Request to Rezone Keymont Drive_Buesing Assoc. LetterBuesing 8a Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, IA 52001
(563) 556-4389
July 30, 2008
E7 °
°
Mr. Mike Van Milligan, City Manager & ~`~ ~ ~-~ t
City Council Members ~~- ~ ~' c,,a "~
Cit~r Hall
t s ~`-
~ °
& Central
13 ~= u
~ ~-
~
i~
Dubuque, IA 52001 ~; `~
C -. V
t
--.1
Council Members & Mike:
In response to comments made at the July 21, 2008 City Council meeting we offer the
following:
In response to Kevin Lynch's question about a second access, we wish to point out that
there is no access to any other stub street or potential road right of way from the
property. The Keymont connection is the only one. Per Kyle Kritz, even when the
property was originally subdivided, the access to the north that now goes to the church
was to property that was not owned by the same party as the North Fork Trails parcel.
There were questions about the width of the street and its perceived advantage for more
development, the sidewalks and subsequent access issues. It is true that we are
proposing a narrower street, than most, and sidewalks on one side only. The right of
way width is not being changed and therefore there is no net gain of developable lots.
This also means that there is no additional traffic or storm water runoff for the city to deal
with, over and above that of a 31' street. In fact, the narrower street will reduce the
amount of impervious surfaces and therefore reduce the amount of storm water runoff,
and the pervious pavers should reduce the amount of runoff even further.
The narrowing of the street from 31' to 27', with parking on one side, will actually
increase the driving width of the street compared to the 31' street with parking on both
sides. In regard to the City Code, the right of way width cannot change for a street that
has already been stubbed out. This width is not being changed. It remains 50 feet. The
Fire Department has indicated to the planning staff that they have no issues with this
development.
The proposal for sidewalks on one side is an effort to further reduce the amount of
impervious surface, which in turn increases the amount of Green Space, and reduces
the amount of storm runoff.
There was a concern about additional storm water runoff. It is a requirement of the City
of Dubuque that there can be no more storm water runoff post-developed than pre-
developed, and those are the rules for this development as well. Storm water will be
reduced by any means necessary, whether it be pervious pavers, rain gardens,
detention basin or some other practices.
It was pointed out by a council member that this looks like a crammed development. A
comparison between this development and the R-2 minimum requirements shows that
this development is far from being crammed.
R-2 min. Lot Area = 6000 sf North Fork Trails avg. Lot Area = 13,900 sf
R-2 min. Lot Frontage = 50' North Fork Trails avg. frontage = 106' in straight, 78'
in curve, 62' in cul-de-sac
North Fork Trails avg. Lot width at 60' from ROW = 106' in straight, 106' in curve, 114'
in cul-de-sac
We profoundly reject the concept of one of the objectors' that the land adjacent to the
creek was "worthless". This property is the conservation corridor area that we strongly
recommend to set aside in any subdivision so that it can be used for green space, trails
and similar types of recreational opportunities. Any conservationist who has some
development experience would argue in a like manner.
We would like to reiterate comments from the various zoning commission member that
the "traffic will be less" than what we might put there with an R-1 zoning if we mirrored
the adjacent residential development to the west.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that over the last twenty five years I had been
involved with the "rapid" development of the outlying rural area in and around Dubuque.
For many of those projects, we are sometimes taking prime agricultural land out of
production. In addition, the cost for extending infrastructure can be very high. With the
future being challenged with $4.00 gasoline, it seems to me that with the less distance
involved with trips to schools, for shopping, etc. it only makes environmental sense for
an infill type of development as this. For that reason and all of the others, we ask the
members of the Council to approve the second and third reading of the proposed
rezoning request.
Respectfully submitted,
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
Cc: Mr. Terry Thompson
Mr. Kyle Kritz