Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Unified Development and Land Use Code 2008_Transmittal Documents
Planning Services Department City Hall 50 West 13~ Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 (563) 589-4210 phone (563) 589-4221 fax (563) 690-6678 TDD planning@cityof dubuque.org The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Dubuque City Hall - 50 W. 13th Street Dubuque IA 52001 Applicant: City of Dubuque Description: Unified Development Code (UDC) Dear Mayor and City Council Members: z-tiE cm of Dubuque DUB E Masterpiece on the Mississippi ' ~ ~ ( i 2007 September 11, 2009 The City of Dubuque Zoning Advisory Commission has reviewed the above-cited request. The proposed UDC, staff reports, and related materials are attached for your review. Discussion On July 1, 2009, the Zoning Advisory Commission held a public hearing on Articles 1 - 10 of the proposed UDC. Staff Member Carstens outlined the UDC process. She discussed the incorporation of the changes recommended by the Commission and City Council to UDC Articles 1 - 10 after their work sessions. She said that staff had not received any substantial input at the July 1, 2009 open house or on the City's web site. There were no public comments at the July 1, 2009 public hearing. The Zoning Advisory Commission discussed the request and felt that UDC Articles 1 - 10 had been adequately modified to represent their recommended changes. On September 2, 2009, the Zoning Advisory Commission held a public hearing on Articles 11 - 15 of the proposed UDC. Staff Member Carstens discussed the incorporation of the changes recommended by the Commission and City Council to UDC Articles 11 - 15 after their work sessions. She discussed the August 21, 2009 staff memo recommending additional language be added to the UDC regarding connection of streets, sidewalks and bike/hike trails. She also discussed the September 2, 2009 staff memo detailing four provisions that included: 1) The keeping of hens to include both ducks and chickens in R-1 and R-2 Districts; 2) allowing 0 lot line townhouses to adjoin along the rear property lines in R-2, R-2A, R-3, R-4 and OR Districts; 3) increasing or eliminating the 75 foot high maximum building height in the C- 4District; and 4) options for parkland dedication that will not eliminate the tax deduction advantage for developers. Staff Member Carstens noted that a number of the incentives Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Page 2 created in the UDC help to encourage sustainable development. She said that staff had received developer input prior to and at the September 2, 2009 open house, but had not received any input on the City's web site. Staff Member Carstens noted that two developers have concerns that, if made a requirement, parkland dedication would no longer be eligible for a tax deduction. She said these developers said this would increase the overall cost of development. Commissioners discussed the proposed parkland dedication language and the UDC. A number of Commissioners thought that parkland dedication should be required; others said that it could still be provided on a voluntary basis. The Commission directed staff to explore options for parkland dedication that may provide the necessary parkland and still allow the developer to take advantage of a tax deduction. Commissioners discussed both the August 21, 2009 and September 2, 2009 staff memos provided by staff. Commissioners also discussed the proposed UDC sign regulations for electronic message center signs, and UDC green space and sidewalk requirements. The Commission decided to leave the 75 foot high maximum building height in the C-4 District as is. There were no public comments at the September 2, 2009 public hearing. Subsequent UDC Revisions By consensus, the Commission instructed staff to forward their recommendation for options for parkland dedication to the Legal Staff. Subsequent to the September 2, 2009 public hearing, Planning Services and Legal staff meet with the City Manager to review options to parkland dedication. The recommended language is included as a revised UDC Article 11-9. This revised language accomplishes the Commission's goal to make developers aware up front of the City's desire to include parkland in new subdivisions, while providing for private donation of parkland as a charitable tax deduction. This revision also allows for the provision of parkland in County subdivisions within the City's 2-mile jurisdiction. One written comment, one verbal comment, and one electronic comment received for the UDC are enclosed. The written comment is in support of the accessory dwelling unit provision. The verbal comment alerted staff to inadvertent omissions of regulations for bed and breakfast establishments; which have been corrected subsequent to the September 2, 2009 public hearing. The electronic comment was with respect to parkland dedication, which was addressed with a new Section 11-9. The electronic comment also addressed the cost of conservation subdivision design and possible incentives for sustainable development. A separate staff memo addresses these issues. Recommendation By a vote of 5 - 0, the Commission recommended adoption of UDC Articles 1 - 10, as submitted on July 1, 2009. Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Page 3 By a vote of 5 - 0, the Commission recommends codifying the long-standing practice and City policy that the extension of the streets, sidewalks and bike/hike trails within a development to the property lines reflects sound planning principles for maintaining good circulation networks for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians throughout the community as UDC Article 11-8 A.6. By a vote of 5 - 0, the Commission recommends the conditional use of keeping of hens include both chickens and ducks in R-1 and R-2 Districts. By a vote of 5 - 0, the Commission recommends modifying the bulk regulations table for the R-2, R-2A, R-3, R-4 and OR Districts to permit townhouse style residences with a 0 foot rear setback, with a recommendation that the language be amended to read "either the side and/or rear building lines". By a vote of 5 - 0, the Commission recommends to amend 11.9.2 of the UDC to read that "the City shall require the subdivider to grade and seed recreational open space. By a vote of 5 - 0, the Commission recommends to approve the Unified Development Code as amended and recommended it be forwarded to the City Council. A simple majority vote is needed for the City Council to approve the request; however, due to the complexity of the proposed UDC, three readings of the ordinance are recommended by City Staff. Respectfully submitted, ~ -> ~- ~,...- Charles Miller, Vice Chairperson Zoning Advisory Commission Attachments cc: Tim O'Brien, Assistant City Attorney Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork Preparers James A. O'Brien Address: Suite 330, 300 Main Street. Dubuque, IA 52001 Telephone: (5631583-4113 ORDINANCE NO. -09 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TITLE 16, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CODE OF IOWA AND FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH WHEREAS, the provisions of the Code of Iowa empower the City of Dubuque, Iowa to enact a new Title 16, Unified Development Code and to provide for its administration, enforcement and amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the City to enact such an ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Iowa has appointed a Zoning Commission to recommend the boundaries of the original districts and appropriate regulations to be enforced therein; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission has recommend establishing zoning districts of such number, shape and area as are deemed best suited to carry out the purpose of this ordinance and has prepared regulations pertaining to such districts in accordance with a comprehensive plan and design to lessen congestions in the streets; to secure safety from fire, flood, panic, and other dangers; to promote health and the general welfare, to provide adequate light and air, to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, and parks and other requirements; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission has given reasonable consideration, among other things, to the character of the area of the district and the peculiar suitability of such area for particular uses, with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of lands throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission has made a preliminary report and held public hearings thereon, and has thereafter submitted its final report to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has given due public notice of hearings relating to Title 16, Unified Development Code and has held such public hearings; and WHEREAS, all requirements of the Code of Iowa with regard to the preparation of the report of the Zoning Commission and subsequent action of the City Council have been met; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE IOWA: That the City of Dubuque Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by adopting Title 16, Unified Development Code, attached hereto and incorporated herein, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Iowa. Passed, approved and adopted this day of , 2009. Roy D. Buol, Mayor Attest: Jeanne F. Schneider, City Clerk f:lusers\m rettenb\wp\udc\un~eddevelopmentcodeordinance_091409.doc City Council Planning Service Dept. Dear Council Members: ~ C~ ~ C~ Q,~U~ ~~ ~~~ i ~S7~E July 3, 2009 `ii!! ~ t` J U L 7 2009 f PLA,ilNIN^ S=R~i1.cS DEi-,''~ ,~`^~~!T I am writing to encourage you to adopt the Proposed Ordinance Section 5-2.2 Regarding Conditional Uses for R 1 Dwellings - in particular Accessory Dwelling Unit. My name is Patricia Haas. My mother has been in a nursing home for almost 3 years now. She entered the home the day after her husband died. She didn't want to be alone. She wanted to feel safe and cared for. It would've been nice if she could have moved in with us having her own separate area of the house. For mom to have a private room at Stonehill is about $60,000 per year. I have put ten thousand five hundred miles on my car visiting her and you know how expensive gas is. It is my pleasure to visit with my mother and am not complaining. I can afford this but many can't. With longevity in the family, this could become very costly. Dad provided well for mom but what about those who can't afford it. Most nursing homes don't have private rooms for those without means. My dad wanted to die at home and he was dead set against nursing homes. So many are. I don't want to end up in one either unless I need nursing care. My husband died in May of this year. ' He was 69. I don't like being alone either. If my family wanted to take me in, I would be most thankful. I would want to have my privacy however, and my children should have their privacy too. If it would mean adding on to their home, I would certainly abide by the zoning and building codes. Please consider adopting the Accessory Development Unit proposal for the safety, comfort, and financial benefits for our aging population. Thank you immensely. Pat icia Haas ~~ Page 1 of 1 Laura Carstens -Unified Development Code From: Wally Wernimont To: Carstens, Laura Date: 9/1 1/2009 1 1:37 AM Subject: Unified Development Code Laura, I was contacted by a Bed & Breakfast owner about the UDC. He suggested the following changes to the Unified Development Code. In OR -Office Residential, OC -Office Commercial & R-4 Multi-Family we allow Bed & Breakfast Inns as a conditional use. These districts allow single-family homes. He suggested that we allow Bed & Breakfast Homes as a conditional use also. He also notice that some of the bulk reg tables do not have maximum lot coverages. After reviewing the bulk reg tables, I have made changes to the following districts: R-2 Two-Family Residential R-2A Alternate Two-Family Residential R-3 Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential R-4 Multi-Family Residential OR -Office Residential OC -Office Commercial ally ernimont Assistant Planner City of Dubuque 50 W. 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001 Phone (563) 589-4210 Fax (563) 589-4221 wwernimoCa~cityofdubuque.org file://C:\Documents and Settings\lcarsten\Local Settings\Temp\XPGrpWise\4AAA3690D... 9/11/2009 (9/11/2009) Laura Carstens -Comments for Public Hearing for City of Dubuque Zoning Board Page 1 From: <jpglrs@aol.com> To: <Icarsten@cityofdubuque.org> CC: <kkritz@cityofdubuque.org> Date: 9/2/2009 7:31 PM Subject: Comments for Public Hearing for City of Dubuque Zoning Board Laura: I follow up to the open house tonight, I would like to comment that I have concerns about certain provisions that would increase the cost of development. Specifically, the proposal for donation of land or cash payment for parks is a concern. I would prefer that you continue the current program of voluntary verses mandatory donation. Also, I am concerned about provisions regarding conservation subdivisions that might also increase the cost of development. I believe the topography of our area and the soil composition could make certain of those provisions hard to meet without increasing the cost significantly. As we discussed, I would like you to consider incenties to achieve your goals verses mandatory requirements. I will follow up with more specifics later. Sincerely, Jim Gantz THE CTTY QF Dubuque ~T T~I2 ~ All-AmericaC~y ~,J j„J f Masterpiece on the Mississippi ,® 2007 TO: Zoning Advisory Commission FROM: Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager ~ ~~;~p `°` SUBJECT: Public Hearing -UDC Articles 1 through 10 DATE: June 19, 2009 INTRODUCTION The Zoning Advisory Commission will hold a public hearing on the first ten Articles of the proposed Unified Development Code (UDC) as part of the regularly scheduled meeting on July 1, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building. The marked-up versions of these Articles are enclosed for your consideration. The Planning Services staff will hold a public open house from 4:00-5:30 p.m. on UDC Articles 1 - 10 prior to the Commission's public hearing. BACKGROUND The UDC combines the City's zoning, subdivision, historic preservation, and sign regulations into one document. The purpose of the UDC is to eliminate contradictory and redundant regulations while updating City codes to reflect new approaches in land use regulation and City initiatives for sustainability. The project objectives were for the UDC to: conform to local, state, and federal codes; be relevant for Dubuque; be user-friendly; and streamline the process. We have worked to draft a UDC that reduces obstacles and incorporates sustainable design provisions. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Working together, JEO Consultants, Planning Services and Legal staff reviewed, revised, and prepared a draft UDC with considerable staff and citizen involvement. We worked with the UDC Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of City staff from the Engineering, Economic Development, Housing & Community Development, and Building Services Departments. We provided public input opportunities. We worked with citizens on the UDC Sign Review Advisory Con-rr~ittee, the UDC Citizen Advisory Committee, the Zoning Advisory Commission, the Environmental Stewardship Advisory Commission, and the Zoning 1 Board of Adjustment. The Historic Preservation Commission and the State Historic Preservation Office provided comments on Article 10. We invited the Developers' Roundtable to a series of UDC open houses last fall and winter. We also invited sign contractors to the open house on the UDC sign section. The Commission held work sessions on November 5, 2008 and January 7, 2009 on UDC Articles 1 - 10. Copies of the minutes of these meetings are enclosed. DISCUSSION Highlights of the proposed changes from current codes in Articles 1 - 10 are described below. Major changes made after the Commission's and City Council's work sessions are italicized below. Additional changes, including minor wording changes since the Commission's last review, are highlighted in red text in the enclosed UDC Articles. ARTICLE 1: In General • This Article describes the relationship of the UDC to the City Code and the Comprehensive Plan. It has been combined with Article 16 on administration and enforcement, and Article 17 regarding legal status provisions, and re-titled to "Development and Land Use" for incorporation as Chapter 16 of the City Code. ARTICLE 2: Definitions • Over 300 definitions have been added, and many existing definitions have been modified to help clarify the regulations and to ensure conformance with state and federal laws. • Definitions added or modified as requested by the ZAC include: biofiltration, dwelling unit, dwelling unit - single-family, detention pond, drainageway, dormitory, retention basin, sidewalk cafe, stormwater detention, and swale. • Definitions added since the ZAC work sessions include: accessory dwelling unit, adult day services, crematorium, district energy system, hospital, resource recovery/recycling center, and tourist home. ARTICLE 3: General Provisions • This section covers general lot requirements and standards, accessory structures and uses, and temporary uses. Minor updates have been made. The limited setback waiver has been moved to this section. • This Article also includes a new provision for averaging front yard setbacks in R- 1 Single-Family Residential, R-2 Two-Family Residential, R-2A Alternate Two- Fdiliiiy Resider~tiai, and R-3 Moderate Density I'v9uiti-Famiiy I=tesidentiai Districts to promote traditional neighborhood design (see enclosed diagram). 2 • As requested by the ZAC, the visibility triangle definition has been deleted to remove the conflict noted by the ZAC with Article 3-5, ground level has been clarified in 3-6.2 (c), and height restriction in Section 3-9 has been modified. • As requested by the City Council, Section 3-10 on the occupancy of basements and cellars has been deleted. ARTICLE 4: Non-Conformities • This section regulates how "grandfathered" structures and uses are regulated. Language has been revised to make these regulations easier to understand. ARTICLE 5: Zoning Districts • Major changes to all zoning districts include: o Updated the purpose and intent sections of individual districts. o Updated and consolidated lists of permitted and conditional uses. o Reorganized charts of bulk regulations to improve readability. o Rear yard setbacks changed from percentage of lot depth to a fixed setback in feet. • Major changes to specific districts include: o Creation of a new C-2A Mixed Use Neighborhood District. o Changed side yard setbacks where commercial abuts residential from six foot to 20 foot on a corner lot (see enclosed diagram). o The UDC Citizen Advisory Committee recommended the side yard setback also increase where industrial abuts residential from six foot to 20 foot on a corner lot in all 3 industrial zones. o Eliminated off-street parking requirement in C-4 Downtown Commercial District to match C-5 Central Business District (Town Clock Plaza), to reduce requests for parking variances and support conservation of structures in the historic downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. o Consolidated the list of manufacturing uses in the HI Heavy Industrial and MHI Modified Heavy Industrial Districts into primary manufacturing and secondary manufacturing. o As requested by the ZAC, drive-up automated teller has been included as an accessory use in the C-4 and C-5 Districts. ARTICLE 6: OVERLAY DISTRICTS • This Article includes the Rural Residential Overlay District (RROD), the Restricted Heightvverlay District (R HOD), the Freeway 6ii151 Corridor Signage Overlay District (SOD), the Floodplain Overlay Districts, and two proposed new 3 overlay districts: the Old Town Neighborhood Overlay District (OTND) and the Airport Overlay District. • The RROD Rural Residential Overlay District has been modified. • In the SOD Signage Overlay District, the language has been re-ordered and the descriptions of the sub-areas have been clarified by Legal staff. • The Floodplain Overlay Districts are based on the Iowa Department of Natural Resources model ordinance; a few minor changes are recommended. • The proposed OTND Old Town Neighborhood Overlay District is intended to provide alternative design guidelines in older areas of the city where strict application of site design standards for new commercial and multi-family residential development are difficult to apply due to the dense development patterns of these older areas. • The Airport Overlay is still under development. • The ROD Redevelopment Overlay District has been deleted. This overlay was replaced by the Port of Dubuque PUD, and is no longer needed. ARTICLE 7: SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS • This Article includes home-based businesses (currently referred to as home occupations), telecommunication towers, wind energy conversion systems, and adult entertainment establishments. • The lists of permitted and prohibited home-based businesses have been updated. As requested by the City Council, the percentage of square footage for ahome- based business has been increased to 50%, and advertising of a home address would now be allowed; however, a prohibition has been added for business signs. • The telecommunication towers section has been updated with new definitions, and revised requirements for: site plans, security fencing, landscaping, and maintenance, repair, and modification. This section has a new definition for communication tower and an expanded list of exclusions. Application requirements have been deleted; these will be in the application packets. • The section on wind energy conversion systems (WECS) is entirely new. It provides for three types of WECS: residential, small, and commercial. As requested by the ZAC, WECS were added as a conditional use in ID Institutional Districts, "reduce" was changed to "offset" in Section 7-3.3(A)(7) and the height requirement for residential WECS was deleted from Section 7-3.3(A)(8). :• The adult enteriainrr~ent regufaticns have been modified as a result of the licensing standards established in Chapter 31 of the City Code. 4 ARTICLE 8; ZBA APPLICATIONS AND PROCEDURES • This Article updates the current Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) procedures to clarify the application processes for requests filed with the Board: variances, conditional uses, and special exceptions. These applications involve notification of surrounding property owners and a public meeting before the ZBA. As requested by the City Council. the effect of appeals section has been clarified. • Conditional uses are listed in each zoning district in Article 5. Proposed changes are: o In the current code, the conditions for each conditional use are repeated in each zoning district. In the UDC, the conditions are consolidated in Article 8. o In the current code, a number of conditional uses have the sole condition to meet parking requirements. This single condition has been eliminated because it is redundant; all uses must meet parking requirements, unless granted a variance by the ZBA. These uses remain as conditional uses in the UDC. o The conditions for several existing conditional uses have been revised. As requested by the ZAC, larger more appropriate sings have been added for licensed child care centers and licensed adult day services in commercial and industrial districts. • A number of new conditional uses have been added for specified districts. Those uses added since the ZAC work sessions are italicized below: o Accessory dwelling unit: suggested as a sustainability measure; proposed to support affordable, supplemental housing. o Keeping of hens: suggested as a sustainability measure; proposed conditions are based on the City's 1934 Zoning Ordinance, which regulated poultry in one- and two-family districts. o Licensed adult day services: staff sees a growing need for these services, which function similarly to licensed child care centers. o Multiple-family dwelling (13 or more units): suggested as a sustainability measure, to support higher density housing in the R-4 Multi-Family District without having to request a PUD rezoning. o Retail sale of agricultural products: suggested as a sustainability measure, to allow the sale of locally-produced foods in AG zones. o Tour home: public input suggested this use for historic homes. 5 o Tourist home: public input suggested this use to supplement income. o Residential and small wind energy conversion systems: suggested as a sustainability measure. o WineN: proposed in AG zones to support a growing regional industry. ARTICLE 9: ZAC APPLICATIONS AND PROCEDURES • This Article updates the current Zoning Advisory Commission (ZAC) procedures to clarify the application process. The substantial and non-substantial option has been removed from the rezoning section because it is never used. The text amendment section has been modified to clarify when text amendments are appropriate. ARTICLE 70: HPC APPLICATIONS AND PROCEDURES • This Article updates the current Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) procedures to clarify and consolidate the application processes now found in two different chapters of the City Code. Major changes include: o additional definitions, o reorganization of the historic preservation regulations for clarity, o streamlining the historic district and landmark nomination review process, o combining duplicative sections on the design review process into one section, o consolidating conservation district regulations with historic preservation, o streamlining the demolition permit review process in conservation districts by transferring review to the Historic Preservation Commission similar to the demolition permit review process in historic districts, and o adding conservation planning areas. • A color coded map depicting the existing Historic Districts, the existing Conservation Districts, and the proposed Conservation Planning Areas is enclosed. The City has conducted a phased historic/architectural survey of over 4,700 structures in the city's older areas. The Historic Districts, the Conservation Districts, and the proposed Conservation Planning Areas comprise the areas surveyed in Phases I through V. Updated diagrams to illustrate definitions and bulk regulations are included for reference. REQUESTED ACTION The requested action is for the Zoning Advisory Commission to review the enclosed UDC Articles 1 through 10, hold a public hearing on these UDC Articles, and then provide a recommendation to the City Couneii regarding adoption of these Articies. Enclosures 6 Minutes -Zoning Advisory Commission November 5, 2008 Page 2 Regulations, except for Section 42-19 Blocks & Lots, and requiring that a minimum 20 foot paved driveway access be provided through Lot 3 to serve Lot 2. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Smith, Hardie, Norton, Miller, Henschel and Stiles; Nay -None. WORK SESSIONIUNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE: Article 1 through Article 6 Staff Member Carstens outlined the Unified Development Code (UDC) process. She discussed the rationale for the comprehensive code rewrite. She said that the Zoning Advisory Commission's role for the work session is to review the first six articles and provide comments. She outlined the first six articles of the UDC noting recommended changes that included modified setbacks, creation of a Mixed Use Neighborhood Commercial District (C2-A), creation of an Rural Residential Overlay District (RROD) District and parking changes in the C-4 District. Staff Member Kritz discussed the proposed setback change for commercial corner lots located adjacent to residentially zoned properties. He said that Staff's intention is to simplify and equalize the setback which, he said, will be a standard 20 feet. The Commission discussed setback issues for commercial properties. Staff Member Carstens discussed the definition of group homes. Commissioner Henschel asked if the public would receive highlighted copies of the ordinance changes. Staff Member Carstens said that they would. Commissioners discussed Articles 1 through 6 recommending numerous changes to the definitions, permitted uses and bulk standards. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, I. -- - Ky L. Kritz, sociate Planner ia?• 3 •og Adopted F:IUSERSVCmunson\WP1Boards-Commissions\ZAC1MinutesVAC Minutes 20081ZAC Min 11 05 08.doc Minutes -Zoning Advisory Commission January 7, 2009 Page 4 Bob Edwards, 1565 Geraldine Drive, reviewed his request with the Commission. He said that Edwards Concrete had expanded their operation onto an area of their own property that currently is zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential district. He said that Edward's Concrete would like to rezone the area to PI Planned Industrial District. He said that the area includes parking and storage. Staff Member Hemenway reviewed the request noting the size ofthe area to be added. He stated that the property would be used for an accessory building, outdoor storage and parking. He noted how existing storm water is managed and indicated that the area is screened by natural vegetation. He said that Edwards Concrete would have to submit a site plan to be reviewed by the Engineering Department regarding storm water management and impermeable area. Commissioners had no objection to the request. There were no public comments. Motion by Christ, seconded by Hardie, to approve the rezoning as submitted. Motion approved by the following vote: Aye -Smith, Hardie, Christ, Norton, Miller, Henschel and Stiles; Nay -None. WORK SESSION - UN1FiED DEVELOPMENT CODE: Staff Member Kritz summarized the changes proposed forArticle 6 Overlay Districts; Article 7 Supplemental Use Regulations, Article 8, ZBA Applications & Procedures; Article 9 ZAC Applications & Procedures; Article 10 Historic Preservation; Article 16 Administrative Procedures; and Article 17 Legal Status Provisions of the proposed Unified Development Code. Commissioner Miller recommended that the word "pony" be left in the Ordinance in an attempt to be all inclusive. Commissioners discussed the Sign Overlay District Regulations and the changes regarding the Port of Dubuque. Staff Member Hemenway clarified that the Port of Dubuque was excluded in the language indicated in the preamble of the SOD. Staff Member Kritz discussed wind energy conversion system regulations. Commissioners discussed the 1,000 foot separation required between wind turbines and historic preservation districts. They discussed proposed regulations for both commercial and industrial wind generators. They asked that wind turbines located in Institutional Districts be required to obtain a conditional use permit. Staff Member Kritz suggested that Institutional Districts could be amended to allow wind turbines on a case-by-case basis. He said this would require that the entity requesting a wind turbine would have to come before the Zoning Advisory Commission to amend the district. Commissioners stated that they felt that this is appropriate. Commissioner Miller discussed changing wind energy conversion system language to use the word off-set versus replace. Commissioner Miller Minutes -Zoning Advisory Commission January 7, 2009 Page 5 recommending striking the height requirement for residential wind generators as it relates to house height. Commissioners discussed the difference between daycare and licensed childcare center, and asked staff if there are inherent problems regarding traffic and parking for childcare centers. Staff discussed their experience with child care centers. Staff Member Kritz discussed the Zoning Advisory Commission and Zoning Board of Adjustment processes and procedures. Commissioner Hardie asked why drive-through and automated tellers were struck from the C-4 District. Staff Member Kritz said that he would research that. Commissioners recommended that the size of signs for licensed childcare centers in commercial districts be altered to allow larger, more appropriate signs. Staff Member Hemenway said that he would look into that. Commissioner Hardie asked for clarification regarding historic and conservation districts. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Commissioner Christ asked that Commissioners please remember to turn their cell phones off prior to the meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~- y~o~ Kyle L. Krit ,Associate Planner Adopted F:IUSERS\KmunsonlWP\Boards-CommissionsVAClMinutesV_AC Minutes 2009VAC min 01 07 09.doc Commercial Next to Residential Proposed Setback Change Street A `~ a~ :~----, w, rn~ ,.. ........ ......ti o v a~ v c~ ~~ c~ c~ 00 TO: Zoning Advisory Commission FROM: Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager ~?~~! SUBJECT: Public Hearing -UDC Articles 11 through 15 DATE: August 18, 2009 INTRODUCTION The Zoning Advisory Commission will hold a public hearing on the last five Articles of the proposed Unified Development Code (UDC) as part of the regularly scheduled meeting on September 2, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building. The first public hearing on UDC Articles 1 - 10 was held July 1, 2009. The marked-up versions of Article 11: Land Subdivision, Article 12: Site Plans, Article 13: Site Design Standards, Article 14: Parking, and Article 15: Signs are enclosed for your consideration. The Planning Services staff will hold a public open house from 4:00- 5:30 p.m. on UDC Articles 11 -15 prior to the Commission's public hearing. BACKGROUND The UDC combines the City's zoning, subdivision, historic preservation, and sign regulations into one document. The purpose of the UDC is to eliminate contradictory and redundant regulations while updating City codes to reflect new approaches in land use regulation and City initiatives for sustainability. The project objectives were for the UDC to: conform to local, state, and federal codes; be relevant for Dubuque; be user-friendly; and streamline the process. We have worked to draft a UDC that reduces obstacles and incorporates sustainable design provisions. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Working together, JEO Consultants, Planning Services and Legal staff reviewed, revised, and prepared a draft UDC with considerable staff and citizen involvement. We worked with the UDC Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of City staff from the Engineering, Economic Development, Housing & Community Development, and Building Services Departments. We provided public input opportunities. We worked with citizens on the UDC Sign Review Advisory Committee, the UDC Citizen Advisory Committee, the Zoning Advisory Commission, the Environmental Stewardship Advisory Commission, and the Zoning Board of Adjustment. We invited the Developers' Roundtable to a series of UDC open houses last fall and winter. We also invited sign contractors to the open house on the UDC sign section. The Commission held work sessions on December 3, 2008 on UDC Articles 14 and 15 and on March 4, 2009 and March 25, 2009 on UDC Articles 11 and 12. (Article 13 previously was part of Article 12.) Copies of the minutes of these meetings are enclosed. DISCUSSION Since the Articles for review at this second UDC public hearing deal with the design and development aspects of land development, we want to review two relevant sections of the UDC Request for Proposals (RFP) and the development review process. In the RFP, the project objective, Be Relevant for Dubuque, had several actions related to land development regulations: / Prepare a UDC that is responsive to contemporary development trends, recognizes the diverse physical characteristics of Dubuque's neighborhoods (e.g. street patterns, building types, density etc.), and encourages quality development. / Create coordinated regulations that facilitate development effectively, enhance neighborhood quality, and result in planned and managed growth. / Develop regulations that acknowledge and accommodate Dubuque's three distinct geographical areas as well as potential growth areas in the environs. In the RFP, the consultant was asked to complete a Critical Issues Inventory, including: / Review, improve and update standards for site plan and subdivision reviews, and modernize existing zoning and subdivision development standards. / Revise existing provisions regarding site development review and evaluate the creation of new or improved flexible and illustrated site development standards. / Evaluate options for design review process, guidelines, and standards for screening, setbacks and visual impacts of commercial and industrial developments, particularly for outdoor storage. / Review, improve and update parking standards and requirements to prevent excessive and unnecessary parking areas, particularly in the central business district and surrounding historic neighborhoods. Development Review Process Since 1990, the Planning Services staff has coordinated and facilitated weekly meetings of the Development Review Committee (as needed) with staff representing the Fire, Water, Engineering and Building Services Departments to streamline the land development process. The Development Review Committee reviews the following: ^ minor and major subdivision plats; 2 ® minor and major site plans for new and expanding multi-family residential, commercial, office, institutional, and industrial developments; and ^ conceptual development plans for new and amended PUDs. Developers and their architects and engineers are invited and encouraged to attend the weekly meetings to discuss their projects with this interdepartmental team. Planning Services staff provides written review and approval letters with comments from Committee members to the applicants or their agents. The Planning Services staff hosts and facilitates ad hoc meetings of the Developers' Roundtable as a forum for open communication and coordination about the City's development review process. The Roundtable was initiated by the Planning Services Department in 1992 to: ^ Improve communication and coordination of City departments with each other and with developers; ^ Foster and maintain a good public/private working relationship; ^ Evaluate how City codes and procedures can be improved, what barriers exist to improvement, and what solutions can be implemented; ^ Develop a streamlined and documented development review process; ^ Provide "in service training" on new codes and procedures; and ^ Enhance public relations and customer service. As a result of the initial meetings of the Developers' Roundtable, the development review process was streamlined with 3 types of subdivisions and site plans: simple, minor, and major. The process was documented with subdivision and site plan application packets that included submittal checklists. Highlights of the Proposed Changes Highlights of the proposed changes from current codes in Articles 11 - 15 are described below. Major changes made after the Commission's and City Council's work sessions are italicized below. Additional changes, including minor wording changes since the Commission's last review, are highlighted in red text in the enclosed UDC Articles. ARTICLE 77: LAND SUBD/VISION • Minor subdivisions involve land division of 3 or more lots without public or private improvements (streets, utilities). Major subdivisions involve land division of 3 or more lots with public or private improvements. • Subdivision application requirements and review procedures were updated to clarify the application process. The submittal checklists are removed from the UDC. The checklists are in the subdivision application packets. The packets are updated annually by Planning Services staff in consultation with the Development Review Committee. When the UDC is completed, the subdivision application packets will be reformatted for a consistent appearance and new graphics. • The subdivision regulations continue to refer to City standards, which are under development this summer. The Engineering Department is evaluating the 3 applicability of the State Urban Design Standards and Specifications (SODAS) developed by the Iowa Department of Transportation as well as low-impact development (LID) best management practices. The subdivision regulations continue to have a process for the Zoning Advisory Commission and City Council to waive these standards for cause. • Under Iowa Code, the City has joint review authority with Dubuque County for subdivisions within 2 miles of the city limits. The City has a fringe area development policy for this two-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction. • While traditional subdivision design is still allowed, it is now the exception. Subdivision regulations have been extensively revised to promote sustainable measures, including: o Parkland dedication, including ratios and fees as well as exceptions. o Sustainable subdivision tools that incorporate a point system. o Conservation subdivision design and development bonus, to replace and expand upon existing smaller lot (clustered) subdivision language. o Solar subdivision, which is based on the City of Madison's approach that a solar subdivision is possible unless there are mitigating factors (which are listed). o Cottage design subdivision, which incorporates conservation and traditional neighborhood design elements. o A placeholder for a future Complete Streets policy. • We have enclosed checklists for minor and major subdivisions (#1), handouts that illustrate conservation subdivision (#2), solar subdivision (#3), and cottage subdivision (#4) designs, and a Complete Streets FAQ handout (#5). ARTICLE 72: SITE PLANS • By City policy, minor site plans are required for new or expanded parking lots and expansion under 10,000 square feet. Major subdivisions are for expansions of 10,000 square feet or more and all new construction. • Site plan application requirements and review procedures have been updated to clarify the application process. The submittal checklists have been removed from the UDC. These checklists are in the site plan application packets. These packets are updated annually by Planning Services staff in consultation with the Development Review Committee. When the UDC is completed, the site plan application packets will be reformatted for a consistent appearance and new graphics. We have enclosed the checklists for minor and major site plans (#6). ARTICLE 73: S-TE DESIGN STANDARDS • Article 13 lists the various design standards and guidelines that apply to site development in the city. These design standards are mandatory now. Staff has proposed a waiver provision. 4 • While traditional site design is still allowed, it is now the exception. Site design standards have been extensively revised to promote sustainable measures: o Three-tier review process for new development, redevelopment, and special development areas to accommodate different development patterns in the city. o Site development requirements, including site lighting, utility location, parking structures and lots, and sidewalks and walkways. o Expanded parking requirements, including: lot layout, lighting, bicycle parking, stormwater management, and stall dimensions (from SUDAS). o Landscaping and screening requirements, including use of LID tools for site landscaping, preservation of trees, parking lot landscaping, screening of exterior storage and trash collection, and maintenance. • We originally proposed a simplified formula for calculating required permeable area to be 20% of the site. This recommendation has been modified to reflect the standards used for the past 70 years in the Dubuque Technology Park and Dubuque /ndustrial Center West. Presently, there is a three-part test to calculate required permeable area. We have enclosed a chart (#7) comparing various site developments under current and proposed standards. Site plans for these developments with open space shown in green follow the chart. • Existing standards for big box retail uses, retail commercial uses, and regional shopping centers have been modified with maximum parking restrictions. Based on developer input, existing standards for big box retail uses to have a green roof have been eliminated. Maximum parking requirements have been proposed that will require that permeable paving or additional green space be provided when a big box retail use, retail commercial use, or regional shopping center exceeds 125% of the minimum required parking. Enclosed is a chart illustrating the impact of maximum parking regulations (#8). • Design guidelines for development in older neighborhoods are proposed. The purpose and intent of the OTND Old Town Neighborhood District Overlay is to provide form-based guidelines where strict application of "suburban-style" site design standards for new commercial, industrial and residential development are difficult to apply due to the dense development patterns of these older urban areas. We want to encourage new development that is compatible with older neighborhoods. A map of the OTND Overlay area is included, along with the draft design guidelines (#9). Staff has limited these provisions to just site development. ARTICLE 74: PARKING • This Article updates the off-street parking regulations. The parking requirement for each use listed in the UDC is now individually listed by use instead of grouped by classification number. New uses and revised parking requirements are in red. • Bicycle parking spaces are now proposed based on size of new parking lots. 5 • Shared parking is new, and we recommend that it be allowed with approval by Planning Services staff. A shared parking worksheet is enclosed (#10). ARTICLE 75: S/GNS • This Article combines and updates sign regulations from the Zoning Ordinance and the Building Code to create a single Sign Code. • Many new definitions have been added and many definitions have been modified. • The enclosed sign graphics have been developed for City Council review and comment (#11). They will be incorporated into Article 15 to illustrate the sign regulations. • Bulk standards for signs in a C-2 Neighborhood Commercial Shopping Center district have been reduced to reflect common sign installations. Bulk standards for signs that reflect C-2 standards have been established for the proposed C-2A Mixed-Use Neighborhood district. • Bulk standards for signs in CR Commercial/Recreational, CS Commercial Service and all industrial districts have been reduced so as to not exceed C-3 General Commercial district sign standards for highway dependent commercial development. • Electronic message sign regulations have been added to establish a time frame for animation and static messages. Currently, these signs are limited to time and temperature. With advances in technology, the UDC Sign Review Advisory Committee saw the need to allow animation and static messages while minimizing driver distraction and negative impacts on residential areas. IDOT standards for 1:8:1 timing for electronic off-premise signs are proposed. A timing sequence of 2:2:2 for on-premise electronic message signs is proposed. A video that illustrates the proposed standards in sign sequencing shown below will be available at the work session. Sign Sequence Off-Premise On-Premise Transition 1 2 Static Message 8 2 Transition 1 2 Updated diagrams to illustrate definitions and sign regulations are included for reference. REQUESTED ACTION The requested action is for the Zoning Advisory Commission to review the enclosed UDC Articles 11 through 15, hold a public hearing on these UDC Articles, and then provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of these Articles. Enclosures 6 Dubuque THE CTTY QF : ~~ `t~ r I~ ~I IVIas`terpiece~oti the:lVlississippt zoos MINUTES CITY OF DUBUQUE ZONING ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION 6:30 p.m., Wednesday, December 3, 2008 City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building soo o °o COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairperson Jeff Stiles; Commissioners Martha Christ, Pat Norton, Charlie Miller and Tom Henschel. COMMISSIONERS EXCUSED: Commissioners Ron Smith and Stephen Hardie. STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Carstens, Kyle Kritz and Guy H AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying that the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. . MINUTES: The minutes of the November 5, 2008 meeting were approved as submitted. ACTION ITEM\STREET NAMING: Application of the City of Dubuque for approval to reriame David Court to Peach Tree Lane. Staff Member Kritz outlined the request to rename David Court to Peach Tree Lane. He discussed the separate plats and street configuration noting that David Court currently is a small stub street in the Wynstone Subdivision. The Commission discussed the request and said that they felt it was appropriate. Motion by Christ, seconded by Henschel, to approve the renaming of David Court to Peach Tree Lane. Motion approved by the following vote: Aye -- Ghrist, Norton, Miller, Henschel, Stiles; Nay --None. PUBLIC HEARINGIREZONING: Application of David & Tim Blake to rezone property located at 6255 Pennsylvania Avenue {West of Heacock Road and North of Pennsylvania Avenue) from AG Agricultural District to AG Agriculural District with an Rural Residential Overlay District (RROD). City of Dubuque Zoning Advisory Commission Minutes -- December 3, 2008 Page 2 David Blake, 6255 Pennsylvania Avenue, reviewed his request noting that he would still like to have the ability. to use his property for agricultural purposes allowing hunting and burning. Francis McDonald, 6000 Pennsylvania Avenue, stated that he is an adjacent property owner who lives across Pennsylvania Avenue. He said he fully supports the applicant's request and has no objection to the rezoning. Staff Member Hemenway reviewed the request explaining the establishment of the Rural Residential Overlay District. He said that, if the property were to be developed for single- familyresidential use, there would have to be a subdivision plat submitted and approved by the Zoning Advisory Commission and City Council. The Commissioners stated they have no objection to the rezoning. Motion by Christ, seconded by Miller, to approve the rezoning request, as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Christ, Norton, Miller, Henschel and Stiles; Nay --None. PUBLIC HEARiNG1WORK SESSION: Unified Development Code: Article 14 Parking and -Article 15 Signs Staff Member Carstens summarized the proposed parking regulations noting the UDC process and highlighting recommended changes to the existing ordinance. She discussed the addition of bicycle spaces, shared parking and permeable area requirements. Commissioner Norton commended the changes. He said that the parking regulations were comprehensive and sustainable. He applauded the shared parking concept and noted that the ordinance appears to be easy to use. Chairperson Stiles agreed. Staff Member Carstens discussed the composition of the Sign Review Advisory Committee. She reviewed the process for sfiudying and recommending changes to the City's sign ordinances. She highlight the recommended changes, including incorporation of the building code regulations into the UDC, the addition and modification of definitions, the addition of graphics and the changes in bulk standards. Staff Member Hemenway reviewed a video regarding message center signs and electronic billboards illustrating examples of various timing schemes. He said the recommended 1-8- 1 timing scheme for electronic billboards matches the IDOT regulations. He~said the Committee's recommendation for on-premise electronic message signs is a 2-2-2 timing formula. He noted that this is what the Committee had recommended to minimize distractions to motorists and to reduce impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods. City of Dubuque Zoning Advisory Commission Minutes -December 3, 2008 Page 3 Commissioner Norton had questions about the definitions. Staff Member Carstens said that the Sign Committee wrestled with the idea of putting all~of fihe definitions in one place. She said that the Committee and Staff felt that sign regulations, including the definitions, should be all in one section so that signs were compartmentalized. Commissioners agreed that this was appropriate. Commissioners discussed the recommendations for electronic signs. Chairperson Stiles said that he felt that the proposed electronic sign regulations represent a fair compromise. Commissioners agreed. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kyle L. Kritz Associate Planner /~ 7 ~ ©~ F' Adopted F:\USERS\Kmunson\WP\Boards-Commissions\ZACWIinuteslZP,C Minutes 2008\ZAC Min 12_03_08.doc THE CITY OF DUbUgUe U ~~ j 1 Masterpiece on tl:e Mississippi zoos MINUTES BONING ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION March 4, 2009, 6:30 p.m. City Council Chamber 350 W. 6~h Street, Dubuque, Iowa PRESENT: Chairperson Jeff Stiles; Commissioners Ron Smith, Stephen Hardie, Martha Christ, Patrick Norton, Charlie Miller and Tom Henschel; Staff Members Laura Carstens, Kyle Kritz and Guy Hemenway. ABSENT: None. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying that the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. MINUTES: The minutes of the February 4, 2009 meeting were approved unanimously as submitted. WORK SESSIONtUNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE: Article 11 Land Subdivision Article 12 Site Development and Proposed TND Traditional Neighborhood District Overlay and Design Guidelines: Staff Member Carstens outlined the proposed changes to Articles 11 and 12 of the Unified Development Code. She discussed the addition of sustainable provisions in the Unified Development Code, including the proposed Conservation and Solar Subdivision measures. " Staff Member Kritz discussed the mandatory parkland dedication measures. Staff Member Carstens discussed the conservation subdivision design criteria. Staff Member Kritz noted the limitations on solar subdivisions including problems with topography and vegetation and or orientation. Commissioner Hardie asked if the requirements that the ordinance be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan were removed. Staff Member Carstens noted the new location of language. Commissioner Norton recommended restructuring the first paragraph in 11.1 regarding the purpose and intent of the ordinance. He also asked that the language regarding plats and Minutes -Zoning Advisory Commission March 4, 2009 Page 2 vacation of public right-of-way be reordered. He said that staff should reference the SWPPP and NPDES, and that all city, state and local permits be required for development. Commissioner Smith questioned the detention basin sequencing recommended requirements. Staff Member Kritz clarified that detention basins must be built at the beginning of a project to temporarily accommodate sediment from the construction site. Commissioners discussed electronic site plan submittal. Commissioners asked the word "schools" be removed from Section 11-8.b. In response to a question from Commissioner Henschel, Staff Member Carstens explained that the Southwest Arterial Corridor Moratorium has been consolidated and is located in a separate section of the City Code. Commissioner Hardie said that he would like to have parkland more well defined and that a graphic be provided to illustrate a cottage subdivision and a conservation subdivision. Commissioners extensively discussed the requirement that parkland be provided and the no more than 50% be located in a wetland, f(oodway or detention area. The Commission discussed whether this measure should be modified. They asked that staff further study the issue. Commissioners discussed conservation subdivision design criteria. Commissioner Norton asked that staff further study definitions and mapping of wetlands areas. Commissioners discussed the sustainable subdivision tools. Commissioner Hardie expressed concerns with the ability for a developer to come in and build a subdivision with substandard lots without meeting the requirements established in the underlying residential zoning district. Staff explained the process and Commissioner Hardie said that he has no problem with it. Commissioners discussed potential costs associated with conservation subdivision design. They decided that since they had only completed one of the two articles for review, that they should have a special meeting. Commissioners decided to conduct a special meeting on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. and notify them by a-mail. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Meeting Time: Staff Member Kritz asked if the Commission would consider changing the Zoning Advisory Commission meeting schedule to an earlier time. Commissioners discussed the request and decided to hold future meetings at 6:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, __----- Ky L. Kritz, A ociate Planner ~/~ l•~~ Adopted THE CITY OF U L J-.~ Masterpiece on the Mississippi MINUTES BONING ADVISORY COMMISSION SPECIAL SESSION Wednesday, March 25, 2009 6:00 p.m. City Council Chamber 350 W. 6t" Street, Dubuque, Iowa Dubuque pol- o ~~ as AnArt~laGltY ,,I .- zoo PRESENT: Chairperson Jeff Stiles; Commissioners Ron Smith, Stephen Hardie, Martha Christ, Patrick Norton, Charles Miller and Tom Henschel; Staff Members Laura Carstens, Kyle Kritz and Guy Hemenway. ABSENT; None. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying that the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. WORK SESSIONIUNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE; Article 11 Land Subdivision Article 12 Site Development and Proposed TND Traditional Neighborhood District Overlay and Design Guidelines: Staff Member Carstens noted that the Commission had almost concluded review of Article 11 and would then be reviewing Article 12 ofthe Unified Development Code. She summarized the high points of Article 12. Staff Member Kritz noted that the street tree policy had been distributed to the Commission as requested. Commissioner Hardie asked who pays for required street trees. Staff Member Kritz said that the street tree requirements currently are not mandatory. Commissioners debated the need to make street tree requirements mandatory and whose responsibility it is to pay for said trees. Commissioners discussed clarifying the language regarding street trees. Commissioners decided to not require street trees and directed staff to clarify the language regarding street tree installation. Commissioners said they felt that street tree installation should be left to the discretion of the property owner. The Commission discussed the timing and responsibility for sidewalk installation in Article 11 and Article 12. No changes were recommended by the Commission. The Commission reviewed Article 12. In response to a question from Commissioner Norton., Staff Member Kritz noted that if a developer were to conduct preliminary grading Minutes -Zoning Advisory Commission March 25, 2009 Page 2 they would be required to obtain a grading and erosion control permit from the Engineering Department for sites of one acre or more. The Commission recommended that the requirement for a grading and erosion control permit be noted in Article 12. Commissioner Norton recommended that the site plan pre-application conference language be consistent with the language on the site plan checklist. Commissioners discussed the site plan process and the site development timeframe. Commissioner Hardie asked Staff to clarify the site lighting requirements. Commissioner Norton asked if the site lighting requirements should be more stringent regarding vertical light. Staff and Commission discussed concerns with lighting impacts on adjacent properties. After discussion, the Commission decided not to change the proposed lighting requirements. Commissioner Norton asked that staff add a diagram to Section 12-8(5). Commissioners discussed exterior storage and trash screening. Staff clarified said requirements. The Commission discussed green roof requirements for big box development. Staff Member Kritz discussed his research on green roofs. Staff Member Carstens noted that pervious pavement could be installed in lieu of a green roof. Commissioners asked that staff provide more information regarding green roofs at which time they will revisit the issue. Commissioner Hardie questioned the requirement for public amenities required for big box retail businesses. Commissioner Smith agreed and the Commission asked that provision of amenities be made voluntary. Commissioners discussed Section 12-10(B) regarding sidewalks, walkways and entrances for big box retailers, Commissioners felt. that these requirements should be voluntary. Commissioner Hardie asked why transit facilities should be provided at the owner's expense. After discussion, the Commission recommended that an area be provided that could accommodate a transit facility, but that the City be required to pay forthe installation of the transit shelters. The Cormission and staff discussed the rationale for specific biofuel facility regulations. Commissioner Norton recommended that biofuel standards be extended to all industrial development. The Commission disagreed with this recommendation. No changes were recommended. Stafif Members Kritz and Carstens discussed the green space requirement for site landscaping, noting that sites must provide 20% of total permeable area and half the permeable area must be landscaped. Commissioner Norton recommended an explanatory calculation be includod. Commissioners agreed. The Commission discussed the landscape requirements and agreed they are appropriate. Minutes -Zoning Advisory Commission March 25, 2009 Page 3 Commissioner Smith asked if site plan standards could be waived by the Zoning Advisory Commission. Staff Member Carstens said that she would research that option with Legal staff. Commissioners further discussed landscape standards, recommending that the street tree language in Section 12-12.7 be made more uniform with the changes discussed forArticle 11. Commissioner Miller recommended that the maintenance of landscaping and screening in Section 12-12.8(1) be combined with the installation, maintenance and replacement of landscaping language in Section 12-12.10. Staff Member Carstens discussed TND Traditional Neighborhood Design. She noted that the Citizens Advisory Committee recommended that the standards be advisory guidelines, not requirements. After some discussion, the Commission agreed with this recommendation. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Chairperson Stiles asked staff to explore the ability for a person that lives within Dubuque's two-mile jurisdiction to be able to join a Board or Commission. Staff said that they would confer with Legal staff regarding this request. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Approval of Revised Zoning Advisory Commission Bylaws regarding meeting time. Staff Member Kr'itz outlined the revision to the Zoning Advisory Commission Bylaws regarding the change to the meeting time. He also noted a grammatical error in Section 10 (Shorthand Report), second sentence. Motion by Miller, seconded by Hardie, to approve the change in the Bylaws, wi#h the grammatical correction as noted, and rescheduling the Zoning Advisory Commission meeting from 6:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Motion carried by the following vote: Smith, Hardie, Christ, Norton, Miller, Henschel and Stiles; Nay -None. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, I' ~ ~ K e L. Krit ,Associate Planner Adopted F:\USERS\Kmunson\WP\Boards-CommissionsVACWlinuteslZAC Minutes 2009\ZAC min 03 25_09.doc `_~ 9VIAJ®R SUS®IVISI®N ~U MITT`4~ CHECKl~I~T~ Preliminary Plat Checklist a. Completed Planning Application form. , b. Application fee (checks made payable to City of Dubuque). c. Preliminary grading and erosion control plan. d. Proposed street tree planting plan showing varieties and placement of trees. e. General summary description of any covenants, easements or restrictions. f. Preliminary plans for proposed public and private street, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water main, well, septic system, drainage, sidewalk and street lighting construction. g. Six (6) copies of the preliminary plat drawn at a scale of one-inch equals 200 feet or larger, on a sheet not exceeding 24" by 36" and clearly marked "preliminary plat" (see Surveyor's Plat Checklist for additional requirements). h. Existing and proposed zoning of the proposed subdivision and adjoining property. i. Existing and proposed topography of the subdivision, showing contours at appropriate vertical intervals. j, Location of all existing easements, buildings, water courses, tree masses, flood plains, floodways, and other features located within 100 feet of the subdivision. k. Location, width, dimensions, approximate grades and proposed names of all public and private streets. I. Location of present and proposed utility systems, including sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water lines, wells, septic systems and other facilities within 100 feet of the subdivision. 'm. Proposed perpetual easements showing locations, widths and purposes. n. parcels of land proposed to be dedicated or reserved for schools, parks, playgrounds or public or. semi-public purposes. o. A key map showing the general location of the subdivision in relation to surrounding development. p. All adjacent streets and subdivisions, and the names of the owners of record of all adjacent property. q. Approximate total area of the proposed subdivision. r. Approximate total area proposed or in the public right-of-way. s. Layout, numbers, approximate dimensions, and area of proposed lots. Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork Final Plat Checklist a. Complete planning application form. b. Application fee (checks made payable tb the City of Dubuque). c. Original and three (3) copies of the surveyor's certificates. Original certificates must have the surveyor's signature, the attorney's signature, and the owner's signature when submitted. d. Copy of any presently applicable and/or proposed restrictions or covenants of all types that affect or will affect the subdivision. e. Final grading and erosion control plan. f. Existing zoning of the proposed subdivision and adjoining property. g. Existing and proposed topography of the subdivision, showing contours at approximate vertical intervals. h. Location and documentation of any required easements. i. Final street tree planting plan showing varieties and. placement of trees. j. ~ Location of present and proposed utility systems, including sanitary and storm sewers, water lines, wells; septic systems, and other facilities located within 100 feet of the subdivision. . k. Six (6) copies of the final plat for the proposed subdivision, drawn on mylar or equivalent reproducible film, drawn at a standard engineering scale on a sheet size not to exceed 24" by 36", at a scale of one-inch equals 200 feet or larger. (See Surveyor's Plat Checklist for additional requirements.) I. Reproducible plans on mylar or on equivalent reproducible plastic film of the street, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water main, well, septic system, drainage, sidewalk and street lighting construction. m. Any other pertinent information, as required by the City Planner. . Revised 10 16 08 Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork SURVEYOR'S PLAT CHECKLIST 1. Graphic scale 2. Stated scale 3. North arrow 4. Tied to two land corners or subdivision corners 5. Lengths and bearings of all lines 6. Bearing reference 7. Recorded bearings and distances if different from measured 8. Identify all monuments and designate whether found or placed 9. Describe land corners and note found or placed 10. Describe control monuments and note found or placed 11.~ Show radius, central angle and length~of curve 12 .' Error of closure: a. Each~lot 1:5,000 b. Exterior Boundary 1:10,000 . 13. Meander irregular line with distance to irregular 1 ine 14. Date of survey 15. Description of subdivision 16. Surveyor statement of supervision 17. Signed by surveyor and dated 18. Iowa registration number 19. Surveyor's seal 20. If more than one sheet, show: a. Total number of sheets b~. Match lines on each sheet c. Index of sheets showing relationship 21. Subdivision name in bold letters at top of sheet 22. Bearing and distances of all: a. lots b~. blocks c, streets _ d. easements e. other areas 23. Interior excepted parcels labeled "not a part of subdivision" .24. Adjoining parcels identified 25. If part of a previously recorded subdivision show ties to controlling monuments of same 26~. State purpose of all easements 27. State purpose of areas dedicated to the public Notations Owners + = shown ~ Project No. - = not shown Legal Desc. NA = not' applicable Reviewed by Date MINOR SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST - a. Completed planning application form e b. Application fee, check payable to City of Dubuque c. Original and (3) copies of the surveyor's certificates. Original certificates must have the surveyor's signature, the attorney's sianture, and the owner's signature when submitted: _ d. Copy of any presently applicable and/or proposed restrictions or covenants of all types that affect or will affect the subdivisions - e. Final grading and erosion control plan (see checklist) - f. Existing zoning of the proposed subdivision and adjoining property g. Existing and proposed topography of the subdivision showing contours at approximate vertical intervals - h. Location and documentation of any required easements - i. Final street tree planting plan showing variety and placement of trees. - j. Location of present and proposed utility systems, including sanitary and storm sewers, water lines, wells, septic systems, and other facilities located within 100 feet of the subdivision k. Show all storm sewer improvements including catch basins, pipe sizes, connections to City sewer mains and drainage swales with invert elevations. Storm water runoff calculations must be provided to determine accuracy of proposed pipe sizes - I. Show proposed connection to City water main. Plans must indicate location and size of water main, service lateral and location of any valves (stop box or post indicator valve). Please check with Frank Lovera, Water Department (589-4305) regarding . front footage fee for water main connection m. Show proposed connection to City sanitary sewer main. Plans must indicate location and size of sewer main and service lateral with invert elevations. Please check with Gus Psihoyos, Assistant City Engineer (589-4270) regarding front footage fee for sanitary sewer main connection: - n. Any other pertinent information, as determined by the City Planner - o. Twenty (20) copies of the final plat for the proposed subdivision, drawn on rnylar or equivalent reproducible film, drawn at a standard engineering scale on a sheet size not to exceed 24 x 36 inches, at a scale of 1 inch equals 200 feet or larger. (See Subdivision Plat Checklist for additional requirements.) SUB®NISION PLAT CHECKLIST 1. Graphic scale 2. Stated scale 3. North arrow 4. Tied to two land corners or subdivision corners 5. Lengths and bearings of all lines 6. Bearing reference 7. Recorded bearings and distances if different from measured ' 8. Identify all monuments and designate whether found or placed 9. Describe land corners and note found or placed 10. Describe control monuments and note found or placed 11. Show radius, central angle and length of curve 12. Error of closure 1:5,000 or less . 13. Meander irregular line with distance to irregular line .14. Date of survey 15. Description of parcel 16. Surveyor statement of supervision 17. Signed by surveyor and dated 18. Iowa registration number 19. Surveyor's seal 20. Parcel letter designation approved by auditor 21.~ Names of proprietors 22. Total acreage of each parcel 23. Acreage lying with a public right-of--way Notations + = s own - =not shown NA =not applicable Owners Project No. Legal Desc. Reviewed by Date N sa~sff~i~~~~e residec~t8a9 s~~~6efusa®ra ~esfi~~ ffacff sheet serves The District Council of Mount Barker ~l9~~~ a~®l,~t ~~®~i~g ~o~~~~ On sloping sites, north facing sites improve opportunities for solar access while south facing slopes limit solar access. The steeper t he slope, the greater the advantage or disadvantage. Accordingly, smaller allotments should be concentrated on northern slopes and larger/deeper lots on southern slopes. O\ ~ ..:o} ~ ~ `~ \ '`"-_ - ~ ~ N ~!, I v South slope Noah slot?e penalty bonus Slope affects solar access (Source: Energy Efficient Housing Manual, Energy Victoria, 9994) ~9~a~~ ~~®aal~ X16®$a~~~~ ~6~~ aa9~ ~~~~~? Generally it is desirable to include a mix of allotments sizes within a residential development project. Therefore, using the above information, it's desirable that the narrower and smaller allotments be located on the northern side ofeast-west streets. North-south aligned allotments on the south side of the street need to be w ider to allow internal living space with a northerly orientation. This also allows for dwelling and site designs that could incorporate parts of the private open space to the side of the dwelling where it will achieve reasonable solar access. East-west aligned allotments need to be wider again to prevent overshadowing of adjacent dwellings or private open space on allotments to the south, and to allow dwellings to be set back from the northern boundary to allow solar access into north facing living space. It is also preferable to create regular and rectangular shaped allotments, rather than splay shaped allotments, to maximise lot yield efficiency and allow for standard house designs that address the street and achieve optimum solar access. north•south lots C/fAA~ house set forv/ard to create large sunny couKyard houses s~ south off limit west windows exposed summer Lot size and orientation affects solar access potential to private open space and internal living areas Regular shaped allotments are more space efficient and better facilitate solar access cess front privacy watt rse set ;k [~ra~it sheet Tw®- Cnergy Efffficie~cy gage ~ off ~ maximises solar orientation poor solar orientation with awkward shaped lots P r ~ ~~" Cy!"?;~ G- " I ~~ _. .. ~ - r ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~O ~CmO 4d~ @Y~tl V Langley, Washington, is a small town on Whidbey Island in the Puget Sound, an hour away from downtown Se- attle and Everett by road and ferry. The town is home to about 1,000 people and retains a village character despite being under moderate development pressure. In 1995, the city of Langley adopted the "Cottage Housing Development (CHD) Zoning Ordinance" to expand hous- ing options, foster strong neighborhoods, and retain and enhance Langley's rural character. The CHD allowed de- tached homes at twice the previously allowable density in all single-family zones, up to 12 homes per acre. Third Street Cottages is the first development in Langley to be built under the CHD. Neighbors initially voiced a few concerns about added traffic and loss of, parking; how- ever, with just 12 residents and 10 vehicles added to the neighborhood, these worries proved unfounded. The de- velopment is three blocks from downtown shopping and dining, and it is close to bike paths and routes around the island. To maintain consistency with the town's character, the Langley Design Review Board established minimal pa- rameters on design, fencing, and landscaping of the de- velopment. :,~~~i~~ Mfr y .F ~ ' { ~ rr pS ~ ~ -~~ 5 r _ ,~ ~ ~dt "_ } ,~~iYa~~'~~~ y ~ - ~, N - ~a~ ~ ;_ f ~ ~ _ - SP~ART' GR® H PRINCIPLE THIRD STREET COTTAGES #1 Includes Mixed #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Homes in the Third Street Cottages development sold for #g $140,000 to $150,000, with five of eight sold before con- struction was completed in 1998. The centerpiece of the #9 community is a landscaped common area containing a garden, tool shed, mailboxes, and a workshop. It is de- signed to facilitate community interaction and build co- #10 hesiveness. Though the cottages are no more than 975 square feet, the developers used natural light and archi- tectural details to make the spaces seem open and airy. Typical owners are singles, couples, or families with one child. Land Uses Exhibits Compact Building Design / Provides Range of Housing Types _ _ / Promotes Walkable Neighborhoods Exhibits a Distinct Sense of Place / Preserves Open Space / Utilizes Existing Development / Provides Transportation Choices Practices Fair Decision-making / Promotes Stakeholder Participation J The success of Third Street Cottages has motivated other localities in the region to adopt similar zoning requirements and legalize the construction of cottage-style homes and neighbor- hoods. The Town has been able to increase housing supply with minimal land consumption. Building these homes under Langley's previous zoning would have consumed up to three times as much land. Although the developer added a hydrant and extended the sewer collection system to accommodate development, the smaller footprint and location near the existing downtown saved construction costs, avoided road building, and used existing water services. '7 grew up in wartime Maui,.in a small cottage like this one,nsaid owner Faith Smith to the Seattle Times. "This place reminds me of that very tight community where everyone kept an eye on each other." - Solving Sprawl, NRDC ILK T Contact: Ross Chapin Architects PO Box 230' Langley, Washington 98260 360-221-2373 inquiry@rosschapin.com Location: Langley, Washington Web: www.rosschapin.com/Projects/ projects.html Implemented: 1998 d ... _ _ _,_. u_~.~. _ ~ ~+' ~'i. ,r~ + i f` ~~~~,' ~' ! ~ ,~ ' '' ' I '' i s 'I ~, i .~.•+ ! ~ ~ ~~~~_~ ~~ I ~ ' F ~~_ . - ~ ~ YY ~ -- .. ~~ ,~ .;=~ ~~-- ~_- _ __. tea:, ~_ - t j { (~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. + ~~ ~' ~ , ~' __ .. "s f' - e 5 ~~~ - . '. -~ - complete Streets FAQ ~ Complete Streets Page 1 of 2 H r~ _ -6 ~~~3 ~~,~ t-- ~ _ Ir ~ ~:- -_ - What are complete streets, and complete streets policies? Complete streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, riders of alt ages and abilities must be able to safety move along and across a complete street. Creating complete streets means transportation agencies must change their orientation toward building l Instituting a complete streets policy ensures that transportation agencies routinely design and operate to enable safe access for all users. Places with complete streets policies are making sure that their stye drivers, transit users, pedestrians, and bicyclists, as welt as for older people, children, and people with c What does a complete street look like? Since each complete street is unique, it is impossible to give a single description. But ingredients that m~ street include sidewalks, bike lanes (or wide paved shoulders), special bus lanes, comfortable and access crossing opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian signals, curb extensions, and more. A comp will look quite different from a complete street in a highly urban area. But both are designed to balance everyone using the road. Look at our `Many T~[pes of Complete Streets' slideshow to see examples from ; • Why do we need complete streets policies? Complete streets improve safety. A Federal Highways Administration safety review found that streets de raised medians, better bus stop placement, traffic-calming measures, and treatments for disabled travel safety. Some features, such as medians, improve safety for all users: they enable pedestrians to cross b~ reduce left-turning motorist crashes to zero, and improve bicycle safety. Complete streets encourage wa health. The National Institutes of Medicine recommends fighting childhood obesity by establishing ordina construction of sidewalks, bikeways, and other places for physical activity. One study found that 43% of 6 walk within 10 minutes of home met recommended activity levels; among individuals without safe place active enough. Complete streets address climate change and oil dependence. The potential to reduce carbon emissions carbon modes is undeniable. The 2001 National Household Transportation Survey found 50% of all trips in three miles or less and 28% of alt metropolitan trips are one mile or less -distances easy to walk, bike, of 65% of the shortest trips are now made by automobile, in part because of incomplete streets that make i for other modes of travel. Complete streets would help convert many of these short automobile trips to r increasing bicycling from 1% to 1.5% of all trips in the U.S. would save 462 million gallons of gasoline eacl already helped the United States save 1.5 billion gallons of fuel each year since the early 1990x, which is of oil. Complete Streets foster strong communities. Complete streets play an important role in livable commun regardless of age, ability or mode of transportation -feet safe and welcome on the roadways. A safe wall environment is an essiential part of improving public transportation and creating friently, walkable comp Where are complete streets being built? Many states and cities have adopted bike plans or pedestrian plans that designate some streets as corridc bicycling and walking. But a few places have gone beyond this to ensure that every street project takes Among the places with some form of complete streets policy are the states of Oregon, California, Illinois; Florida. The City of Santa Barbara, CA calls for "achieving equality of convenience and choice" for pedes users, and drivers. Columbia, MO adopted new street standards to encourage healthy bicycling and walki that allocates federal transportation dollars around Columbus, OH has determined that all projects must and bicycle. httr-•/%ananz~ nnmr~lPtPetreatc nra/nnmrlPtP_ctrPPtc_fi~nriamPntalc/nnmr~lPtP_etrPetc_fan/ Fi/7/~M9 Complete Streets FAQ ~ Complete Streets Page 2 of 2 lNhat are some of the benefits of complete streets? Complete streets can offer many benefits in all communities, regardless of size or location. The National Coalition has developed a number of fact sheets, which are available through our website. How can I get a complete streets policy adopted in my community? This website has many resources to help you. See the Changing Policyr tab for information on developing policy, working with local advocates, and the answers to many questions on implementation. The Nation Coalition offers interactive workshops led by national experts on policy development and policy impleme transportation planning and engineering professionals ready to help create complete streets? Our Compte can offer the expertise and dedication you need. http://www.completestreets.or~/complete-streets-fundamentals/complete-streets-faq/ 6/2/2009 j ~__~ .. ~ .-~, ,~ ~~ ~' ~,,~ [ ..y-.,r ~) Graphic information to be shown or indicated on the site plan: Site plans shall be drawn to scale not less than 1" equals 100' and submitted on 11" x 17", 24" x 36" or 30" x 42" sheets. All property lines, lot dimensions, total area, and easements. Location and exterior dimensions including height of all proposed and/or.existing buildings or structures. All erosion control measures temporary and permanent. Submit copy of NPDES permit and associated storm water pollution prevention plan. Any development that removes the ground cover, grades, excavates or fills one acre or more of area must apply to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources for a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction site permit. Existing and proposed contours of the property taken at regular intervals not to exceed two (2) feet and/or spot elevations as necessary to provide adequate drainage information. All storm sewer improvements including catch basins, pipe sizes, invert elevations, connections to City sewer mains and drainage swales. Provide storm water runoff calculations to verify pipe sizes and gradient of piping. Storm water detention will be required to detain.the 2, 10 and 100-year storm events for the increase inflow caused by the improvements. Calculations for the above must be provided by a licensed Professional Engineer. See attached storm water facility design requirements. Please contact Deron Muehring, Civil Engineer (589-4270) if you have any questions. ~ . Proposed connection to City water main. Site plan must indicate location and size of water main, service lateral and location of any valves (stop box or post indicator valve). Please check with Brant Schueller, Water Department (589- 4305) regarding front footage fee for water main connection. Proposed connection to City sanitary sewer main. Site plan must indicate location and size of sewer main and service lateral with invert elevations. Please check with Gus Psihoyos, Assistant City Engineer (589-4270) regarding front footage fee for sanitary sewer main connection and interceptor fees. Major Site Plan Checklist Page 2 Proposed connections to underground utilities and indicate existing underground utilities in the area including: Cable TV, electrical, natural gas, telephone and fiber optic. Parking lot material and thickness of pavement. The dimensions from the' proposed building to the property lines. Proposed locations of geo-thermal loop systems including proposed well location(s), drainage outlet piping, and rate of flow (if applicable). The location and general nature of existing natural features including, but not limited to, trees or brush areas (trees over six (6) inches in diameter must be shown individually), rock outcroppings, streams, wetlands and other bodies of water. The location and dimensions of all present and/or proposed paved surfaces including elevations of the abutting streets and sidewalks. City of Dubuque Zoning Ordinance requires that all areas to be used for vehicle travel and parking. must be paved. The location, grade, dimensions~and engineering cross sections must be provided for any existing and/or proposed street within boundaries of proposed development, if applicable. The location and dimensions of parking stalls, circulation aisles, loading areas and sidewalks, including curb ramps. The location and dimensions of accessible parking stalls, access aisles and access ramps, including appropriate signage and location of the accessible entrance(s) to the building. The location of all landscaping features such as trees, shrubs, berms and open areas planted with grass. The City of Dubuque Zoning Ordinance requires parking lots to be screened and a percentage of a development site to be left as open space; please review Section 4-4 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached to application) for a detailed description of these requirements. Graphic scale and north arrow. Additional graphic information may be required by the City Planner or other City departments after preliminary review of site plan, if special conditions exist on or adjacent to the proposed development. Major Site Plan Checklist Page 3 2) Written information to be on site plan: Legal description and address of property. Narne, address and phone number(s) of the property owner(s). Name, address and phone number(s) of the developer(s), or contractor(s) if . different from the owner(s). Proposed use(s) for all non-residential buildings or structures. Calculation of impervious area, including building footprint, paving and total area of lot. Data clearly identifying the following: Total number and type(s) of dwelling units on the property; number and type of all structures or buildings, whether residential ornon-residential; total floor area of each building or~the number of floors, their elevation and square footage if the building has multiple floors. Proposed landscaping schedule indicating plant types, number and timing fior installation. Proposed construction schedule of all structures and physical improvements indicating the timing and sequence of each major structure and improvement. Present zoning classification(s) of the property. A certificate of an Iowa licensed professional engineer and/or architect, as applicable, in responsible charge of the preparation of the site plan as required by the Iowa Code. Minor Site Ptan -- Checklist Page 2 N11Nt~ SITS PLAN --CHECKLIST 1) Graphic information to be on the site_ptan: Site plans shall be drawn fo scam not less than 1"equals 100' and submitted on 11" x 'i 7", 24" x 36" or 30" x 42"sheets. ,,._ Shaw ail property tines, tot dimensions, total area and easements. Show location and exteri©r dimensions including height of all proposed andlor existing buildings or structures. Shaw all erosion control measures temporary and permanent. Details of any proposed structures andlor storm water detention facilities must be provided.. Existing and proposed contours of the properfy taken at regular intervals not to exceed two (2) feet and spot elevations as necessary to provide adequate drainage information. Show ail storm sewer improvements including catch basins, pipe sizes, invert elevations, connections to City sewer mains and drainage 'swales. Provide storm water runoff calculations to verify pipe sizes and gradient of piping. S#orm water detention may be required to detain the 2,10 and 100 year storm events for the increase in volume caused by the improvements. Calculations for the above must be provided by a registered Professional Engineer or by a person qualified in the field of hydrology and hydrauNcs and in a format acceptable to City Engineering. Please contact Gity Engineering Department {589-4270) if you have any questions. Show proposed connection to City water main, Site plan must indicate location and size of water main, service lateral and location of any valves (stop box or past indicator valve), please check with the Water Department (589-4300 regarding fron# footage fee for water main connection.. Shaw proposed confection to City sanitary sewer main. Site plan trust indicate location and size of sewer main and service lateral with invert elevations. Please check with the Ctty Engineering department (589 :4270) regarding .front footage fee for sanitary sewer connec#ion. Indicate all other underground utilities (tf existing) in the area including: Cable TV, electrical, natural gas and. #elephone. Minor Site Plan - Checklis# Page 3 Location and general nature of existing natural features including, but not limited to, trees ar brush areas {trees over six {6) inches in diameter must be shown individually), rock outcroppings, streams and other bodies of water. Show Location and dimensions of all present and/or proposed paved surfaces including elevations of the abutting streets and sidewalks. City of Dubuque Zoning Ordinance requires that all areas to be used for vehicle travel and parking must be paved. Lf applicable, location, grade, dimensions and engineering cross sections must be provided for- any and/or proposed street within boundaries of proposed development. • Show location and dimensions of parking stalls, circulation aisles, loading areas and sidewalks. ~ ' Show location of alt Landscaping features such as trees, shrubs, berms and open areas planted with grass. The City of Dubuque Zoning Ordinance requires parking Lots to be screened and a percentage of a development site to be [eft as open space; please review Section 4-4 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached to application) for a detailed description of these requirements. Graphic scale and north arrow. Additional graphic information may be required by the City Planner or other City departments after preliminary review of site plan. 2) Written information to be on site Pian: Legal description and address of property. ' Name, address and phone number{s) of the property owners}. Name, address and phone number{s} of the developer{s}, or contractor{s) if different from the owner{s). Proposed use{s} for cal non-residential buildings or structures. Data clearly identifying the fiollowing: Total number of type(s) of dwelling units on the property; number and type of a!I structures or buiiditigs, whether residential ornon-residential; total area of the property; number of dwelling units per acre; total floor area of each building or the number of floors, their elevation and square footage if the building has multiple floors. • Proposed landscaping schedule indicating plant #ypes, number and timing for installation. Minor Si#e Plan - Checklis# Page 4 Proposed construction schedule of a[I structures and physical irriprovements indicating the timing and sequence of each major structure and improvement. Present zoning classification(s). of the praperfy. F:IUSERS1KmunsonlWPlBrochuresiMIN4R SITE PLAN RENEW HANDOUT 45 12 08.doc -- 1 i -- __,, _~ , _; !~_ , ~_~ ~, i ~~ ~,~ L~ ~_ ~ (~ ~ ~d ~ o s ~ i s s ~ s ~ N ~' ®® ~ ~ ~ ~ u i v i u i u i to to _ ® ®~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ N dN' 000 N N 00 M N ~ O r ~ ~' O O ti d~ M ~ M O r I` M ~ @' ~ r ti') r i` d' ~ d' ~ O Cfl N O Op r N r ~- r r ILf) r r ~~ 0 0 c ~ \ 0 \ 0 \ 0 ~ ~ \ ~ \° N o ~ i~ @) ~ ~ O N 1` rn ~ O t~ d' CV N r ~ `. ..~ ~, ~® a- u~ a u~ s u~ a u~ s cn a v~ a- ~ a- a- s cn a- ~\ ° ~ ti ~ N ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rn ~ ~ N r O ~ N O M o O d'; rn CD ~ tD m 00 0 d' ~ ~ ~ N O N ~ Cfl r ~ ~ N CO CD CO \ \ o ~ ~ "i N N r ~- N r O N r N ~ ~ ® ~ ~ t, S zT ~ N a' ~ ~" fA a' a' ~ ZT ~' o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ® `~ N ti ~ ~ ~ Cfl N r N t` O M to d' fn N fn d' fn 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ O O 0 ~ ~ O tij M Cfl C O 0 0 Li) O r ~ O r ~ N Cfl 67 M .-. .-. _ F' N to ~ N ~ ~- $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d' O ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O f` ~ ~ Cfl M ~ d' O M GO O r O ~ M N ~ r ~ O Lfl ~ ~ M O d' cn ~ ~ ~ N M i` v M N `-' N ~ N ~ ~ N ~ N ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ N U ~ N U t~ U ~ d' U t6 U (6 t~ ~ M ~ L. U d. (6 d. t6 r, r M ~ 00 ~ t6 Cfl 00 Cfl ~ r ~? ~ ~ r N N r r r ~ ~ r L /~ N ~ U L ~ _ ~ ~ c E J ~ N .-. Q ~ 4. ~ ~ 'C N ~ `. N = ~ ~ D ~ ~ a to ~ ~ U O U ~ ® a ~ ~ c c • c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ m ~ ~ m D ~ ~ IL ~ ~ ~ /i~~,~~~ ~(~: ~~ ~`i tub 607 ~ C~ U ~ C1 Q v M ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ O N O O O O O LD ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ O z ° O z ~o ~ ~ p m m ~ oo ~° Ln 00 c~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ o N m to o ® m Ch i.n M t~ Lf~ i.n Ln ~ t~ M O t-1 bA ~ ~ O ~ ~ LO CO ~ d' ~ O O ~ ~ N N d'' d'' ~ t'n ~ O ~ ~ O N ~ d" ~' m N ~' a' . o ~ rn n o ~ o n o ~ rn ~ ~; o ~ ~ ~ [~ N r-i c-1 c-I OJ N a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ® ~ ~ - ~ Q Tw Cl~ . Q.v a CJ~ y ~i ~ ~ y V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ a~ ~, ~, 3 ~ ~ ~ x x ~ ° ~ ~ x c, n O ~, ~. x U "~ cSS O N it bA ~, ~' 0 0 0 0 ~, O O O ~-+ ~~+ O ~. O bA O ~], ctS ~a ~ ~ 0 O 'CS to O ~ O O ~ s~ ~~" ~ ,~ O ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .r T-r '~ 4~ O "C~ 'CS O O ~ N ~ O a TO: Zoning Advisory Commission 2,~ FROM: Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager (~ SUBJECT: Additional Language to be added to UDC Article 11: Land Subdivision DATE: August 21, 2009 Planning staff would like to add the following language to UDC Article 11: Land Subdivision. "All streets, sidewalks, and bike/hike trails shall connect to other streets, sidewalks, and bike/hike trails within the subdivision, and to the property lines, to provide for their extension to adjacent properties. Each subdivision shall connect to the existing and planned street network of the City to ensure connectivity between properties, distribution of traffic, and access for public and emergency services." Planning staff is recommending the additional language for the following reasons: 1) This language reflects our long-standing practice and policy, and we feel it should be codified in the UDC. 2) The extension of streets, sidewalks and bike/hike trails within developments and to the property lines reflects sound planning principles for maintaining good circulation networks for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians throughout the community. We therefore recommend the Commission approve the addition of this language to UDC Article 11: Land Subdivision. LC/mkr TO: Zoning Advisory Commission FROM: Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager SUBJECT: Additional UDC Input DATE: September 2, 2009 This memorandum presents additional UDC input received since the Zoning Advisory Commission's July 1St public hearing on UDC Articles 1-10. 1. In the R-1 and R-2 Districts, the keeping of chickens is proposed as a conditional use. We have had a request to expand this use to include ducks. The current language limits chickens to hens only. A similar limitation on female ducks is recommended. 2. The PUD proposed by Curtis McDonald off Roosevelt Street includes back-to- back zero lot line townhouses. The UDC uses the current language for side-by- side zero lot line townhouses. Staff recommends that the bulk regulation tables for the R-2, R-2A, R-3, R-4, and OR Districts be modified to Ilow townhouse style residences to have a 0 foot setback on either the sidr rear building lines. 3. In reviewing the 75-foot maximum building height for the C-4 District, staff noted that at least two historic structures exceed this limit: the Hotel Julien at 105 feet, and the Dubuque County Courthouse at 199 feet. The next highest maximum building is 150 in the MHI and HI Districts, and no maximum building height in the C-5 District. Staff recommends that the Commission discuss what they feel is an appropriate maximum height greater than 75 feet for the C-4 District, or if the maximum building height should be removed as it is in the C-5 District. 4. Staff has received comments from at least one. developer that the proposed requirement for parkland dedication in Article 11 removes the option for developers to receive a tax deduction for the charitable dedication of the value of land donated for a City park. Staff recommends that the parkland dedication remain as is as a sound planning and sustainability principle. If additional land is dedicated beyond the required amount, the tax deduction would be available. Staff recommends that the Zoning Advisory Commission provide a recommendation to the City Council on the additional UDC input items outlined above.