Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Planning & Zoning Minutes 10/03/2012 MINUTES CITY OF AMES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Date: October 3, 2012 Norman Cloud , Chairperson 2013 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. Julie Gould 2013 Jeff Johnson 2014 Place: Ames City Hall *Troy Siefert 2014 Council Chambers Debra Lee, Vice Chairperson 2015 Rob Bowers 2015 Adjournment: 10:31 p.m. Yvonne Wannemuehler 2015 MAJOR TOPICS DISCUSSED: *Absent 1. Preliminary Plat and Master Plan for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, Located at 599 Wilder Avenue 2. Considerations for Alternatives for Athen LUPP Request ____________________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER: Norman Cloud, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2012: MOTION: (Wannemuehler/Johnson) to approve the Minutes of the meeting of September 5, 2012. MOTION PASSED: 6-0 ____________________________________________________________________________ PUBLIC FORUM: There were no public comments. ____________________________________________________________________________ Preliminary Plat and Master Plan for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, Located at 599 Wilder Avenue Karen Marren, Planner, presented the project to the Commission. The original approval of the subdivision by the City Council was in 2004 and later amended in 2006. The applicant is proposing to amend the remaining portion of the development that has yet to be developed. The applicant is looking to just amend the portion that is zoned Low Density Residential. The total development is approximately 106 acres. The subdivision at completion will encompass 235 residential units, two commercial lots, and just over 19 acres of open space. The changes include the addition of four lots for single-family detached residential dwelling, shifting of Westfield Road south to allow for the row of single-family lots along the north boundary of the subdivision, a revision to the outlots for detention and drainage, and the reorganization of the street ways and lot layouts for the single-family homes. All of the changes they are proposing are in conformance with the Code for minimum density requirements. Our minimum requirement is 3.75 dwelling units per acre for the FS-RL zone. As proposed, their submittal includes a density of 4.16 dwelling units per net acre. They have revised the outlots for stormwater and detention drainage purposes. They are including utility easements and public sidewalks as part of the new infrastructure development for the subdivision, which is in compliance with all of the requirements. They have submitted a revised stormwater management plan and Public Works have approved that revised plan. The application also includes a revised street tree plan for the 2 new layout and it is consistent with the Code and the previously approved preliminary plat. There was an original development agreement with the subdivision established in 2005. This proposal does reduce the number of street connections to the north. The original was five and the revised is two street connections from the north. An amendment to the legal language regarding an agreement that allowed for the City to pick up the overage cost to upgrade Wilder and Westfield Road to collector classification streets. That language is still to remain; however, there has been some discussion that the legal language that is used in terms of when the City would let that bid would be amended. The Legal Department is currently working on amending this language. A couple stipulations that have been noted are amending that development agreement prior to the revised preliminary plat and master plan being approved by Council. There are a couple notes that need to be revised f or the Assessor’s Office in terms of the language adding square footages to the plat prior to approval and any easement documents would need to be reviewed prior to any approval. Ms. Marren pointed out the findings of fact and conclusion listed in the report. There has been discussion with the Parks and Recreation Department regarding possible future connections for a shared use path to the north; however, the Parks and Recreation Department has not initiated a need at this point. This plan is identifying a shared use path that follows along the west side of Wilder to the north. Chuck Winkleblack (applicant), 105 S 16th Street, discussed some of the reasons the changes to the originally approved preliminary plat. These reasons included: not being successful in purchasing the property to the north of this subdivision, providing more open space with less paving, and drainage of the water. Debra Lee, asked about the cul-de-sac on Springbrook Drive and expressed her concern for connectivity in the future. Ms. Marren stated that there is a grading and slope concern. Mr. Winkleblack explained that the biggest reason for the cul-de-sac is otherwise the Fire Department would not allow construction past a certain point; this would cause abandonment of land. Norman Cloud asked if Westfield Drive connects to County Line Road. Mr. Winkleblack explained that it currently doesn’t connect, but it will with the approval of this plan. MOTION: (Johnson/Bowers) to accept a motion, which states: The Planning & Zoning Commission can recommend that the City Council approve the revised Preliminary Plat and Master Plan for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, with the stipulation noted in this report. MOTION PASSED: 6-0 ____________________________________________________________________________ Considerations for Alternatives for Athen LUPP Request Charlie Kuester, Planner, described the request for a Land Use Policy Plan and Urban Fringe Land use Framework Map Amendment. The request comes from Chuck Winkleblack representing Hunziker Land Development, the applicant. The property in question is owned by the Athen family. This property is about 141 acres, northwest of the existing city limits of Ames. He described the location to the Commission using the plans on the overhead. Mr. Kuester briefly discussed the two different planning documents in place for the City of Ames, the Land Use Policy Plan and the Urban Fringe Plan. He explained the density requirements for the Urban Fringe Plan. The request is to change the map to the Urban Residential designation, which would allow them to annex into the City and have access to the City sewer and water, 3 and build to our standard urban residential densities and expectations. The other part of it is to designate the area as a portion of a growth area. Mr. Kuester gave discussed the reason for the natural area and gave some background. He discussed the flood plain area and explained that the applicant isn’t proposing to do any development in the flood plain besides maybe some trails or shelter, which is consistent with the City’s regulations. The reason for the request is because the applicant has plans to develop the land as a senior living center and also single family housing. The request is consistent with the FS-RL or FS-RM zoning designation. Mr. Kuester briefly described the history of the Land use Policy Plan and discussed the difference between the major and minor amendments. He described the progress for this amendment and explained the public open houses and workshops that were held. He explained that no recommendation has been made by staff, but the Commission is to come up with an alternative or some alternatives to take forward to the City Council. Mr. Cloud asked when the update to the LUPP was that discussed priority growth areas. Mr. Kuester said it may have been last year or the year prior, but it was before the major/minor amendment process was adopted. Mr. Cloud asked why the little piece of land that is just north of the northwest growth area was left out of this growth area since it touches the current city limits. Mr. Kuester briefly discussed some of the reasons that may have led to leaving that piece out. Ms. Lee asked if the emergency service time was also part of the decision for leaving that land out. Mr. Kuester explained that that was part of the decision. Mr. Kuester went over the different aspects of the implications of growth in the area. He explained that infrastructure, sewer, water, storm sewer, traffic impacts, emergency response times, natural geographic features, and historical/archaeological resources are all looked at. Mr. Kuester discussed some of the concerns that were raised at the open house and workshops. He explained that a lot of questions were raised about George Washington Carver’s ability to handle the traffic. Three quality of life issues that were raised were the speed of traffic, the noise of traffic, and safety concerns with the bicycle and car interactions with the lineups with the trails. Mr. Kuester briefly discussed some other traffic concerns. Mr. Kuester discussed the infrastructure. He explained that getting water to the site is not a problem. Sanitary sewer is still an unknown and stormwater is a concern. Mr. Kuester explained that the City requires stormwater management plans and soil erosion control measures. Another option is the City’s Conservation Subdivision Ordinance. If the Commission thought it was important, a Conservation Subdivision Ordinance could be applied to this site. Mr. Kuester discussed the Norris Study in regards to natural resources. He also discussed issues regarding the floodplain and archeological resources. He explained the breakdown of the economic impacts. Mr. Cloud asked if the sanitary sewer system that’s being extended to the north is being tied in to the development directly to the east of the subject property. Mr. Kuester explained that it is a completely separate line. Yvonne Wannemuehler asked if it could be connected. Mr. Kuester said that it would be difficult due to the hill. Discussion about the emergency response time ensued and whether or not a fourth fire station will be needed in the future. There was a brief discussion about alternative sites that were looked at for this development. 4 The development is 140 acres, but most of the site is in the tree line and floodplain. Mr. Kuester reviewed the six criteria to consider for major amendments. He explained what is being asked of the Commission. Mr. Cloud clarified what would be needed from the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council and that any alternatives will be considered. Mr. Cloud asked if the map with the city boundaries includes all of the parcels that have been annexed already or if they are prioritized to be annexed. Mr. Kuester explained that they are not annexed and the LUPP does not prioritize them, but they do differentiate between an incentivized growth area and a non-incentivized growth area. Jeff Johnson asked if there is a plan as to where future fire stations would need to be if all of the potential areas were annexed at the same time. Mr. Kuester said there is no plan. Mr. Johnson asked if there is anything in the subject area that would provide an amenity to draw people to that area. Mr. Osguthorpe said that there aren’t any current amenities in this area. Chuck Winkleblack (applicant), 105 S 16th Street, has been working with the Athens for over ten years now. He discussed the sewer connection and explained the infrastructure connections that could be made in the future. The connection point would likely be at Weston. Mr. Winkleblack explained the Certificate of Need from the potential developers of the Senior Living Center. He briefly discussed the need for fewer parking spaces, creating less impervious surfaces. Mr. Johnson asked about the staffing details and guest parking numbers. Mr. Winkleblack explained that he is unaware of the specifics of the requirements. Ms. Wannemuehler asked how many acres are actually going to be developed. Mr. Winkleblack explained that approximately 80 acres will be developed. Greg Artz, 3819 Deer Run Lane, discussed some of the questions that were brought up. He explained that he is also in the natural area and is required to abide by certain regulations and would like that to be defined. He exclaimed that nothing is more efficient for that land than agricultural. Mr. Artz’s biggest concern and concerns of his neighbors is that land evolving into apartments in the future. He stated that the best question asked at the workshops was why we would give them a blank check to any zoning district. He said tonight is the time to address the floodplain concern and not to allow any houses be developed on the west side of the tree line. Mr. Artz would like a more defined plan showing the proposed housing and care facility. There was a brief discussion regarding the blank check concern and an explanation of the zoning requirements. Mr. Johnson asked for more clarification on the process of the LUPP amendment. Mr. Kuester explained the process of the major amendment and asked the Commission to create some broad concepts to take to the City Council to review. The Council will then send those alternatives back to the Commission for a public hearing and that is the time when the Commission would make a formal recommendation to the City Council. 5 Mr. Cloud asked about the natural areas and the ability to further subdivide. Mr. Kuester explained that they wouldn’t be allowed to further subdivide and that this is in the Urban Fringe Plan. Rob Bowers asked if they were to take no action, if this could still get developed through the County processes. Mr. Kuester said that no, it has to go through the approval process of the City. There was a brief discussion regarding the density in the different zoning areas. Julie Gould asked if this was annexed what the default future land use would be. Mr. Kuester stated that if it was annexed, it is automatically by default rezoned to Agriculture. Mr. Cloud stated that right now this is not an allowable growth area to the City because it is contrary to two different plans. Mr. Kuester explained that it would need to have two map amendments. The subject area would have to be changed to an allowable growth area, an extension to the north growth area, and some or all of the land will need to be designated as Urban Residential. Mr. Osguthorpe explained that the designation does not need to follow property lines. The item was opened back up to the public for comment. Jackie Olson, Deer Run Lane, discussed the Natural Area designation. She asked if the Commission has the authority to change the boundaries of the Natural Area. She expressed her concern for not allowing development on a wooded lot. Mr. Winkleblack discussed the concern for bringing in the floodplain area. He said if the land is not annexed it will just sit there. Mr. Cloud expressed his concern about spot zoning. Mr. Kuester explained that it is more of an issue of where the City plans to grow and is not a spot zoning issue. He explained that there are identified areas for growth. Ms. Lee asked when the Urban Fringe Plan was approved. Mr. Kuester stated that it was approved in July 2006. Discussion ensued regarding near term lands. Mr. Osguthorpe stated three important issues: Sewer – capacity and cost, emergency response, and what the impacts are on other City investments. He stated that these issues should be looked at in making a recommendation. Mr. Cloud stated that the Commission needs to discuss the boundary line for the Natural Area. Ms. Lee stated that since it is adjacent to the City it is not making a big stretch. She also stated that since it was already designated as Priority Transitional Residential in the Urban Fringe Plan, it was already suggested that it could be part of the City in the future. MOTION: (Johnson/Wannemuehler) to accept a motion, which states: The Planning and Zoning Commission will move forward to recommend the annexation with the understanding that conditions will be tied to it. 6 MOTION PASSED: 5-1 Mr. Johnson questioned if there could be an agreement about what has to be there and that nothing else can be there in the future. Mr. Osguthorpe explained that a developer’s agreement could include this. Mr. Johnson expressed his concern for placing a condition in the future developer’s agreement and the importance of having a condition in there only allowing a senior care facility. Mr. Bowers recommends the City Council evaluate: the sewer issue, the emergency response situation from the Fire perspective, impact on City investments, and the developer’s agreement based on the Certificate of Need. Mr. Cloud expressed his concern for what the actual cost of all of these things would be. Mr. Osguthorpe explained that it’s a matter of timing. Ms. Gould stated that these issues would probably be issues regardless of where they would locate this project. Ms. Gould would like to an adjustment be made on the map to the natural area, or for the line to be better defined. Mr. Cloud recommended that someone take a look at the topography before a line is drawn. Mr. Osguthorpe asked what should be considered in the topographies. Mr. Cloud stated he wants to ensure the integrity of the tree line. Ms. Gould would like the consideration of the possibility of adjusting the line and protecting the tree line with a buffer. MOTION: (Bowers/Gould) to accept a motion, which states: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council consider the following factors in evaluating and approving these changes: 1. Development of proposal for the distribution of cost for any needed sanitary sewer improvements. 2. The impact the development in this area may have on emergency service response. 3. The impact the development in this area may have in areas that have already been targeted for growth or have been invested in by the city for growth. 4. The possibility of a developer’s agreement be investigated to require a care facility. 5. The consideration be provided to ensure the protection of the natural area of at least at or before the tree line. 6. This area be provided with two zoning designations with the minimum zoning necessary for the care facility and low density housing. MOTION PASSED: 6-0 _______________________________________________________________________ COMMISSION COMMENTS: Ms. Lee shared her thoughts on senior care facilities. Ms. Gould expressed her thoughts on the LUPP amendment process. Mr. Johnson suggested flow charts for these processes in the future. 7 Ms. Lee expressed her gratitude for the City staff on the LUPP amendment process. Mr. Bowers thanked staff and Commission for their efforts tonight. Mr. Cloud welcomed Karen on her first presentation and thanked the Commission on their hard work. ____________________________________________________________________________ STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Kuester stated that the City of Ames Flood Mitigation Study is underway and discussed the purpose of the study. Mr. Osguthorpe reviewed the tentative agenda for the October 17, 2012, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Osguthorpe announced his resignation from the City and that this will be his last meeting. ____________________________________________________________________________ MOTION TO ADJOURN: With no further business coming before the Commission, the Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 10:31 p.m. _________________________________ ____________________________________ Norman Cloud, Chairperson Melissa DeBoer, Recording Secretary Planning & Zoning Commission Department of Planning & Housing S:\PLAN_SHR\Council Boards Commissions\PZ\Minutes\2012 Minutes\Minutes-10-03-12.docx