZ\Minutes\2013 Minutes\P&ZMinutes-03-06-13.docx