Loading...
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment 1100 Carmel Drive_InitiateCity of Dubuque ITEM TITLE: SUMMARY: SUGGESTED DISPOSITION: Copyrighted March 16, 2020 Public Hearings # 1. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment 1100 Carmel Drive Proof of publication on notice of public hearing to consider approval of a request from I I W, P.C., Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc., to amend the PUD Planned Unit Development District at 1100 Carmel Drive to accommodate a secondary emergency access for a senior living community, and the Zoning Advisory Commission recommending approval. ORDINANCE Amending Title 16 of the City of Dubuque Code of Ordinances Unified Development Code by repealing Ordinance No. 29-18 and adopting an Amended PUD Planned Unit Development with a PR Planned Residential designation, and Conceptual Development Plan to accommodate a secondary emergency access for the development of a senior living community Suggested Disposition: Receive and File; Motion B; Motion A ATTACHMENTS: Description Zoning Advisory Commission Cover Letter Applicant Materials Staff Materials Ordinance Public Input 1023 Shady Oaks / Gordon Correspondence Proof of Publication Suggested Motion Wording Type Staff Memo Supporting Documentation Staff Memo Ordinance Supporting Documentation Supporting Documentation Supporting Documentation Supporting Documentation Planning Services Department City Hall 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 (563) 589-4210 phone (563) 589-4221 fax (563) 690-6678 TDD planning@cityofdubuque.org Dubuque hiltd tiztrTAR 'III'•' Masterpiece on the Mississippi 20Q7 2413.7A201217 March 5, 2020 The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Dubuque City Hall — 50 W. 13th Street Dubuque IA 52001 Applicant: IIW, P.C. / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. Location: 1100 Carmel Drive Description: To amend the PUD Planned Unit Development District to accommodate a secondary emergency access for a senior living community. Dear Mayor and City Council Members: The City of Dubuque Zoning Advisory Commission has reviewed the above -cited request. The application, staff report and related materials are attached for your review. Discussion The applicant, Mike Jansen, IIW, 4158 Pennsylvania Ave., representing the Sisters of the BVM, spoke in favor of the request. He noted that IIW had been involved in the original development of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) in 2015 and a PUD Amendment in 2018. He discussed a timeline that indicated that Phase I of the PUD could commence but prior to Phase II a secondary emergency access road was required to be installed. He explained that the current amendment is for a gated secondary emergency access to the BVM's property. He said that the roadway as designed is sufficient for fire apparatus and other emergency vehicles. Staff Member Wally Wernimont reviewed the staff report, noting that the proposed roadway will be for a secondary emergency access only. He said the access will be gated and the only vehicles that will traverse the property would be emergency vehicles or a snowplow to keep the drive access clear during inclement weather. He explained the requirement for construction of a secondary emergency access prior to commencement of Phase 2 of the development. He noted that the proposed access lies fully within the BVM's property. He said that other similar residential facilities generally have two accesses, either on a secondary driveway or adjacent city streets. Staff Member Wally Wernimont said that the amended ordinance mirrors the existing ordinance with the exception that the emergency secondary access is indicated on the concept plan. He said there will not be through traffic on the proposed access. He said that the BVMs could build a residential driveway to house at 1847 S. Grandview Avenue Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Page 2 in the same location without any further review. He noted that fire access to some of the abutting residential properties requires that the fire hoses be stretched approximately 1,000' from the Grandview Avenue. He said if the access would be approved the Fire Department noted that it would reduce the length of hose needed to approximately 600'. There were eight public comments. Neighbors expressed concerns with privacy, traffic, property values, and future development of the BVM property. There were concerns with regards to the potential for the emergency access road to create a loop with an existing private drive which would encourage pedestrians to walk down the private lane. In addition, there were concerns with the access road being used for construction and service access to the BVM's property. One of the adjacent property owners to the emergency access road spoke in favor of the request provided they could use it to access a future single-family home. Mike Jansen addressed the concerns raised by the neighbors. He said that the lane will be gated and used for emergency access only; therefore, eliminating through traffic. He said that the BVMs will not allow the access road to be used as a construction or service road. He said that the grade and driveway design has been reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and is being reviewed by the Engineering Department. He said that the roadway will not be converted to a full access road. He said there is currently access to the balance of the BVM's property from a platted roadway easement on the northside of the property off the South Grandview Avenue cul-de-sac. He said that traffic volume is not an issue because the access drive will only be used in the rare event that the Grandview Avenue access would be blocked. The Zoning Advisory Commission discussed the existing private driveway access, the creating of a loop that pedestrian may potentially use, fencing and installation of an additional gate, and asked if the developers had considered different options. Staff Member Wernimont said that there had been consideration for an access from Julien Dubuque Drive by the girls' softball fields. He said that there were topography and roadway negotiation issues. Mike Jansen noted that engineers had looked extensively at other options and that a driveway access off Julien Dubuque Drive would require traversing property that was not owned by the BVM's and would create extreme grades and switchbacks that would be very difficult for fire apparatus to negotiate. He said the roadway would not accommodate all the Fire Department's equipment. Cody Austin noted that of all the options studied the driveway access from Shady Oaks was the best. Commissioners further discussed the request. Recommendation By a vote of 6 to 0, the Zoning Advisory Commission recommends that the City Council approve the request. Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Page 3 A simple majority vote is needed for the City Council to approve the request. Respectfully submitted, Martha Christ, Vice Chairperson Zoning Advisory Commission Attachments cc: Cody Austin, IIW, P.C., 4155 Pennsylvania Ave., Dubuque, IA 52002 Alan Stache, BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc., 1100 Carmel Dr., Dubuque, IA 52003 Rick Steines, Fire Chief Mark Burkle, Fire Marshal Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork mount mel BLUFFS February 3, 2020 City of Dubuque Attn: Mr. Wally Wernimont 50 West 13th St. Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 Re: BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. Application for Planned District Amendment to PUD Ordinance No. 29-18 Dear Mr. Wernimont: On behalf of the BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. (DBA Mount Carmel Bluffs) we are pleased to provide you with an application for planned district amendment to PUD Ordinance No. 29-18 for a portion of land located at 1100 Carmel Dr., Dubuque, Iowa. This amendment addressees the second means of emergency access. The Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary and Presbyterian Homes & Services formed this partnership to develop a senior living community for BVM Sisters and the general public. The Conceptual Development Plan includes Assisted Living, Memory Care, Independent Living, and Skilled Nursing. The proposed development may have up to 452 units, the same number approved in the 2018 PUD, anticipated in multiple phases. Construction is underway with Phase 1 Skilled Nursing, Assisted Living and Memory Care. Phase 1 and 2 are anticipated to be completed in 2021. We look forward to presenting our application for planned district amendment to the Zoning Advisory Commission. This application includes the following information pursuant to the City of Dubuque's Planned District Procedure: 1. Planning Application Form. 2. Amended Planned District (PUD) Fee of $527.00, payable to the City of Dubuque. 3. Neighborhood Map with Zoning. 4. Updated Figure 1.1: Conceptual Development Plan. It is our understanding the City intends to amend the existing PUD by combining the unchanged portions of PUD Ordinance No. 29-18 with the updated information provided in this application. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Sister Teresa Hadro, BVM Board Chair, BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. President, Sisters of Charity BVM Cc: Bill Hagstrom, Senior Housing Partners Michael A. Jansen, IIW, P.C. Ward Isaacson, Pope Architects 1100 Carmel Drive, Dubuque, IA 52003 563-588-2351 MountCarmelBluffs.org A shared ministry of the Sisters of Charity, BVM and Presbyterian Homes & Services Masterpiece on the Mississippi DVariance ❑Conditional Use Permit ❑Appeal ['Special Exception ❑Limited Setback Waiver DRezoning/PUD/ID Dubuque kretA ill -burin pry k.�. nL illfllY2F II I I ' 1 2007.2012.2013 2017*2019 PLANNING APPLICATION FORM ❑Preliminary Plat DMajor Final Plat ['Minor Final Plat ❑Simple Site Plan ['Minor Site Plan ❑Major Site Plan Please type or print legibly in ink ❑Simple Subdivision DText Amendment ❑Temporary Use Permit ❑Annexation DHistoric Revolving Loan DHistoric Housing Grant City of Dubuque Planning Services Department Dubuque, IA 52001-4845 Phone: 563-589-4210 Fax: 563-589-4221 planninoacitvofdubuque.orq ❑Certificate of Appropriateness DAdvisory Design Review (Public Projects) ❑Certificate of Economic Non -Viability DHistoric Designation DDemolition ❑Port of Dubuque /Chaplain Schmitt Island Design Review Propertyowner(s): BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. Phone: 563-588-2351 Address: 1100 Carmel Dr City:Dubuque State: IA Zip: 52003 Fax #: Cell #: E-mail: Applicant/Agent: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin Phone: 563-556-2464 Address:4155 Pennsylvania Ave City:Dubuque State: IA Zip: 52002 Fax #: Cell #: E-mail: c.austin@iiwengr.com Site location/address: 1100 Carmel Dr. Neighborhood Association: n/a Existing zoning: PUD-PR Proposed zoning: PUD-PR District: N/A Landmark: ❑ Yes ID No Legal Description (Sidwell parcel ID# or lot number/block number/subdivision): Lot 1 & Lot 2 of Carmel Heights No. 2 Total property (lot) area (square feet or acres): 32.756 Ac Describe proposal and reason necessary (attach a letter of explanation, if needed): Identification of a second means of emergency access. CERTIFICATION: I/we, the undersigned, do hereby certify/acknowledge that: 1. It is the property owner's responsibility to locate property lines and to review the abstract for easements and restrictive covenants. 2. The information submitted herein is true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge and upon submittal becomes public record; 3. Fees are not refundable and payment does not guarantee approval; and 4. All additional required written and graphic materials are attached. Property Owner(s): Applicant/Agent: Date: 424% gO�� Date: 2/63/20EC) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY — APPLICA ON - UBM/CHECKL - it)(1l oo I Fee: Received . • Lw.„—dr,ter`— Date:2 -3 `20/5) Docket: EXHIBIT A HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 300 600 ORAYANG MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED SHADY OAKS PHASE 1 SKILLED NURSING - 60 BEDS ASSISTED UV1NG - 40 UNITS MEMORY CARE - 21 UNITS PHASE 2 INDEPENDENT LIVING - 115 UNITS PHASE 3 INDEPENDENT UVING - 84 UNITS EXISTING PUD BOUNDARY PHASE 4 (3) BROWNSTONES 30 UNITS EACH PROPOSED PUD UNITS PARKING REQUIRED (PREVIOUS PUD-452 UNITS) EXISTING EXISTING CIRCLE HOUSING- 16 UNITS MOTHER HOUSE- 25 UNITS 25 x .25 + 12 = 19 PHASE 1 ASSISTED UVING- MEMORY CARE - SKILLED NURSING- 40 UNITS 21 UNITS 60 UNITS PHASE 2 INDEPENDENT UV1NG-115 UNITS FUTURE PHASES INDEPENDENT LIVING-84 UNITS BROWNSTONES - 90 UNITS 451 UNITS 62x.25= 15 60x.25+30- 45 115 x 1.5 = 172 84 x 1.5 = 126 90 x 1.5 = 135 512 575 PROVIDED PUD SUBMITTAL 2-3-2020 SISTERS OF CHARITY BVM MOUNT CARMEL PUD SUBMITTAL DUBUQUE.IOWA FIGURE 1.1 CONCEPTUAL PUD SITE PLAN Masterpiece on the Mississippi Dubuque bitexl u-AMInooiy I'l111f 2007.2012.2013 20174,2019 Vicinity Map Applicant: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin Location: 1100 Carmel Drive Proposal: To amend the PUD Planned Unit Development District to accommodate a secondary emergency access for a senior living community. rdoppAEI Proposed Secondary Emergency Access Current PUD Boundary Parcels - � City limits 0 125 250 500 Feet A 1:5,000 Dubuque Alit arICa Car 1 1.1 Masterpiece on the Mississippi February 27, 2020 TO: Zoning Advisory Commission FROM: Wally Wernimont, Associate PlannerV"" SUBJECT: Amend Planned Unit Development for property located at 1100 Mt. Carmel Drive to accommodate a secondary emergency access for a senior living community. INTRODUCTION The BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc, has submitted an application asking to amend the Planned Residential District located at 1100 Mt. Carmel Drive to accommodate a secondary emergency access for a senior housing community. Attached is the proposed ordinance and proposed conceptual development plan. BACKGROUND On August 20, 2018, the City Council reviewed and unanimously approved Ordinance 29-18 which rezoned the subject property from R-1 Single -Family Residential to PUD Planned Unit Development with a PR Planned Residential designation. The amended planned unit development regulations facilitated development of a 452-unit senior living community. During review of the proposed development plans for the senior living community, City staff noted a concern that the property has only a single vehicular access. This access is from the terminus of South Grandview Avenue. The Fire Marshall told representatives of the Sisters of Charity BVM and Presbyterian Homes and Services that a second means of access will be necessary to ensure that, in the event of an emergency situation, there is a viable second means of access to the property. DISCUSSION The developers have been working with the Fire Department to determine the location of a secondary emergency access road. On February 7, 2019, BVM-PHS Senior Housing, Inc, acquired the property at 1847 S. Grandview Avenue. This property is a platted lot that takes access from S. Grandview Avenue along a shared driveway easement. The lot also has 50 feet of street frontage along Shady Oaks Drive which is directly adjacent to the subject property. The developers are proposing to construct an emergency access drive from Shady Oaks Drive (a public street) to an existing parking lot as shown on the proposed PUD conceptual development plan. The access lane will only be used by emergency vehicles (ambulance, fire trucks, police vehicles) in the event of emergency where the primary access from the terminus of South Grandview Avenue is blocked. As shown on the proposed conceptual development plan, a gate will be installed on the property at 1100 Mt. Carmel to prevent through traffic from using the secondary emergency access road. The gate will be designed so the Fire Department can open it in the event of an emergency. It should be noted that the proposed emergency access lane will be located entirely on property owned by the BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. Currently, the property at 1847 S. Grandview Avenue is accessed by an approximately 10-foot wide, concrete, private driveway that is over 750 feet long and has access from South Grandview Avenue. This existing access is substandard for emergency vehicular access. If approved, the proposed emergency access lane will need to be designed to meet all Engineering and Fire Code standards for grade, width and pavement specifications. The portion of the proposed emergency access lane that is not gated will provide improved driveway and emergency access to the residence at 1847 S. Grandview Avenue. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Commission review the criteria established in Section 9-5 and Section 5-24 regarding rezoning reclassification and planned unit developments. Enclosures Cc: Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer Rick Steines, Fire Chief Mark Burkle, Fire Marshall 1 T. 1716 1730 1736 1740 1760114.17770 •1790 L_ I _: L1780 -� 17.15 ,:1041 Legend 1847 S. Grandview Avenue BVM owned property i 1840 • . ,' 897., 899 _ I.` '..:I•,—' . INFORMATION WAS COMPILED USING V'.:AaUURCES FROM THIRD PARTIES OR MAINTAINED 1'r IpTY OF OU8U0UF (THE PTV). BY USE OF THIS I11 TFIORMAMA, THE USER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT, WHILE THE 1 o.i < CRY USES THE MOST EU ARENT ANDACCURATE INFORMATION I ' L� 'y "_„�`.� AVAIIABLE, THE CITY GOES NOT WARRANT THE ACCURACE OR ,. f ) I immeack. ,.� iill.r CURRENCY OFTHE INFORMATION OR DATA CONTAINED HEREIN. I BYUSEOF THIS INFOR MATION, THE USER AGREES T HECITY IS 1801 1 y NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MISUSE OR MISINTERPRETATION OF T.Ty,.�Iy a- 1955 ANY INFORMATION DISPLAYED IN THIS MAP ANDTHATTHE 7F� J"1 I USER WILL NOT HOLD THE CRY LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS, DAMAGE, OR INCONVENIENCE CAUSED AS A RESULT OF RELIANCE ON THE 1849 ' 1871 19511" INFneA..vrin , 1843 " 18.17 1150.— IX� 9ue n mcrrY or DUB UE Masterpiece nn the Mississippi „�, View of Existing Private Drive from South Grandview Avenue August 2019 Google Maps Image 91 MOUNT EL/RD MINIM GRANDVIEW AVE 5 GRANDVIEW AVE • GRANDVIEW AVE GRANDVIEW AVE "107,ez GRANDVIEW AVE • GRANDVIEW AVE GRANDVIEW AVE 1023i5HADY OAKS DR GRANDVIEW AVE 1041SHADY OAKS DR GRANDVIEW AVE_ Yi • 1056 S OAKS 1047 SHADY OAKS DR map: Auto (Oblique) - Mar 2016 - May 2016 - < image 1 of 12 > 04/17/2016 Imagery from Pictometry View of 50' Wide Lot from Shady Oaks Drive Google Maps Image Wally Wernimont From: Mark Burkle Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 3:35 PM To: Wally Wernimont Subject: Shady Oaks Attachments: Shady Oaks hydrant access.JPG; S Grandview hydrant access.JPG BVM emergency access road would provide additional options including: • Additional fire hydrants on Shady Oaks available to 1845 and 1847. • Reduced 5" diameter hose lay from 1,160' to 624' • Reduce congestion on private driveway (large diameter hose and fire apparatus) • Provide easier access for emergency ambulance if needed (firefighters and residents) Hydrant #000674 on South Grandview would be the likely choice because it is in the direction of travel from the nearest fire station. Mark Burkle Fire Marshal 11 West 9th Street Dubuque, Iowa 52001-4839 (563) 589-4161 office --(563)-5543=6522 cell (563) 589-4209 fax mburkle@cityofdubuque.org 1 624.17 11 PM Wed Mar 4 Feet GPS accuracy 32.8 ft • required 30 ft soli 1 Se°!- RI 41-4ti fj !!I Done Prepared by Laura Carstens, City Planner Address: City Hall, 50 W. 13th St. Telephone: 589-4210 Return to Kevin S. Firnstahl, City Clerk Address: City Hall- 50 W. 13th St Telephone: 589-4121 ORDINANCE NO. 12-20 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 16 OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE CODE OF ORDINANCES UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BY REPEALING ORDINANCE 29-18 AND ADOPTING AN AMENDED PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITH A PR PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION, AND CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE A SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA: Section 1. That Title 16 of the City of Dubuque Code of Ordinances, Unified Development Code, is hereby amended by repealing Ordinance 29-18 and adopting an amended PUD Planned Unit Development District with a PR Planned Residential designation, and a revised conceptual development plan to accommodate a secondary emergency access, a copy of which is on file with the Planning Services Department, for the property at 1100 Carmel Drive as depicted in the attached Exhibit No. 1. Section 2. Attached hereto and made a part of this zoning reclassification approval is the Conceptual Development Plan for the Mount Carmel Planned Unit Development marked Exhibit A. It is recognized that minor shifts or modifications to the general plan layout may be necessary and compatible with the need to acquire workable street patterns, grades, and usable building sites. The general plan layout, including the relationship of land uses to the general plan framework and the development requirements shall be used as the implementation guide. The provisions of the City of Dubuque Unified Development Code shall apply to the development of the property included in this Planned Unit Development unless specifically regulated by this Ordinance. A. Use Regulations Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 Permitted Uses 1. Cemetery, Mausoleum, Columbarium 2. Hospice 3. Housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities 4. Library 5. Licensed adult day services 6. Multiple -family dwelling* 7. Nursing or convalescence home 8. Parking structure 9. Off-street parking 10. Place of religious exercise or assembly 11. Single -Family Dwelling (detached)* 12. Two -Family Dwelling (duplex)* 13. Townhouse* * Limited to Seniors or Persons with Disabilities Conditional Uses: Subject to the provisions of Section 16-8.5 of the Unified Development Code. 1. Group homes 2. Keeping of horses or ponies 3. Licensed childcare center 4. Museum 5. Seminary Accessory Uses: Subject to provisions of Section 16-3.8 of the Unified Development Code. 1. Any use customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use it serves. 2. Detached garage 3. Fence 4. Garage sales 5. Keeping of hens 6. Home -based businesses 7. Non-commercial garden greenhouse or nursery 8. Satellite receiving dish 9. Solar collector 10. Sport, recreation or outdoor cooking equipment 11. Storage building 12. Tennis court, swimming pool, or similar permanent facility 13. Wind turbine (building -mounted) 2 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 B. Bulk Regulations Minimum lot area ■ Single -Family Residential • Two -Family (duplex)] • Townhouse • Multi -family dwellings 5,000 square feet 5,000 square feet 1,600 square feet/du 2,000 square feet/du Minimum lot frontage width Minimum lot frontage townhouse 50 feet 16 feet/du Maximum building coverage 40% Maximum building height • Number of stories • Height 4 60 feet Minimum yards • Front • Side(2) • Rear 25 feet(1) 10 feet 20 feet Open Space Requirements • Minimum permeable open space (3) 40% Setback requirements (4) • Internal roadway setbacks (5) • Site perimeter setback (6) 25 feet 25 feet Landscape buffer requirements (6) • site perimeter landscape buffer 25 feet (1) Minimum building and/or garage setback from public right-of-way or edge of pavement (2) Where no lot lines exist, 20 feet of clearance is required between buildings. (3) Includes easements, setbacks, wooded areas, and landscape buffers, internal roadway setbacks, and parking area landscape, excludes all hardscape. (4) Figure 1.2: PUD Setback Requirements (5) Setback calculated from edge of pavement on private drives. (6) See Figure 1.3: PUD landscape and Open Space Requirements. C. Roadways The private roadways in this PUD shall conform to the City of Dubuque Unified Development Code and SUDAS as adopted by the City. 3 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 D. Parking 1. Parking Requirements Parking areas shall accommodate sufficient parking while minimizing impervious surfaces and the visual impact of large lots. Parking requirements will follow city standards as outlined in the City of Dubuque Unified Development Code (Section 14-6 Off -Street Parking Requirements). 2. All surface parking lots shall be designed to: ■ Integrate and link existing parking areas with new parking areas for improved pedestrian and auto circulation. Accommodate pedestrian routes through parking areas to building entrances. Accommodate snow removal and storage. Comply with City lighting standards and minimize impact on surrounding properties. 3. All parking structures shall be designed to: ■ Comply with City requirements for vehicular and pedestrian access, ADA compatibility, safety, lighting and ventilation. ■ Clearly identify with signage all pedestrian and vehicular entrances to parking structures. ■ Integrate ample floor -to -ceiling heights to maximize light and visibility and accommodate a wide variety of vehicle sizes. ■ Incorporate where feasible, flat floors to minimize driver confusion and maximize Tight, visibility and safety. ■ Integrate into land contour and grading opportunities to minimize above grade height and mass when appropriate. All parking areas shall comply with the landscape standards set forth in Section F: Landscape Standards. 4. Dimensional Requirements Minimum parking stall dimensions shall be 8.5' x 18' with 24' drive aisles to accommodate two-way traffic. Accessible parking space requirements shall adhere to standard outlined in the City of Dubuque Unified Development Code (Section 14-7 Accessible Parking Space Requirements). 4 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 5. Bicycle Parking Bicycle parking shall be considered and placed in safe, convenient locations near building entrances and comply with Section 16-13-3.5.1 of the Unified Development Code. E. Loading and Service Areas The visual impact of loading and service areas on a building, site or adjacent sites and uses should be minimized. Loading and service areas are not allowed in the right-of-way or within any setbacks. 1. All loading and service areas shall be designed to: Provide access to a street or alley in a manner that will create the least possible interference with through traffic movements. No curb cut shall exceed 30 feet in width. 2. Accommodate maneuvering space to allow vehicles to access and exit the space without having to make backing movements on or into a public or private street. 3. Provide fixed lighting that prevents direct glare of beams onto any other property or street by the use of luminaire cutoffs. All lighting shall be reduced to security levels at all times of nonuse. 4. Have masonry or other screening materials that complement materials used on campus buildings, and that are effective in every season. 5. Comply with the landscape screening requirements set forth in Section F: Landscape Standards. 6. Outside storage of materials, equipment or trucks shall be kept to a minimum and located in areas that are screened from views by a permanent, solid and year-round screening element. Sharing of loading, trash and utility areas between buildings shall be considered for ease of maintenance, to reduce land needed for such functions and to improve the visual quality of the Campus. F. Landscape Standards 1. General Description and Intent The natural character of the site should be preserved and enhanced as campus land use changes. Site landscaping will be designed in a naturalized pattern to complement the bluffs, ravines, and other natural features of the site, work with the architectural form of buildings, provide shade, create outdoor spaces for employees, residents and visitors, and buffer parking lots. These landscape standards build on elements of the City of Dubuque Unified 5 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 Development Code to provide landscape requirements for plant material, parkways and site buffer and parking lot treatments that: ■ Preserve or enhance the appearance and character of the property and its surroundings. ■ Reduce noise and air pollution, light glare, soil erosion and solar heat gain. ■ Provide buffering between land uses and zoning districts of differing intensity. ■ Promote the preservation of existing significant vegetation. ■ Improve the appearance of parking areas and properties abutting public rig hts-of-way. 2. Landscape Requirements Overall Site Landscape Requirements Minimum permeable open space will be calculated at 40 percent of the entire site dedicated under review. ■ Permeable open space calculations may include easement areas, perimeter setbacks, woodlands, landscape buffers, internal roadway setbacks (parkways), and parking lot landscape. Minimum site landscape plant quantities shall be calculated at one plant per unit per 2,000 square feet of site landscape area. ■ Street trees planted in the parkway or in the public right-of-way shall not be counted toward fulfillment of the minimum site requirements for number of trees. ■ Parking lot landscape requirements shall not be counted toward fulfillment of the minimum site requirement for number of trees. ■ Existing trees to be retained on site may be counted toward fulfillment of the landscaping requirements. 3. Plant Units A plant unit is a measurement used to determine the quantity of plant material required for screening and shading. One plant unit is comprised of any of the following elements: ■ One canopy tree 6 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 • Two under -story or ornamental trees • Two evergreen trees • Seven shrubs (large or small, deciduous or evergreen) Plant unit calculations establish the total quantity of required plant material while allowing the landscape architect flexibility in allocating and distributing plant material. Existing plant material protected during construction may be used to satisfy the plant material requirements provided the type and size of the plant material meets the plant material standards and the plant material is not an invasive or noxious variety. 4. Perimeter Buffer Landscape Requirements Perimeter buffer landscape will help create a transition from the adjacent residential uses on the north and west to the campus. Plant material shall consist of a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs as shown in Figure 2.1: Typical Perimeter Buffer Planting. A minimum total of three (3) plant units per 100 linear feet of buffer shall be installed. • Only required access drives and sidewalks shall break through a perimeter landscape open space. • Every perimeter buffer landscape open space shall be designed and maintained to preserve unobstructed views of the street and sidewalk at points of access and to not interfere with or be damaged by work within any public utility easement, unless the City shall determine that no other location is reasonably feasible. 5. Parkway Landscape Requirements A consistently planted parkway will add to the overall Campus character by providing an appealing arrival sequence and uniform experience around, into and through the Campus. All streets shall include 2 canopy trees per 100 feet of road frontage. These trees may be located in closer proximity to each other to create clustering or massing of plant material instead of a consistent on -center planting approach as long as they are located within the roadway setback, see Figure 2.2: Typical Parkway Planting. 6. Parking Lot Landscape Requirements The following are standards for the design of parking lot interior and perimeter landscape areas which build upon the standards defined in the City of Dubuque Unified Development Code. Figure 2.3: Typical Parking Lot Planting reflects a minimum treatment for a typical parking lot. • Parking bays in excess of 11 spaces in length shall provide landscaped islands at the ends of each aisle. Parking bays in excess of 20 spaces 7 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 in length shall be divided by intermediate landscaped islands and provide landscaped islands at the ends of each aisle. A landscaped island for a single parking bay shall be a minimum of 9 feet wide by 18 feet long and shall contain the equivalent of two (2) plant units. A landscaped island for a double-parking bay shall be a minimum of 9 feet wide by 36 feet long and shall contain the equivalent of four (4) plant units. • If the required planting ratio is not obtainable in a healthy landscape environment, then the remaining plant material required by this calculation may be placed in close proximity of the parking lot. This additional area should be integrated with the parking lot perimeter landscape. • All parking lot landscape areas shall be protected by raised curbs with a minimum height of 4 inches. • Except for in swales, the finished grade (crown) or interior planting areas shall not be less than 3 inches above curb or pavement. • A landscaped buffer strip shall be provided along the frontage of all surface parking areas at least 10 feet wide along the public right-of- way. The buffer strip shall be planted with a minimum of 7 plant units per 100 linear feet of buffer. Landscaped earth berms and or decorative walls and fences are permitted provided they are integrated with the landscape screening described above. The use of biofiltration methods of landscape and drainage design is encouraged. • A landscaped buffer strip of at least seven feet wide shall be provided along the remaining sides of all surface parking lots. The buffer strip shall be planted with a minimum of 5 plant units per 100 linear feet. • Prior to planting, all interior areas shall be excavated to a depth of 3 feet and amended with a soil mixture consisting of 1 part screened topsoil, 1 part existing topsoil, and 2 parts of organic compost or an approved equivalent, with the exception of other soil mixtures as necessary to accommodate Low Impact Development features. This requirement may be waived upon confirmation by the City Planner that the pre-existing soil is suitable for planting and drainage, and that no amendments are necessary. All landscaped areas that are not planted in grass shall be finished with a 3-inch layer of mulch. 8 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 7. Intersection Visibility In accordance with the requirements of the City of Dubuque Street Tree and Landscaping on Public Right -of -Way Policy, nothing shall be erected, placed, planted, or allowed to grow in such a manner as to impede or obstruct vision between a height of 3 to 10 feet above the road crown in areas adjacent to intersecting streets, drives or alleys. This area is defined by: • Trees shall be planted at least fifty (50) feet from the edge of street intersections, traffic control lights and stop signs; • at least ten (10) feet from driveways; • and fifteen (15) feet for alleys • Trees shall be planted at least two feet from the back of curb. 8. Plant Materials Plant material used to satisfy the standards of this section shall comply with the following standards: • Unless otherwise expressly provided, all plant materials used to satisfy the requirements of this section shall meet the following minimum size requirements: Plant Type Canopy tree Under -story or ornamental tree Evergreen tree Deciduous shrub Evergreen shrub Minimum Size 2-1/2" caliper 2" caliper or 8' height 8' height 18" height (small), 30" height (large) 24" width • Species of plant material shall require approval from the City. • Plants installed to satisfy the requirements of this section shall meet or exceed the plant quality standards of the most recent edition of American Standard for Nursery Stock, published by the American Association of Nurserymen. Plants shall be capable of withstanding the extremes of individual microclimates. • All required landscape areas not dedicated to trees, shrubs, or preservation of existing vegetation shall be landscaped with grass, ground cover, or other landscape treatment, not including sand, rock, or pavement. For each plant type associated with the landscape requirements of this section, no single plant species shall represent more than 40% of the total plantings. 9 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 Plant material shall be installed so it relates to the natural environment and habitat in which it is placed. Native vegetation shall be utilized in all instances unless site conditions or availability of species warrant the use of cultivars or similar materials compatible with the area. The scale and nature of landscape material should be appropriate to the site and structures. For example, larger scaled buildings should be complemented by larger scaled plants. Plant material should be selected for its form, texture, color and concern for its ultimate growth. 9. Tree Survey and Preservation Plan As part of any development plan submission, a tree survey shall be conducted by a certified arborist. The survey shall delineate the limits of all vegetated woodland areas on site. All specimen trees not located in vegetated woodland areas that measure 8" or greater at Direct Breast Height (DBH) shall be tagged, identified and recorded. Based on this tree survey, all trees in below average or poor condition, of a noxious species, or that measure less than 8" DBH can be removed from the property at the discretion of the owner to assist in providing a healthier growing environment for the existing tree stands. The tree inventory shall rate tree condition and form as follows: ■ 5 — POOR CONDITION: A rating of 5 shall be given to a tree that has a significant deadwood, bad sweep or lean, disease or damage by insect pests or larvae, lightning damage, split, or other physical damage. ■ 4 — BELOW AVERAGE CONDITION: A rating of 4 shall be given to a tree that has some deadwood, minor sweep or lean, distorted shape, trunk of bark damage, multiple stems, or poor physical quality. ■ 3 — FAIR CONDITION: A rating of 3 shall be given to a tree that is average in condition, form, physical state, appearance and health. ■ 2 — ABOVE AVERAGE: A rating of 2 shall be given to a tree that has little or no damage, sound, good shape and form, and is good in overall physical quality. ■ 1 — EXCELLENT CONDITION: A rating of 1 shall be given to a tree that is excellent in appearance, condition and form, balanced branching and healthy. 10 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 The following tree species identified are considered noxious: ■ Buckthorn The following tree species identified are considered undesirable: • Box Elder ■ Siberian Elm • White Mulberry The preservation of existing healthy trees and natural landscape features on a site is encouraged. The number of new plant materials may be reduced when existing trees of a desirable species in a healthy growing condition are preserved within the area of the perimeter landscape or open space. Credit for the preservation of existing trees 8 inches in caliper (deciduous or 8 feet in height (evergreen) shall be as follows, but in no instance shall a developer or property owner receive greater than a maximum of 50% credit towards the number of required trees: Size of Preserved Tree Tree Credit 1 canopy or under -story tree, 6" to 12" caliper 1 evergreen tree or multi -stem under -story tree, 6'-12' 3 trees 1 canopy or under -story tree, 12" to 30" caliper 1 evergreen tree or multi -stem under -story tree, more than 12' height 4 trees 1 canopy tree or under -story tree, more than 30" caliper 5 trees 10. Vegetative Woodland Preservation Wooded areas 2 acres in size or larger, or groves of trees with 10 or more individual trees having a diameter of at least 12 inches and a canopy cover of at least 50 percent of the area encompassed by the trees shall be delineated on the submitted plans. Such woodlands shall have 20% retention protected. All woodland areas retained must have a buffer of 50' from the trunks of trees to be preserved, to protect the trees. If the City determines that a required woodland area cannot be retained due to site constraints or infrastructure requirements, replacement trees must be planted at a rate of one tree for every 200 square feet of woodland removed from the retention area. When that is not feasible, mitigation may take place by planting supplemental trees at an off -site woodland approved by the City. Exceptions With the incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMPs), Low Impact Development practices (LIDs) or other Sustainable Design practices into the 11 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 project, the required landscaping may be reduced or arranged in a manner that will enhance the design concept at the discretion of the City of Dubuque. Considerations shall include the following: ■ Swales or bio-filters placed in islands or at the perimeter of parking areas, designed to improve the filtration and quality of stormwater runoff. ■ Proposals to modify the type or quantity of landscape materials may be allowed in exchange for the installation of plant species such as native trees, shrubs, grass or perennials that will enhance the filtering capacity of the site and promote the use of diverse native species. ■ Proposed swales or filters using a structural pervious surface may be used for parking or drive aisles provided such features are designed to withstand vehicular loads. G. Architectural Standards All buildings shall have a balanced, integrated design theme that strives to incorporate solid architecture that fits within a Campus -wide character. 1. Building Scale and Massing The size and orientation of buildings is critical to achieving a balanced overall Campus design. The following items shall be addressed to achieve appropriate scale and massing. ■ Rather than single, large building masses, buildings shall be clustered together where feasible to promote efficient street/driveway systems, shared parking, integrated open spaces and pedestrian linkages between buildings. ■ Where feasible, buildings and main entries shall be located along the Campus Loop Road to foster a welcoming pedestrian environment. In no instance shall a building's rear entrance or service area be oriented towards the Loop Road or internal access drives. ■ Building orientation and design elements shall encourage overall visual continuity. ■ To the greatest extent possible buildings shall be oriented to take advantage of natural Tight view sheds and passive solar opportunities. 2. Architectural Styles and Building Materials & Colors 12 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 Architectural styles should be carefully balanced and coordinated with the style, materials, color and massing of other buildings seen throughout the Campus. • A balance of proportions and scale through vertical and horizontal rhythm and facade articulation should be set. • Unarticulated, flat front buildings are prohibited. • A building's main entrance should be clearly defined within the facade. • Building projections shall be pedestrian -scaled and proportional to the building facade. • Structures should be consistent with residential scale and articulation, especially on street facing elevations. 3. Building Materials A range of acceptable building materials shall be considered to enhance architectural interest and Campus character. • All new buildings should be constructed with a blend of high -quality materials such as masonry (brick and stone) and wood. Limited amount of "glass skin" or decorative stucco may considered if they are considered accent materials rather than primary materials. In addition, a limited amount of cement board siding may be used in combination with other approved materials if it is an accent rather than primary material. • Since all future Campus buildings will be highly visible from roads, access drives and open space, architecture should be complete and wrap all four sides of the building. Primary building materials used on the front or main building facade shall be continued on the side and rear facades. • The number of materials on any exterior building face should be limited to no more than three to avoid clutter and visual overload. The following building materials shall not be used as exterior building materials or on any exterior walls: • Concrete finishes or precast concrete panels (tilt wall) that are not exposed aggregate, hammered, sandblasted or covered with a cement - based acrylic coating. • Metal panels with a depth of less than 1 inch or a thickness less than US Standard 26 gauge. 13 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 Mirrored glass with a reflectance greater than 40% shall not cover more than 40% of exterior walls. 4. Building Colors The use of a limited range of neutral or natural colors is encouraged. Building colors shall be compatible with the Campus character and subtly enhance a building's visual appeal. • Natural colors and complementary colors shall be used for primary building facades and roof forms. Neutral earth tones (beige to brown), shades of gray, traditional colors (brick red, dark green, navy blue) or light, subdued hues are acceptable. Contrastingcolors, accent which are compatible with the colors listed above, are acceptable for secondary facades or accent colors or details. • Primary, bright or excessively brilliant colors are prohibited unless used in very limited applications for subtle trim accents or specifically for art/sculptural elements of a building. • Building facade colors should be kept to two or three colors or hues of individual colors. The color of visible roof forms should also be considered when selecting colors. 5. Sustainable Design Principles Best management practices for efficient and sustainable development shall be taken into consideration. The following design principles highlight areas to focus on for future development: • Recycled materials. ■ Local source material acquisition. ■ Reduced construction waste. ■ Health conscious building materials and systems. ■ Energy efficient materials and systems. • Building rehabilitation. • Stormwater Best Management Practices. Vegetative swales, rain gardens and expanded wetlands • Water recapture systems • Ground water recharge • Low volume irrigation systems H. Sign Standards 1. Sign Standards Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 a. Purpose The purpose of these sign standards is to maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment, maintain pedestrian and traffic safety and minimize the distractions, hazards and obstructions caused by signs, and to minimize the possible adverse effects of signs on nearby public and private property. b. Sign Area, Height and Number The size, height, and number of allowed signs shall be regulated by Article 15-11.13 of the Unified Development Code unless further regulated by the PUD Ordinance. c. Prohibited Signs Pylon, rooftop, neon, internally illuminated awnings, fabric banners, official flags of nations, states, or political subdivisions thereof, wooden, and electronic message center signs are prohibited. d. Sign Lighting Sign illumination shall comply with the following requirements: Illumination of a sign within 100 feet of and visible from any property zoned Residential shall be extinguished between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. every day. • Traffic signs shall comply with MUTCD regulations. e. Location and Scale • Signs shall not obstruct significant architectural details or elements, including windows and doorways. • All ground -mounted signs shall be placed within planting areas that are coordinated in design for the overall site. f. Text and Materials Text on all signs shall be simple and easy to read. It is important that all message wording be selected to maximize information being conveyed while using the most concise vocabulary. A sign with a brief, succinct message is more user-friendly, and will have a cleaner look. All directional lettering shall be a mix of upper- and lower-case lettering with the first letter of every word capitalized. Avoid spacing letters too close together as crowding will make the sign more difficult to read. 15 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 Signs shall be constructed of high -quality, durable materials. Brick and mortar or natural stone bases are to be constructed with materials that complement the building architecture. g. Exceptions Home address or family name plaques are excluded from the above requirements. h. Exterior Graphics or Art Painting of garage doors with multiple colors or designs is prohibited. All garage doors shall be one color, with a second color allowed for accents only. I. Performance Standards The development and maintenance of uses in this PUD District shall be established in conformance with the following standards. 1. Platting: Subdivision plats and improvement plans shall be submitted in accordance with Article 11. Land Subdivision, of the City of Dubuque Unified Development Code. 2. Site Plans: Final site development plans shall be submitted in accordance with Article 12 Site Plans and Article 13 Site Design Standards prior to construction of each building and vehicle -related feature unless otherwise exempted by Article 12. 3. Storm Water Conveyance: The developer of each lot shall be responsible for providing surface or subsurface conveyance(s) of storm water from the lot to existing storm sewers or to flow line of open drainage ways outside the lot in a means that is satisfactory to the Engineering Department of the City of Dubuque. Other applicable regulations enforced by the City of Dubuque relative to storm water management and drainage shall apply to properties in the PUD District. 4. Noises: Noises generated within the PUD District shall be regulated by Chapter 33, Article IV, Noises, of the City of Dubuque Code of Ordinances. 5. Phased construction of buildings and parking spaces: The construction of off-street parking spaces may be phased in proportion to the percentage of total building floor area constructed at any one time. Ground area set aside for future parking, loading spaces or driveways or for parking provided in excess of the minimum required number of parking spaces shall not reduce the minimum required area for open space. 16 Mount Carmel Campus PUD Ordinance No. 12-20 6. Other Codes and Regulations: These regulations do not relieve an owner from other applicable City, County, State or Federal Codes, regulations, laws and other controls relative to the planning, construction, operation and management of property in the PUD District. J. Transfer of Ownership Transfer of ownership or lease of property in this PUD District shall include in the transfer or lease agreement a provision that the purchaser or lessee acknowledges awareness of the conditions authorizing the establishment of the district. K. Modifications Any modifications of this Ordinance must be approved by the City Council in accordance with zoning reclassification proceedings of Article 9-5 of the Unified Development Code. Section 3. The foregoing amendment has heretofore been reviewed by the Zoning Advisory Commission of the City of Dubuque, Iowa. Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication as provided by law. Passed, approved and adopted this 16th day of March 2020. Attest: KevipitS. Firnstahl, City Clerk Roy D. ' ol, Mayor 17 OF L0l 1 R� G A E�- ?PA N�1 RCS .,If�ImIIIIIIlon�11,.. NORTH GRAPRIC SCALE 0 00 000 I' - ,00 ORAWM0 MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED p,a�;n0lss. Inform , - Ptg0;l AV: MN Olawn BY JMi 7 •ml u,N Fog B'.01na: Issued Fax CA10000cn: EXHIBIT NO. 1 SISTERS OF CHARITY OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY M-10•:1. 91.N •,dr% 4 14, sue Pegncl Ocx0Ftal j SISTERS OF CHARITY OF THE BVM MOUNT CARMEL - PUD DUBUQUE, IOWA ay] P.\I!\OO1\[R1M0S\4RNY 2016O.b0IC.}.p0 4DISB)R000 010le!l+Ae 010 eu nsl Aua PRE OF P o101 1 EXHIBIT NO. 1 SISTERS OF CHARITY OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY PUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 5A AND PART OF LOT 7 IN CARMEL HEIGHTS, AND PART OF LOT 2 OF MINERAL LOT 1 IN THE CITY OF DUBUQUE. IOWA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 2 IN BEACH'S SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 56 DEGREES 52 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, 77.63 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 53 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 37 SECONDS EAST, 48.75 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 70 DEGREES 09 MINUTES 56 SECONDS EAST, 62.95 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 49 MINUTES 23 SECONDS EAST, 54.65 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY. 95.02 FEET, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS • OF 104.53 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 52 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 04 SECONDS AND THE CHORD BEARS SOUTH 56 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 31 SECONDS EAST, 91.78 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 42 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 36 SECONDS EAST, 52.26 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE: THENCE SOUTH 63 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 47 SECONDS EAST. 56.56 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 73 DEGREES 22 MINUTES 23 SECONDS EAST, 56.35 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 56 DEGREES 53 MINUTES 26 SECONDS EAST, 41.40 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES 02 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 24.20 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 34 DEGREES 35 MINUTES 27 SECONDS EAST, 24.35 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 59.23 FEET, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 431.85 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 28 SECONDS AND THE CHORD BEARS SOUTH 31 DEGREES 42 MINUTES 09 SECONDS EAST, 59.18 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CARMEL DRIVE AND THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 5A IN CARMEL HEIGHTS; THENCE NORTH 54 DEGREES 22 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST. 40.00 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CARMEL DRIVE AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5A; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 159.54 FEET, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 391.85 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 37 SECONDS AND THE CHORD BEARS SOUTH 47 DEGREES 17 MINUTES 42 SECONDS EAST, 158.44 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 5A; THENCE SOUTH 59 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 23 SECONDS EAST. 79.51 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 5A; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 65.97 FEET, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 89.06 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 30 SECONDS AND THE CHORD BEARS SOUTH 37 DEGREES 44 MINUTES 47 SECONDS EAST, 64.47 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5A; THENCE SOUTH 26 DEGREES 11 MINUTES 39 SECONDS EAST, 52.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST, 92.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 74.84 FEET, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 683.42 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 28 SECONDS AND THE CHORD BEARS SOUTH 24 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 47 SECONDS EAST, 74.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST, 670.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 30 MINUTES 19 SECONDS WEST, 1102.45 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 67 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 44 SECONDS WEST, 285.69 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 16 SECONDS WEST, 396.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 48 DEGREES 34 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 320.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 47 MINUTES 01 SECONDS WEST, 522.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47 DEGREES 43 MINUTES 17 SECONDS WEST, 979.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 DEGREES 29 MINUTES 56 SECONDS WEST, 347.18 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2 IN BEACH'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 30 MINUTES 04 SECONDS EAST, 297.26 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 32.756 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS. RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY RECORD AND NOT OF RECORD. 6 a 8 D,>,+...-41SSIe!Wm.*. ( p,yau Mgr AUd IS,,C0 Fa8Win Dt aY Aft Issued No CaRRucGon. Rgod 0l3aI9'uen SISTERS OF CHARITY OF THE BVV MOUNT CARMEL - PUD DUBUQUE, IOWA Rev bosgip4ai AIS NIVRMW,515117 aw OSCS\=2]-Nuc b 1C*( UMW". Ifni= 128 w 20 1.41a Ai 0 Z EXHIBIT A HORIZONTAL SCALE N FEET 0 300 800 DRAVNG MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED SHADY OAKS PHASE 1 SKILLED NURSING - 60 BEDS ASSISTED LIVING - 40 UNITS MEMORY CARE - 21 UNITS PHASE 2 INDEPENDENT UVING - 115 UNITS PHASE 3 INDEPENDENT LIVING - 84 UNITS CIRCLE HOUSING 16 UNITS SECONDARY ACESS EXISTING PUD BOUNDARY \ I \ I PHASE 4 (3) BROWNSTONES 30 UNITS EACH PROPOSED PUD UNITS PARKING REQUIRED (PREVIOUS PUD-452 UNITS) DUSTING DUSTING CIRCLE HOUSING- 16 UNITS MOTHER HOUSE- 25 UNITS 25 x .25 + 12 = 19 PHASE 1 ASSISTED LIVING - MEMORY CARE - SKILLED NURSING- 40 UNITS 21 UNITS 60 UNITS PHASE 2 INDEPENDENT UVING-115 UNITS FUTURE PHASES INDEPENDENT LIVING-84 UNITS BROWNSTONES - 90 UNITS 451 UNITS 62 x .25 = 15 60x.25+30= 45 115 x 1.5 = 172 84 x 1.5 = 126 90 x 1.5 = 135 512 575 PROVIDED PUD SUBMITTAL 2-3-2020 SISTERS OF CHARITY BVM MOUNT CARMEL PUD SUBMITTAL DUBUQUE, IOWA FIGURE 1.1 CONCEPTUAL PUD SITE PLAN Zoning Advisory Commission Wednesday, March 4, 2020 Letters of opposition/concern STATE OF IOWA {SS: DUBUQUE COUNTY CERTIFICATION OF PUBLICATION I, Suzanne Pike, a Billing Clerk for Woodward Communications, Inc., an Iowa corporation, publisher of the Telegraph Herald, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Dubuque, County of Dubuque and State of Iowa; hereby certify that the attached notice was published in said newspaper on the followingdates: March 06, 2020, and for which the charge is $22.01 Subscribed to before me, a Notary Public in and for Dubuque County, Iowa, this (d day of / I aAock ,20c2O. Notary Public and for Dubuquety, Iowa. JANET K. PAPE Commission Number 199e59 lily Comm.. Exp. DEC 11, 292,2 CIT'v OF DUBUQUE, IO OFFICIAWAL, NOTICE NOTICE is hereby en that the Dubuque City ,Councilwill con ductmpubliceeting hearingsto"com;at - mence at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, M 2020 in -the, Historic Federal ;Buildingarch, '.sec- ond-floor,,Councii # 'tubers, -350 W. i Street, Dubuque, on the following: Planned Unit Devel• opment est(sPtUD) Requ- from P.C.,Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHSSenior Hous- ing Inc., to amend the PUD Planned Unit' De- velopment 'District at1100 Carmel Drive to accommodate a sec- ondary emergency ac- cess for a senior living community. Copies` of supporting documents for the pub- lic "hearings are on file in the City Clerk's Of- fice,' City Hall, 50 W. 13th St., Dubuque, Iowa, '; and may , be viewed during normal working' hours. - WrItten comments re- garding the above pub- lic hearings may be submitted to the City Clerk's Office, 50 W. 13th St., Dubuque, IA 52001, on or before said time of public hearing. At said time and place of public hearings'; all interested citizens r and parties will be given an oppor- tunity to be heard for or against said proposal. Individuals with limit- ed English proficiency, vision, ' hearing " or speech impairments requiring special assis- tance should contact the City Cleric's Office at (563) 589-4100, TDD (563) 690-6678, cty- clerk@cityofclubuque.org as soon as feasible. Deaf or hard -of -hearing individuals can use Re- lay Iowa by dialing 711 or (800) 735-2942. Kevin S. Firnstahl, CMC City Clerk It 3/6 STATE OF IOWA {SS: DUBUQUE COUNTY CERTIFICATION OF PUBLICATION I, Renee Pregler, a Billing Clerk for Woodward Communications, Inc., an Iowa corporation, publisher of the Telegraph Herald, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Dubuque, County of Dubuque and State of Iowa; hereby certify that the attached notice was published in said newspaper on the following dates: March 20; 2020, } and for which the charge is $362.08 Subscribed to before me, a Notary Public in and for Dubuque County, Iowa, this c::)5 day of ,Q,L, , 20cQ O. Notary P .i. i in and for Dubuque County, Iowa. JANET K. PAPE Commission Humber 199669 My Comm. Exp, DEC 11, 2022 IWO ' ri - W.•, e,�E' nOs 0 , I,neS R Oa 1 g, ; rd5 • ° I I : • ° ,..:,, , , 7 ; . • Sr:,fi„ ti+w. %s ;^f- T,. r(°.,...? , , DEVEL .,w. Ist 20•feetfOf clear .Ft :.a P ou . p & ,y, ; < •.. •t1. s ', in. 3,Y,. :. d, CEPTUAL e y reasbetweenbuild ex er!e'nce around, plantmaterials: used to instance shag a level facade k � m ern Ii ill n e .OPMENT : PLAN TO , ante , is-..,required„be-' • ings: shall.. be,, consi; • into, and` through the satisfy.. the;,, require bper' or. prop-; , owner, r' • Building projections awnings, fabric. ban - ACCOMMODATE ' A tween buildings:, dered for easerof main- Campus:.. `All streets •:''meets, of this section : receive greater than:a shall:.' be pedestr".ian- ners„, official , flags; 'of SECONDARY EMER- (3) .Includes 'ease- tenance, to reduce land shall include 2 canopy'• shall meet`'the follow maximum of 50%.cred- scaled:and roportional nations;.: states; or po- , GENCY ACCESS FOR ments, setbacks, wooded needed for such:;func= trees:per 100' feet •.of ing u minimm size re it towards the'number ' tothebuildr' .facade:' litical : ' subdivisions "'THE DEVELOPMENT 'areas, . and landscape tions and, 'to improve road frontage..'These` - .qulrements:• ' .:of,requi,red trees , ,Structur should'be thereof; 'wooden, and OF A:SENIOR LLVING buffers, ,internal road the visual quality of the trees may be Iodated in Plant Type Size. of Preserved Tree consistent z ith rest 'electronic-, : message COMMUNITY.. ; y pcloser -proximity • to Minimum';Size 2 •T1 cCredit-jr under- d nionl'aea and artic center signs are pro - NOW, THEREFORE, BE parking setbacks, ' " land dards Landscape Stan el ch : other to: create . ,.-Canopy tree, 2.1/ py,,o ally on ' .:hibited • .: IT ORDAINED BY' THE scape, excludes all•clustering or, massing . caliper story tree, • .6" to .12" streetfaan ' levations' -d:Sign Lighting : CITY COUNCIL OF 'THE hardscape. 1.General `Description': of., plant Material in- Under -story or orna- caliper -.; 3..„Buildi Materials .Sign illumination shall rbITYL OF DUBUQUE, (4)=Fi ure.1.2: PUD and Intent stead of a consistent mental, tree, 2" caliper 1` evergreen, tree or • A range o acceptable .:comply with;the follow-, IOWA: Setback Requirements. The natural character on -center planting ap or8' height: multi'- stem)understory �buildi g m�terials"shall .ing requirements ..,,' Section 1: That Title (5),Setbackcalculated of the site•, should, be . proach as long: as they,, ;.-. Evergreen' tree, 8' tree,6. 12 3trees ' be consitl red to' en ':.;Illumination ofasign 16 of the;; -City of from edge of pavement .preserved and . en Are, located within the ,;height,::' ' `1' canopy;: or: under Nance: architectural in r Within'100 feet of; and ,Dubuque Code of Ordr f. on, private drives.,`, :hanced as campus land,;,.:, roadway setback; see Deciduous shrub, 18 story::tree 12 to•.30" • terest, ',',and Campus visible :fromi4any;prop- nances, Unified Devel- •.. (6).-:See;Figure 1 i (small),• ..:30. caliper ;: character i•• ert'y zoned iResideritial 3: use •changes. Site land- Figure 2.2: • Typical Fiesgh't opment Code, is hereby and :soaping will be de- Parkwa .Plantin . -,her ht (l'arge) 1;.evergreen.;tree orAII new buildings , shall be::extinguished P PUD "landscape P y 9 9 amended by repealing •- Open`Space Require- 'signed in. a°naturalized 6- Parking Lot Land- Evergreen shrub;.24. multi stem under story ,", should" b:e,co�fistru'cted between th'e hours -of Ordinance 29-18 and, ments. pattern.to complement scape Requirements ' width, ' tree,; more than 12 . with a •blend of high 11:00 � ,p.m:: and • -7:00 adopting . an amended C. Roadways -the bluffs, ravines, and ' The '.following' are ..Species of plant ma height, 4 trees„ quality matenalssuch a:m everyday '• PUD Planned_, Unit De- • The. private roadways other •natural features • standards'for the de- ::terial.shall 'require 'pp- 1 canopy tree or un- as masonry (brick. -and Traffresigns !shall velopment District with in this 'PUD shall, -:`con- .of the site, work with. sign:of parking' lot'inte-" :'proval from the City . der=story •tree, more ',.stone) rand wood- Lim ,,comply . with MUTCD r•,a PR. Planned Residen- form to the. City,; of the. architectural forme rior rand .::perimeter :Plants installed• to than °:, 30' 'caliper 5 ;; Ited amount of "`glass r„'egulationsi tial designation, and a .'Dubuque'Unified D;evel- of buildings, •provide' landscape areas.which satisfy.: the -require trees, .,, skin, i.;or decorative ..e; Location and Scale revised conceptual de- opment Code and SU- shade, create outdoor •,'build' upon the''stan meets of this section 10: Vegetative•Wood '• stucco: may, be'consid • Signs,;shall not.ob- velopment plan to ac-'..DASas:adopted.,by' the • spaces for employees,;';:dards defined •in. the ahali%meet or exceed land,Preservatjonk erediftheyare:consid- structsignifcantarchi eommodate a • secon- .,, City.'_:` residents and visitors ' City :of Dubuque Unithe plant quality stan Wooded ar'eas,r2lacres ered ,accent materials, .tectural details: ;or ' dary:. emergency ad-. D. Parking, .and buffer parking Iota... fled' Development tidards of the. most re- 1. in',size or larger or rather than.:•primary . elements including •cess„acopy ofwhich is , . 1: Parking Require- These landscape sten- :, Code. Figure.2.3: Typi ';- cent,. edition > of . groves of trees, with 10,. , materials. -In addition, windows ,•,;and d'oor- on.-.file:.,with:the- Plan- meets ' :dards ' build on ele cale:ing. ParkLot,'Plant- American Standard for ' or .,more , '.individual' alimited amount of CO -ways : nmg Services ,°Depart- Parking :areas shall ments of the City of ing'reflects a minimum ; Nursery Stock, pub- • trees., having a diame- • ment board siding may , Ail ground mounted , ',ment,' for the, property accommodate • suffi- Dubuque Unified Devel- treatment fora typical ';fished by. the American. ter of atleast•12 inches be used'•in combination signs shall 'be:'.placed +`:at 1100 Carmel Drive as cient parking while opment Code to pro- parking lot. , • ',Association of Nursery; . and'a canopy coverof;`,.•with .: other approved within,., planting ;areas -depicted in.:the, at- minimizing impervious • vide landscape require- •'.Parking,'bays in,ex 'men.,'"Plants.,: shall be at least 50',percent of ,; materials if it is an ac- that are'.coordmatedin I:;tached Exhibit.No-1.. surfaces andthe visual 'ments for plant materi- cess;:-of • 11 spaces in "capable',of withstand- the, area encompassed ',cent ratherthan•prima design for the overall Section 2- Attached , impact , of large ,,lots. al, parkways, and site' length. shall provide . ing the. extremes„ of in- • 'by. the trees: shall be ry material site ., . - ; ,;:: hereto and made a part parking requirements buffer and. parking lot: ,:landscap'ed„islands 'at ' dividual microclimates. , .delineated ,on. the sub- .., Since:alffuturerCam `-'f: Text and, Materials of this zoning reclassi will' follow:;: city- Stan- . treatments that: the ends of each aisle. ,Ail required •land- emitted plans. Such . pus buildings;•will be ;Text on :all,signs shall on approval•is the, ,,dards as'outlined in the Parking. hays,in...excess :, scape, areas not •dedir woodlands :shall have highly „ visible ., from ': ;be:simple. and;easy-to frcati• Preserve a enhance, Conceptual Develop Criy of'Dubuque'Unr the appearance and • of 20 spaces .in length cated to trees, shrubs,-20/o,retentionprotected:. roads +; access -'drives read. ,It is 'important Mount,Carmelfor the shalt di..landsca ed fisting vegetation shall to and open spacee tom-:,, ing.belselessage'word- fied Development Code character of the prop- shall be divided by in . or _preservation: of •ex II; woodland areas re (Section 14-6-Off-Street :arty and its surround- P fined. must' have .a tectureshould be:com- •ing be.selected to max- : Unit Development parking Requirements).;' :legs. islands. and.?provide, be, landscaped with buffer of-50' from the •pleteand. wrap,all`four imize information being marked Exhibit A. it is , 2 ,Alts.urfaceparking . .• Reduce noise.and, air, ;landscaped •islantls at; ';.grass,,ground cover, or trunks of trees to :.be •sides of.: the building. conveyed while using Yrecognized that::minor"-::. •lots 'shall:`be,designed 1; the%endsvofeach:aisle other. landscape treat preserved to: protect. Primary:building mate-- .the most'c•oncise vo- shifts or modifications pollution, light glare, P g riala-used on'the'front- to: soil erosion and solar .. ' A landsca ed island 'nient, not.. • includin the If the City' cabulary A`'sign witha • . to the general plan lay- • Integrate and link heat gain. ••for a single parking bay sand, rock, or pave- determines,: that a: -re- or main, building. facade brief • succinct ,:,mes• - -out may. be' necessary existing. parking: areas shall be a, minimum, of meet quired woodland:,area shall be continued .on sage` ,rs . more '.dser- i and conipatib,le with •Provide buffering be - with new, parking areas tween land uses and: ,4 feet,wide: by;18 feet • For each plant -type cannotbe retained„due . theside;and rear facades. friendly,..andl will•have the• need to, acquire for improved pedestri ,zonin districts of dif-':.'tang and' shall: contain ,;associated with the to`:site constraints,. or Thejnumberof;mate a;,cleaner,,look All di- :workable street.:.pat-" an and auto' circula ferin gintensit - the,', equivalent of twe" landscape ` • require infrastructure; -, require- pals on; any ',exterior rectionallett�,e,ring'shall terns„grades, and us-, ,tion - - •. •p omote the' reser- (2) plant units > ' ments of this section, ,ments .- . replacement building•1face should be ,bea mix .of;iipper=.;and ' able building sites The; Accommodate vation of .existing si - • A.Iandscaped isl•and no single plant species _trees" must be.. planted limitedto no morethan ,lower case lettering ',,,genera l plan layout: in- ' edestrian routes a g 9 . for a double-parking shall represent more ,ata rate of anetree for.. three fo .avoid .;clutter .with the first letter, of p nificant vegetation. eluding. the, ;relation,, • ..th'rough..parking areas •.Improve the appear- ,-bay, shall. be. a ,mini-. than 40% of, the total every 200 square. feet and visual overload..' every word capitalized. ship of land uses to the to,building;entrances. once of parking areas • mum of 9 feet w' iderhy plantings. of woodland -:removed . .The following'building Avoid spacing, .letters • general plan ••Accommodate snow and' properties -abut-,. 36 shall • Plant material shall from- the I .retention• materials shal,or build- frame- feeE long and L riot -be . ,too close.aogether, work and the develop-, removal and storage- - ting, public rights -of. contain` the:: equivalent::: be installed so it re area. When. that is.not used as,exteri crowding, will make the ment _ requirement., o .Comply, with City 'way. offour (4) plant units. - ' ' rates to the natural en feasible mitigation ing materials or on any ,.sign more difficult;:to s2. Landscape Re vironment and habitat may,. take! place ,:.b i eaerior walls:', finishes.or . ,read hall+ be c , shall be used'as the im lighting standards and If the required-plant•plementation guide minimize impact on ing ratio is not obtain "' in which it is placed. planting supplementaSigns.s on - The provisions of - the quiremrall .City of Dubuque Unified surrounding proper- Overall Site Land able . in a .healthy Native vegetation shall trees, at.. • an- offsite-'precast: `concrefe, pan t[ucted,of; high=quail ties- scape Requirements landscape ' environ be utilized in all in,.woodland approved .by els (tilt: wall)' that are ty,. durable, materials. :.Development Code ...3. Alt parking.struc- . Minimum permeable ment,'then the remain, • stances unless site the.City. , not exposed aggregate, Brick.:.'and mortar' or shall apply to the'de-'. turres shallbedesigned' ;open •space will be cal' ing plant. ,material .,, conditions or availabiht.Exceotions ..,. hammered sandblast-. natural stone:"'bases are velopment, of the prop- ., to: • .. ' • culated at 40 percent-. required by' fills, calcu :';ay of species warrant With the ',incorpora ed or< covered with a . „to be.constru:cted with arty , included`• 'in this Complywith City re of the entire site deli=:<.latson maybe placed in ..the use of cultivars or ton-. of Best' Manage- cementbased, acrylic ,materialsathat, eomple- Planned UnitDevelop quirements for vehicu- 'sated under review. close proximity of the similar materials coin meet Practices (BMPs), coating. ment,the.,building:. ar- ment unless specifical- . far and pedestrian Permeable, open,;,; parking lot-. This adds .'patible with the area..' 'Law-, Impactl: Develop: Metal panels.with,a . chitecture.,.:,: I.y-;,regulated ,,by.: - this access, ADA, compati; .space calculations may ,,; tional area should be -.::• The scale and nature ment practices .'(LIDS) depth', of -less- than; 1 • • .g- Exceptions ; .. Ordinance. bility;: safety; lighting ;include easement ar=;;••:.integrated with the ,l,of landscape, material .or :other ..Sustainable inch or a thickness less , Home:addresss.orfam- A ' Use Regulations ." and ventilation'.• eas, perimeter set •:Parking ,lot .perimeter <should be appropriate Design practices into than uS Standard 26. ily,:name. plaques:•rare Permitted Uses • Clearly•identify with '.backs, . woodlands, landscape ' to the site and strut . the,,, project.. the` •.re- gauge:,' . excluded from • •the 1: Cemetery,. Mau-`•.signage.-all .pedestrian :landscape buffers, in- All:parking lotaand- turns. For example, quired••landscaping:. Mirrored glasswith a aboverrequirements. ' and. 'vehicular, 2. Hos ice, ;: en, ternal� proadway set- scape::"are b manner reflec 0/° shall -no h. Exterro.r Graphics• soleumpColumbanum trances to backs (parkways), and protectedball'sed ,larger seal complement,. raged in. a, � ° tcov- , or Art ma .be•reduced or ar reflectance greater parking , y rdised should be c 3.,Housing,for the el ..: structures: parking totlandscape• curbs with:a: minimum, ,ed„ by :,.larger scaled 'that;;will enhance the er more, than 40% `of ; Painting, of- garage derly'or persons with` Integrate. ample heightof4inches: ,plants ,Plant material .designconcept'at."the exteriorwalls-,' doors .-with;• multiple „,;Minimum; -site ,land dssabilitles. ,+ °'.floor'to-c'eihng, heights y i s. Exceptfor iiiswains,. `should be'Selected for .discretion oflhe Cstylof,- ti4 'Building Colors colors or designs is . t"rbrary • `, `,') �ir •lit- '-d _ scape P•lant quantities.: to e ,the ,;: inished`''.., grade_'_;its. form, texture; Dubuqua :'.. - r T ";;use of a:liimited prohibited Al;l ,garage • o$sa� and --fshe �betcalculated aper •-' 5. Licensed adult day, visibility . . accom- (crown) or interior " and concern for its ulti "Considerations s?iail • rahge'bfneirtral`or eat= 'doors shall be .one col- one plant per unit per •services modate a wide variety plantingareas shall not. mate growth. include the#ollowmgr vial. colors is encour- or, with a second color , 2,000 square feet of 6. Multiple -family.-, of vehicle'sizes:.t' , ,site landscape,area. be.lasthan,3.•inches ' 9. Tree Survey and �;SWalesor'bio:filters, aged Building„.Color`s allowedforaccentson- dwellin . .. 9 •Incorporate: where • lands trees Planted above'curb or pa ement. Preservation Plan• placed m islands or.,at shall , ,be ,compatible jy, 7i Nursing,•or conva ' feasible fiat` floors to in the arkwa or in A:: landscaped�buffer , As part of any level :the ,perimeter::of park with the, Campus char _ ;I Performance Stan- 5.=-lescence home: minimize•driver confu:the,public right-of-way'',: strip shall be_pr`ovided..'':opment plan submis ing. `areas designed ,to •acter.i"and subtly; en, ,dards ';8.: Parking. structure >„sion .and ::'maximize "p, aloe the frontage of F:`sion, a 'tree . survey improve the'. filtration hance -: a : buildings ::_The.development and 9 Off street parkin shall not be • counted:; g g light, ;risibility and • ,,toward 'fulfillment of. gar and quality"f:of storm vrsuNlaturalacolors an ,masntenance.of:uees,in all surface parkin shall be conducted by a 30: Place',of renlbious ty ' '. imum. site. re, at least 10' feet -,certified arborist' The wat oruosas to mod d ,this PUD iDistrict.shall ' g t ueremsents for number, g p survey shall •delineate , .a,. - • i f , .• , • • ors :be established in :con 9 safe eas yP ify •cam lementar -• exercise orasser y • Irate rate.into land wide aloe the ubhc ., p p y col .,,11. Single- Family:..,: contour -and -,grading loftrees.• right-of-way Thee the limits of all vege the.t aoraqu,antity,of shall.beusedforprima- .formance:with-.the:for Dwelling (detached)*- opportunities to mini- ! .parking; lot land buffer;, strip ,shall be .: 'toted woodland: areas landscape, materials ry building facades and •lowing'standards:. 12. Two -Family ' mize :above '''grade i•requirements,' Planted: with _ a, mini;" on site. All s ecim_en may,,,be allowed,,in;ex- roof .'„forms :,`.Neutral 1. Plating Subdivi= Dwelling (duplex)* n" .°!hei ht' and,masswhen ,scape mum,:of 7 plant ;units p change for�ithe,installa= earth; tones (beige to, lion plats and-improve- g shall not .be counted .trees • not: located in `13;,Townhouse*?` a ro' riate x er 100 '•e ,`;feet of • '�tioli sof,plrant;a acres brown)"shades:of.gray, m 1 shall .be Alpl: arkin" `al:�a'sms ' o yard fulfillment ofp,ti e , �,; 7t aY " :vegetated, woo• I,nd., Sae'. the fees,_, trail $b l Colo e`(brick Limited to Seniors or `f'mitt n accor- 9:rs-( ist,Sth.,,Diab li l:,-gRfI l'`-wih ' 1'46tla imleen re= ..:',Ar > ssr • r,.:ar ,tha ,eas re:; r peren>:: red :¢ en M^n vY,=w ee vn Yticle Yl. tide P,Y qul pient for n e""rvw ati �lrall d:. •r r greate �atvrDrrLci wt gill enhance 'blue) o�i Subdued :Lan ;:Sub •gil-1, :,of * scape,. standards t x cif�trees.i .4 Breast hl.,?aght ;(D8H� r a °•`Conditional Uses Sub forth in:'.' ,Section . r fiances`° are,permitted �the,filtering'capaclty`of hues'are:acLep"tattle' the"City . of,;;,Dub,uque Existing trees tobe shall be -tagged' identi l Landscape Stan' retained o' sate antl- romote, ntrasting, accent Development act fo the provisions of dards ! n site moron° ,Provided they,are mte-- fled . and . 'recorded he' . p Co Ugified Section 16-8.5-,of the :.4. -"Dimensional, Re counted toward •fulfill grated with the land- gased`anthis free Sur .. the,use of diverse na- colors, which are'com : 'Code. Unified Development ,gwrements meet of the landsca -. scape,. screening; descr- ve all trees in:.below tsvespecles: ;_ patible.with, the.:colors 2 Site;: Plana: :Final Code::• Minimu'inparking.stall :<• P ibedabove The.use.of e proposed,swales,or..-,Issted..,,ab�ove,'ar'e ac- site development• plans ..1.,Group homes. mg:requirements average 6r.poor'oxiou `dimensions:'shall . be, :; 3. Plant Units '•biahltration ,''methods tion, • of a „-noxious ,filters using •a•strut ceptabae for secondary shall:.,be: submitted in 8.5' x;18'.,with 24' drive,• A plant unit,is a men of •landscape ;! antl s acres, •or. that men aural; pervious surface facade accordance with Asti 2. Keeping .ofhorses s ai accent col- or'ponies aisles to accommodate surement used, to• de: drainage design 'Is en sure. ,less than 8" DBH .may be used•for park- •, ors.ordetails cle 12,Site: Plans.and 3:Licensed !childcare 'two=wa °traffi y' c.;Ac terrnsne the uanti of ., • g c'an be -removed from Pnrriary, bright or ,Article -13 ;Site Design enter , sible•parkingspace re- `ci' A landscaped buffer r e atthe dss videdrsuch f atureaa e,' excessively. r ...brilliant ,Standards Prior to; eon- c q q , 4: Museum '.`' uirem.ents shall Plant material re viral„i stir of at least"seven .:'the p op rth designed to: withstand colors.,,:,are prohibited ',struction,of each: build- 5: Seminary•4 r to standard forscreen!ng.andShad. : feePwideshalt bepro assistn.ofahe ;ownen.ta 'veh gu.lar. toads ; unless;used m very„hm ing and vehicle related „,AccessorWUses: Sub- `` .ou alined n the -City of . mg. One plant unit is vided along: ;;the Pre- ,assist .sn providing a. G.:Archltectural Stan ited' :'ap nless ,:other - comprised ofany ofthe healthier growing nevi• r pllcations for : feature u'" jest;. to .provisions of Dubuque Unified Devel-• ' ,following elements: ' maining sides: of all : roa ter for the exist- dards subtle tnm4 accents, or wise exempted by Arti- Section 16 3:8 of the. opment Code (Section . ;,• Onecanopytree' • surface parking',;_lots._ .ing tree stands. Alt buildings ,shall specifically .for':.art/ cle 12 . Unified ' Development 14-7 Accessible Parking rl- rwo under -story or The: buffer ,strip. shall• .: ; The tree inventory have a balanced irate' sculptiral elements • Of' 3 Storm'WaterCon `, f Code- Space. Requirement) , ; . be..planted with a mini „ grated design theme :, a,burldshg .. ue nce.,:,The develo r''' ,l Any use customari q 3,, .x, ornamental trees r r shall rate:::tree:.condr '' _, . _. in «fad ode: co' p 5:,,:-Bicycle Paazking, .. ; , :Ifiaxof 5 plant,, units n2`and` form. as" :foist tlavesao.,mcorpo - Biuld g,5a,., er-of-eachaotshala: be ly'in'cidentai'and,su r r: "' ,r two eve• cgree•ntrees, P tro. rr y_ , 'rate solid 'architecture Ors should !be kept to, .:,responsible':,for ,provid- :.dinate to the rprin� ------ e::parking {sh ai .Seven decids (i or erP• iorlto slant n ,all ' ows. that fits within aCam-:,. two'or.;three� colors =or ing surface..or subsur,- be, .cons ere, . an fir -Smarr; deciduous or p g .. 5 - POOR CONDI use it serves- ` placed in safe ` convey evergreen) interior areas shall be .TION: A rating of .5 pus -wide character',' hues, of sndividual col face conveyances) of :',-.2Detached garage nient . locations- -near i Plant unit calculations` :excavate'd to a depth"of "shall'be given to a tree 1.- Bullding':Scale, and . ors The' color of visible : storm :water: from the 3. Fence Y .'„ building entrances'and 3 •feet and amended Massing roof forms should also not: to existing, storm 4:.Garage sales : establish the .total that. has d a,significant comply with Section ;quantity of required With a,,soil mixture:con- deadwood; bad sweep The size and. onenfa be considered when se : sewers', -or, to flow line 5 Keepingof hens , 16-13-3.5.1 of the Uni- ,; plant:material while al-, sisting of{ 1:' ,:, part 'or dean, 'disease or tion,of, buildings is critr',• lectingcolors ' .,of open. drainage:ways 6-.'Home-based`busi- . fied Development Code.' 'lowing the landscape screened topsoll;!,l part:: damage by -insect ical" to' . achieving , ;a,. 5 -Sustainable De- • loutside:,.:the tot in, a nesses.' ." E. Loading and': Ser- 'architect flexibility, .in existing topsoil,•:and 2 ; P �. or larvae,.,'light • balanced overall..Cam :sign Principles ;, means, that :is satisfaC- 7: `Noa-commercial vice Areas• •allocating and dis Parts of organic. corn,,., `Wing damage, split, or Pus design; The follow- Best management toryto. the Engineering •garden, greenhouse or The visual impact of .tributing plant materi post „or•,..an : approved ;other •physical damage. ,ing,:: • items• 'shall `be practices ford:efficient • Department•of the City nursery, .' loadingand service ar- :al. Existing plant; .;equivalent, with,the ex 4,-BELOW AV.ERAGE addressed' to achieve', and devel= of, Dubuque:, Other ap- tion of - -sustainable 8: Satellite receiving :: eas-on a building,. site material protected dui;;: _cep her soil,, ,CONDITION Arating;of appropriate scale and opment.shalt betaken • ptlicable regulations•en- dish or adjacent sites and mixtures as •,necessary masssing into -consideration: The ,,forced by-the::City of .:Solarcollector in .construction may:' treeshall be-; rune to a',than,.g e following design.princi- •.Dubuque ;,relative to ' uses should be' mini- ,be used to Satisfythe,.. to accommodate Low ,tree that has some Rather sin I 10::Sport;;recreation mized: Loading and reinUri-re';''. impact, Developmdie,; deadwood minor large budding masses, ples,highlight;areas to: ,storm water manage-, or' outdoor ,` ,00long plant. rnateria q,., c service areas are not meets ,provided the:. features T1 ,require sweep or lean,. distort builds rigs shall be clus •focus -on for future de ament and,,N 4drarnage equipment allowed in the right -of -, meet may bey waived ..ed Shape trunk of bark •tared •together 'where , ueloprnent shall apply to proper .. type and t size of `:the . p , 11'Storage building ,way. or_:within any set- ;:plant: -material meets-, upon: confirmation by .• . • • ' multiple feasible'to promote':ef.: Recycled materials. ties in the,RID-District '12: , Tennis court, backs: ` the City Planner that .;.• ficientostreet/driveway Local; source materi- , 4. Noises: .Noises 1. All loading' and s the:. Plant. material: stems „Or poor pliysrcal swimming pool; orsim er- the' pre-existrngsoll is systems, shared park- al acquisition generated -;,within' the standards. and the. , quality. ,filar permanent facility': vide .areas stroll be de-:. plant material is not an suitable for ''plantin',g • 3 -FAIR CONDITION ..ing,;: integrated open;;' Reduced construe- PUD., Distnc: shall. be 13: Wind turbine si ned to: - •., .invasive or noxious ya, and drainage, and that : A..rating of 3- shall .be ,spaces and `pedestrian:._ tion Waste regulated. by::Chapter 9 (building -mounted) ' Provide access .to a - no "amendments are ' linkages between Health :conscious 33 Article lU Noises, of riety' given-to,a.tree. that is B' :Bulk Regulations street ` or alley: m• a 4. Perimeter Buffer.•.necessar . -. ., ::waverage;::in condition buildings aterials.•and : the City;o „Dubuque building, m (1).Minimum building, '- manner that will create ;Landscape Requirements, All;landscaped;areas ''=form,' . physical state Where feasible, systems:, . ••Coif' eof,:Ordrnances:: and,or::garage setback; the least possible inter,- < Perimeterbuffer land-'t :that':are notsplanted: in:r'"a earanceand health: buildings and„ main enr ..,Energy efficient ma 5 Phasedr,:construc- from faience with. through sca a will hef `: create:a grass shall be,fi,_ 2 ABOVE AVERAGE: be:. located ion of ;b:iarld rigs and Public. rightof=' p p Wished tries' Shall terialsandsystems t : . ;transition'from the ad m With a`-3 inch.,la ,,A ;rating of 2 shall.,be..,, .. • , bilita- -p p',aces The way ,,,or edge of pave traffic movements'. No yer of along the Campus Loop •:Building reha, ailing s, meet .. curb cut shall .exceed rmulchc Road toNf star a wel- construction) of;; off Minimum lot area ;jacent residential uses' given to a tree that'has tion. 30feetinwitlth. on the north and west 7 Intersection Visr, little 'or no. tlamag' coming pedestrian en .;. Stormwater...Beet street parking. spaces 'Single -Family Resi- 2: Accommodate ma- to the campus. Plant bility' - sound, good shape and vironmen• t, • ".In no- Management -Prat- maybe. phased inpro- adentiar, 5,000' square neuvering space to al-, ,material shall consist • . In .accordance, with form, and is, good in instance shall°a build trees portion to the percent ' • sfeEt low vehicles to access of a variety of decidu- ..the requirements . of 'overall physical quality. Ing's rear entrance or Vegetative, swains, .age .,of ,total building - • Two -Family and exit the space the Cit of 'Dubu Dubuque , EX T CON,service area,be, orient, ram ,,gardens:and ex- floor- area -. onstructed (du ,lex),,;5,00,0, square tie and evergreen y q CELLEN, p without. ,; having :.,to .;trees ancJ': shrubs as : , •Stree Tree andFland;' . DITION . irrg`of.1,'.ed. towards;ttthe Loop; paniied_vietlands::; , at any: one:: ,time. feet ...make backin move- sca In c on Publrc� A raf,Road or internal access g ho' in :-Figure .i"i'' p g shall'be given to. a tree Water recapture Ground+, area seat aside • Townhouse,• ments`on;o'r,into a pub Typical Perimeter.:.• 9 y. , that;;is, excellent in -ap drives ';, . systems ,.: :for future . parking, g s 1 00 Ise or private Buffer Plantin A. maim hing, Wa Policy Pearance; .condition rentation . loading:, space's : or . Rr square wnf iri u street. ! nothing•shall be erect' Buildm or Cround:. water 9 Multrfamily, :3 Providefrxed'tight- mum total ofthree (3).; ed;>.placed, Planted, •or and, form,' balanced and';: design :elements recharge driveways;or for park - dwellings Z 000 square '.ingthat prevents direct, • plant units er. 100 hn •« 2'allowed,., to grow . in}, ,branching and healthy shall encourage overall, Low volume lingo ',,.ing.::: provided in excess feet/du glare• of,';beams onto, dar feet of bufrer'shall>' 'such'.,a,'manner, as,to,; The• following `tree -visual continuity tion systems of ,the': minimum re-' Mr:nrmumlotf?outage -any other, -,property or be installed. impede or obstruct;vi- species, identified are 'To,the,greatest,'ex- H. Sigi:Stan,dards - guired-numberof.park- width, 50 feet street by the -use of lu .,Only required access Sion between a height considered noxious: tent possible• buildings. 1 :Sign Standards ;• ing, spaces°shall not Minimum lot frontage, 'minaire.:.: cutoffs.. All . drives and sidewalks `. of 3 to 10 feet above •Buckthorn shall be • oriented .:to a , Purpose „l, reduce 'th,e.9: minimum townhouse,"16 feet/du ;, lighting; shall be re shall break through a the. road, crown in ar- The, following tree take advantage of riot The,purposejof�these required area'foropen , Maximum building. ' duced-to; security lev-, ;.perimeter landscape eas adjacent to inter- species .identified are Ural light view, sheds , sign „standards, is, ,to space l •-coverage,-40 o -. els •.at. °all -''times of .. sectina streets. drives ,-,..,�,ae.eA';..,,ao�i....h,o ' and.. Passive Solar-7-OP- maintain- andienhance .6 Other,fCodes: and coverage 40° Maximum bueidmg height • Number of stories, 4 • Height i60 feet 'Minimum yards • Front, 25 feet: (1) • Side (2); 10:feet • Rear, 20.feet . OFFICIAL' 4 Open Space: Require - PUBLICATION,;. i mints ORDINANCE NO.12-20 • • Minimum permeable AN ORDINANCE OFTHNG- open, space (3),40% - ' CITY of Setback requirements OF THE ,. 'CITY " ; OF DUBUQUE -CODE OF (4)roadway UNIFIED . • Internal, DEVELOPMENT,,CODE setbacls1s'r(5),,25,feet , i BY REPEALING IORDI- Site perimeter set- NANCE 29-18 AND back (6), 25 feet ADOPTING AN AMEND- Lanscape buffer re- ED PUD ' PLANNED • quirements•(6) UNIT DEVELOPMENT site perimeter land WITH A'PR PLANNED scape buffer, 25feet RESIDENTIAL DESIG- gels tat .:all times, of nonu`se , n 4. Have masonryor other screening mate - trials that complement materials used on cam- pus buildings, and that are effective in every season. 5. Comply, with the landscape screening requirements set forth in Section F: Landscape Standards. '6. Outside storage'of materials, equipment or trucks, shall be kept tto a minimum and lo- cated in areas that are screened from_ views by,a permanent, solid :and year-round screen- ing element. Sharing of 'open space.;; • Every,,, penrneter, buffer landscape open space shalt, be de signed and mamtamed to preserve, unob.- structed views of the street and sidewalk at points of access and' to not interfere with or be damaged by work with- . in any -public ;utility • easement, unless the City shall determine that no other location is reasonably feasible. 5. Parkway Land:' scape Requirements,,' A consistently planted parkway will add to the overall Campus char- acter by providing an appealing arrival se - nets; tlnves ;considered'undesirable or alie�ys- Thes^;area is Box`Elder.. defined by: • SiberiamEim , •T.rees,,shall,be plant- .)Nhite'Mulberry ed at: least^ fifty (50)r,r; The preservation. of feet'. from the edge of existing healthytrees street intersections, .and natural landscape traffic control', lights ; features on a site is en an'd stop signs; couraged. The number • at least ten (10) feet ' of new plant materials from driveways; may bereduced when • and fifteen (15) feet ?existing trees of a de= for alleys sirable 'species in a • Tre,es shall be plant- healthy growing condi- ed at ; least two feet tion are preserved from theback .of curb. within the area of the 8- .Plant Materials' . perimeter landscape or Plant' material; used to ;open space. Credit for satisfy the standards the preservation of ex - of this 'section shall - isting trees 8 inches in .comply w'eth the follow ` °caliper (deciduous or 8 ingstandards' feet in 'height (ever- • Unless otherwise ex- green) shall be as fol- ortuneties 2 .Arefil ecturall Styles' and Building' Matenals & .Colorse 'Architectural styles 'Should be carefully bal- anted"and' coordinated with the style, `materi- als, color.:'and massing of++other buildings seen throughout the Campus.' • A balance of`propor- tions and scale through ' vertical and horizontal rhythm and`,ifacade ar-, ticulation should be 'set. Unarticulated, flat front buildings are pro- hibited. • A building's main en'- trance should: be clear - he aesthete environ mint;, -maintain; pedes trian,and traffic, safety and minimize the dis- tractions,hazards and obstructions.=caused by signs, and -to minimize the +possible adverse effects of,'' signs on "nearby public and pri- vate property. b. Sign Area, 'Height and Number The,•sizeaheight, and number:, of allowed signs shall = be regulat- ed by Article 15-11.13 of the Unified:Develop- ment Code unless fur- ther regulated by the PUD Ordinance. c. Prohibited Signs ;Regulations These ;regulations] dd not<re- °: lieve an i�owner.from .other applicable City, County, State or Feder- al Codes:Lr}egulations, laws°and'Other ,controls relative to the plan- ning, construction, op- eration .:and mana- gement of property in the P,UD'District. J. Transfer of Owner- -Transfer of ownership or lease of property in this PUD District shall include -in the transfer or lease agreement a provision that the pur- chaser or lessee ac- knowledges awareness Planning Services Department City Hall 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 (563) 589-4210 phone (563) 589-4221 fax (563) 690-6678 TDD planning@cityofdubuque.org Cody Austin IIW PC 4155 Pennsylvania Ave. Dubuque, IA 52002 Masterpiece on the Mississippi RE: City Council Public Hearing — PUD Request Dear Applicant: Dubuque Irrthl 11111.' 2007.2012.2013 2017*2019 March 6, 2020 The City Council will consider your Planned Unit Development (PUD) request for 1100 Mt. Carmel Drive at a public hearing on March 16, 2020. Please attend this meeting, or send a representative to the meeting in your place to present your request and answer questions. City Council meetings begin at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 2nd Floor, Historic Federal Building (Post Office), 350 W. 6th Street, Dubuque, Iowa. Please contact the Planning Services Department at (563) 589-4210 if you need more information or have any questions. Sincere Wally erni •. nt Associate Planner Enclosures cc: Kevin Firnstahl, City Clerk Alan Stache, BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc., 1100 Carmel Dr., Dubuque, IA 52003 Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork Jane Glennon From: Gwen Kosel <gwen@getmovingdbq.com> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 3:40 PM To: Kris Gorton Design; Greg GOrton; Planning Subject: 1845 South Grandview - Emergency lane Guy Hemenway and the Dubuque Planning Department - I was contacted by my clients, Kris and James (Greg) Gorton, of 1845 S Grandview. They wondered if locating a fire lane at the end of their lot and connecting Shady Oaks and their private lane would have an economic impact on their property value. I believe that it does have a negative impact on their value. I am a Realtor currently with EXIT Realty Dubuque and have sold property in our market, specializing in classic, historical and architectural homes. I have listed and sold about 500 homes in the past 17 years. I sold The Gorton's this property above assessed value on 12/21/18. It was marketed as a "Private setting" which is not only desirable in the Dubuque market but not common on South Grandview, that combination alone adds value. I have personally lived on South Grandview for the past 16 years. Personally and professionally, to be on South Grandview without the vehicle and pedestrian traffic adds quantifiable value to this and the adjacent properties as well. As I understand it, the fire lane will be for emergency use only and gated at the top and the bottom for only emergency vehicles. This lane would detract from the value of this home and the surrounding homes making it no longer "private" in nature. As a resident of South Grandview, I often call it one of Dubuque's longest parks resulting in walkers, runners and dog walkers. It is my belief that the pedestrian traffic on a closed off lane that could be accessed by foot for recreational purposes would pose additional pedestrian "traffic". Which is one of the reasons the value of these home and its neighbors would be higher, the privacy. I do not suppose that It would provide a natural loop or turn around for those pedestrians seeking and easy access to S Grandview and Shady Oaks via this "short cut". I know that it would increase traffic on the private lane if the emergency lane was put in. I can not see this addition to the neighborhood as one that would provide or improve the enjoyment for the neighboring properties in this well established and exclusive neighborhood. Providing fencing to keep the pedestrians out of the space would also be a distraction to the value of these properties and not be conducive to the shape and constructs of this neighborhoods. I hope that the BVM, INC and Planning can find an alternative to marring this well established neighborhood. The value loss that I see for this and the neighboring properties would be about 10% of the homes value, more if fencing would be used as a barrier. Thank you - 1 Gwen Kosel 445 S Grandview Ave Dubuque Iowa Exit Realty Dubuque - 1200 Cedar Cross Road Dubuque Iowa. Unique in design! One of Dubuques Landmarks, built in 1951 for the "Roshek" family. Concrete hollow core floors on main level, beautiful walnut cabinetry & built ins throughout. Library has built in bar, fireplace, leather wallpaper, and built in organ. Floor to ceiling windows, Italian marble flooring, glass tiled walls in many baths. Beautiful kitchen with new quartz counters, 16x8 butlers pantry with SS counters. 4 fireplaces. Hot tub/sauna room in the LL. Newer 2 car carport plus 28x23 garaging LL. 2 additional Click here to report this email as spam. 2 Jane Glennon From: Kris Gorton Design <krisgortondesign@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 5:56 PM To: Jane Glennon; Travis Schrobilgen; Wally Wernimont Cc: Wally Wernimont; Travis Schrobilgen; Jane Glennon Subject: Re: Public Notification Procedures Guy, thanks for the info and response. Kris On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 4:17 PM Guy Hemenway <Ghemenwa@cityofdubuque.org> wrote: Ms. Gorton Thank you for your inquiry regarding the City's public notification procedures. State of Iowa law requires that notification for all rezoning and district amendment requests be published in the public notices section of the newspaper of record at least 24 hours before the public hearing. However, the City's Unified Development Code requires that notification be published in the paper of record no farther out than 20 days before the meeting and no closer than seven days before the meeting. Those terms have been met regarding notification for the request filed by BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. for an amendment to their PR Planned Residential district to accommodate a secondary emergency access for a senior living community. In addition to the State of Iowa notification requirements, the Unified Development Code also requires that a "reasonable effort" be made to mail notices directly to property owners within 200 feet of the property requested to be rezoned no farther out than 20 days before the meeting and no closer than seven days before the meeting. These terms have also been met. You note that a number of residents within the 200 foot buffer are currently out of town. Unfortunately, Planning Staff cannot control for absenteeism as we have no way of determining residents whereabouts at the time of mailing. It is also important to note that the Zoning Advisory Commission simply makes a recommendation to the City Council that ultimately approves or denies the request at another public hearing where neighbors will be welcome to speak. If you have any questions regarding this information please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Guy Ilemcnwoy Assistant Planner 563-589-4210 ghemenwac cityofdubuque.orq City of Dubuque Planning Services i Jane Glennon From: Yahoo Mail <mjgarrity_44@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 1:35 AM To: Planning Subject: BVM easement I just received word of a meeting on March 4 this year. We cannot attend as we are out of town and we're unaware of planning- zoning meeting.. We currently reside at 1849 S Grandview. That property shares a common drive to 3 homes further down private drive. That private drive was born out of intense long litigation many years ago. The result of the out of court agreement has resulted in many years of good neighbor. The agreement is quite clear that the 3 homes each own a segment of drive(hence 3 lots). Each resident to use private drive and not encumber or add any traffic to existing drive. We disagree with any and all movement to alter/change that agreement made many years ago. It is obvious the purpose of agreement is to provide a tranquil neighborhood and not provide access road across private drive to serve hundreds of apartments I would like planning and zoning to withhold passing any regulations until all parties can be notified. Mike Garrity- Diana Garrity 1849 s.Grandview Dubuque iowa Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad Click here to report this email as spam. 1 Jane Glennon From: Guy Hemenway Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 10:14 AM To: Planning; ggorton68@yahoo.com Cc: Wally Wernimont Subject: RE: BVM Emergency Access Drive Ms. Gorton Thank you for the additional information provided for the Zoning Advisory Commission's consideration. This information will be made part of the public record and will be included in Commissions agenda packet. If you have any additional questions please feel free to contact me. Guy Ilemenwoy Assistant Planner 563-589-4210 ghemenwa(a�cityofdubuque.orq City of Dubuque Planning Services From: Planning Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 9:23 AM To: Wally Wernimont <Wwernimo@cityofdubuque.org>; Guy Hemenway <Ghemenwa@cityofdubuque.org> Subject: FW: BVM Additional comments for the ZAC meeting. Jane Glennon Planning Services Secretary City of Dubuque 50 W. 13'h Street Dubuque, IA 52001 563.589.4210 From: Greg GOrton [mailto:ggorton68@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 9:17 AM To: Planning <planning@cityofdubuque.org> Subject: BVM Please acknowledge the receipt of this email and confirm its inclusion in the packet that goes out today to the Zoning Advisory Commission. Dear BOARD MEMBERS, 1 We are concerned about the road that the BVM, Inc. is requesting for their new development. We feel it will bring increased traffic to the neighborhood, which has been a quiet area with only 3 homes having access since 1950. We purchased it because it was a limited access, private and quiet lot. We feel this will dramatically change it and it hurts our enjoyment of the property. We feel will be burdened with walkers, joggers, people just wandering around on a lane that only 3 homes use. We feel it will become a walking path and our dog will be constantly agitated due to the additional people. We fear the deer will quit sleeping on the road and strolling around due to the additional traffic. We feel it will hamper our enjoyment of the lane to have other cars and pedestrians crossing our private lane. We planned on our grandchildren learning how to bike on this lane because it is so nice and flat unlike most of the area. It is concerning that we will have cross traffic on the lane. My daughters practice sprinting on the lane because there are only 3 houses we fear they will be hit by a person confused by the "emergency access". The BVM, Inc. has 4 years of construction ahead of them with this project for this ONE PHASE. We fear they will use this emergency access for construction and that will hurt our property value. This would damage roads, make excessive noise and be very disruptive to our neighborhood. We have already had to call them for working with loud equipment at 6 am on Saturday morning. So I am concerned that they forget they are part of a neighborhood. They intern gave me the number to the head of construction which I really don't feel like I should be responsible for policing laws. We fear the BVM, Inc. will keep developing and then we will have a larger business next to our residential home again deterring property values. We for these reasons of increased traffic, increased noise, increased foot traffic, potential loitering and littering (cigs/and dog poo) we oppose the lane. 2 On the Shady Oaks Street. The homes on Shady Oaks will face additional traffic which will be hard for the quiet cull de sac. The steep incline and then tight turn the firetruck will make seems quite tight. If bikers trespass on that road it could be quite dangerous with a steep hill running into Shady Oaks. The neighbors will not be able to use it as it is only for emergency vehicles but will have the eye sore of a gate and fence and perhaps a no trespassing sign on it. They may have a possible chain link fence around the whole thing it is yet to be determined. If they continue to develop and are allowed to make this a public Street it damages the Small neighborhood feel that they have. The lots on Shady Oaks are quite expensive and this will disrupt the exclusivity that they have paid for... It will create a lot more traffic in that area if people are coming through there. As of today there are a handful of homes on that Street and Cull de Sac vs. a PUD with unlimited units. If you allow construction trucks through there it will be horrible for Shady Oaks, dirty and dusty, and messy for 4 years of ONLY PHASE ONE with no end in sight. The run off to Shady Oaks Street will be immense especially since they get a lot of water already. Water sits on that sidewalk currently days after rain leaves. How do you plan to divert water? Who pays if there are water issues on neighboring properties? Who pays if there are water issues on the Street? The BVM's have told us they are trying to take away the busy street and parking in the front of their land but essentially I fear they will divert it to this Street. This is many homes with a high tax burden. Why would they bear the brunt of this decision? In essence it takes an exclusive neighborhood and hurts the property value and may lead to even more loss of value if it becomes a street. The following are some questions if have as well and would appreciate if you can address each one definitively. 3 1. Is the lane standard incline for a fire truck? 2. is it standard incline for a "emergency road" 3. I was told by Fire Marshall Dalsing that there would be a gate on Shady Oaks at the street and a gate on the other side of the private lane. That it can only be used for by emergency vehicles and the city will enforce all of those rules in perpetuity. I was told they would be fined if the BVM, Inc. used it for other reasons. Is that true? I was told this is the STANDARD for Emergency Access Roads? Where is this covered in city code? Who sets the standards? If this is a judgement by Fire Marshall Dalsing, what has the history been? Has it been granted before? If so where? If not why would he deviate from the standard that he has found acceptable in the past? 4. Is there a zoning change to allow this? 5. My neighbor told me he was going to be given a permanent easement on the "emergency road". However, that is in direct conflict with what Fire Marshall Dalsing said to me. So how is it possible to use an "emergency only" access road for a driveway access for a private citizen? What is the history on this? Why would an exception be made? What other projects for "emergency access" have had exceptions? If there are none why would it be done now? In light of the fact that there are other options should those not be fully explored before this is decided? 6. Who guarantees me that this will not be used for construction? Workers access during the duration of the project? Then changed when they do the next phase into an "emergency access"? What is the standard on this? Who enforces it? 7. Can this road be "given to the city like other roads" which will make it public? If so what recourse do neighbors have before this is done? If this passes are we one step closer to this being an all access road? 8. The lawyer for the BVM said that after 20 years use changes regardless of what original intent was. Is that correct? 9. If there is damage to the private lane how will it be paid for? 10. If there is lack of access to the private lane how are we going to get to our property? 11. If there is damage due to increased foot traffic to the private lane, who is responsible? 12. If there is additional wear and tear to the private lane who will pays for it? If Wayne's cement is affected who pays for that? 13. If there is additional wear and tear on the private lane during construction who will be responsible financially for it? 14. Who will be responsible for legal fees if there are issues with construction? Damage etc.? 15. What happens if we have construction delays and we can't get to our property? 16. If there are additional walkers and bikers coming off the BVM, Inc., "emergency access lane" on to the private lane and they are injured who pays for it? If I can't see a biker coming down the path but I am driving on my private lane and we collide who is responsible? I am not trespassing but they are? 17. How will BVM, Inc. deter and handle additional littering and smokers loitering at the edge of the property? They currently have some issues with this on the Grandview side of their property. 18. What will the gates look like? What is standard? Are there rules regarding this? 19. Who normally approves gates? 4 20. Will there be signs posted to deter wandering? Who determines what the signs look like? What does the code say? 21. What happens if a fire truck bottoms out on this very steep access? How will a second round of construction differ from the first round? 22. What if the road fails because it is too steep? 23. Will BVM Inc. carry extra insurance to protect against the damage to the private lane? 24. How many additional people will this emergency lane bring on to the private lane? 25. How many additional units are they planning to construct in BVM, Inc.? If they construct more units in the meadow. Will this "emergency exit" be sufficient? Or will they need to make it larger? Will it become a driveway for those units as well? 26. Can someone help me understand is assisted living a business and falls within the code for zoning? 27. When the city allowed this to pass through PUD why did they not have a plan for "emergency access"? 28. Did the BVM, Inc.'s original plan make a lane to the softball field? 29. I was told the softball field plan was too expensive. Isn't the importance of neighborhoods to be balanced with the business of BVM, Inc.? 30. Nursing homes are quite profitable even if they are non-profit so why can't they pay the extra money for the sake of the neighborhood? And neighbors? 31. Who compensates us for the loss of property value? 32. If they are creating an emergency access road...does it need to have a sidewalk? Do they have room for a side walk? What is the standard? 33. I was told they can put a barrier, even a chain link fence around the whole "emergency access" if they do this it will be an eye sore. Who determines this? What are the rules regarding fences in Dubuque? 34. How fast will firetrucks and emergency vehicles be driving on this "emergency access". There is a speed limit on the private lane they are crossing. How will that work? 35. Will there be a stop sign? 36. Who has right of way on the lane vs. "emergency access"? 37. If I am jogging down my lane and a biker hits me or a car hits me who is liable? 38. If I hit a biker that is coming fast down the "emergency access" road, who is responsible? Are they considered trespassing? 39. If people veer off the "emergency access" onto our private lane are they trespassing? 40. The private lane is very skinny and not really made for extra traffic so what if we have issues with extra traffic on it? 41. Where will the water go from this lane? Will it be pushed down to Shady Oaks because there will be considerable water coming down the steep grade? 42. This land and lot was not part of the original rezoning request? So why is this an amendment rather than a whole new zoning issue for RESIDENTIAL? BVM Inc. plans to sell this house off how does that effect the private lane? And the previous agreements to that lane? If you cannot answer all these questions can you delay approval until we have answers since approving a development without an "emergency access" is how we got in this predicament in the first place? Also I am very curious as to why this is part of an existing PUD as it is not part of the original land in the PUD? So should this not go through the standard zoning procedure for residential because neighbors knew that the BVM, Inc. passed a PUD but they did not know it would affect established private lanes, established residential properties and homes? BVM 5 Inc. Purchased a home not rights for a Zoning Change to that land, lot line that affects the values of other homes. Thank you kindly, Kris Gorton Click here to report this email as spam. 6 ..ectzte *-1 From: Connie W Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 5:28 PM To: ghemenwa@cityofdubuque.org Cc: Krisgortondesign@gmail.com Subject: PUD I Connie Bries Welp at 1056 shady Oaks Dr, Dubuque, IA 52003. I do not want this road to go into are subdivisions. It will not only hurt the property value. Its also very quiet in Shady oaks thats the reason i live here. Thank you Connie Bries Welp Kevin Firnstahl From: Brad Cavanagh Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 8:54 PM To: Kevin Firnstahl Cc: Crenna Brumwell; Mike Van Milligen Subject: Fw: 1023 Shady Oaks Dr. Attachments: PUDaccess.JPG; PUD access ammendment.jpg I just received this email. I have not read it and I'm forwarding it to you, Kevin, to include with the information for the public hearing on Monday. Thank you. Brad Cavanagh Ward Four City Council Representative City of Dubuque, Iowa 563.690.6508 From: DMV Gordon <dawnellegordon@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 8:40:06 PM To: Brad Cavanagh <Bcavanagh@cityofdubuque.org> Subject: Fwd: 1023 Shady Oaks Dr. HI Brad I'm writing to let you know that we oppose the amendment to the PUD to accommodate a secondary access road through Shady Oaks Dr. I reside at 1023 Shady Oaks Dr, Dubuque, IA 52003. This road will enter Shady Oaks Dr directly across the road where my home is located. My concern is that there are other options to place this emergency access road that will not enter into a residential neighborhood and risk disrupting It as well as lowering property values. Being this is a large project that will house many seniors, use of this road will be more frequent than most other PUDs. Older adults and seniors require more frequent emergency treatment and therefore increases the likelihood of being used on a regular basis especially if this is later rezoned once again to become a public road. I am grossly concerned that changing the zoning of this easement to become an access road will significantly increase the water run off onto my property. This is already an issue for our property because it is downhill from Shady Oaks Drive and the water run off from 3 vacant and undeveloped plots to the North of our property as well as the to west. I have attempted to contact City Engineering about this problem via email and phone in October 2019 and did not receive a response. I have also attempted to contact the property owners of the undeveloped plots (Tshiggfrie) via phone, email and facebook also without a response. I'm concerned that adding additional pavement to the area will increase the water run off will cause flooding and sink holes on and around my property. I will attach the email that includes the details of this specific problem. While I don't expect this problem to be addressed by the City Council during this proposal, I hope that you consider the impact that this "emergency access" road would have on my property as well as the neighborhood. Lastly, the resident's opinions on the matter should be considered as the residents pay significant property taxes annually while the PUD is a tax exempt entity and providing profits to an out of state developer and does not pay taxes to the City. This road has the potential to decrease the value of our property and therefore decrease the tax revenue this residents pay to the city as a result. While it adds value to the community and I don't oppose the existence of the PUD, it appears that the opinions of the residents that this directly impacts are being ignored while a less i disruptive alternative solution could be considered. It does NOT appear that an access road from the BVM property to enter Julien Dubuque Road at the southend of their property is not being considered. This alternative route would not impact a residential community. This land is owned by the City of Dubuque and the City could offer to sell or give the land needed for a secondary emergency access road without disrupting any business or residential areas. Furthermore, the city could potentially generate some revenue with this alternative. While this would not be a cheaper alternative for BVM, Inc, being that the project is a multi- million dollar project, it would be worth their investment. Thank you for listening Dr. Patrick Gordon and Ms Dawnelle Gordon 1023 Shady Oaks Dr. Dubuque, IA Forwarded message From: DMV Gordon <dawnellegordon@gmail.com> Date: Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 2:38 PM Subject: 1023 Shady Oaks Dr. To: <engineer@cityofdubuque.org> HI We have a problem with storm water running down from 3 empty lots uphill from our property. The drain that we have on our property becomes overwhelmed and can't handle this when there is heavy rain. It gets clogged with leaves and backs up risking flooding to our home. We've attempted to call the owners of the lot without a response (Tschiggfrie Excavating). We've attempted to build a burn to stop the flow and planted greenery on it and that has done nothing. There's nothing left to do so now we're attempting to contact the city. This has been a problem for years and we've tried to remedy it ourselves. We've gotten estimates regarding landscaping to redirect the water and after getting rough estimates, we don't feel it is our responsibility to absorb that cost ourselves to fix this. I'm including photos to show you what the problem is. My cell phone number is 563-676-7509 & my husband's cell is 563-505-1965 (area codes need to be dialed). Thank you 2 Dawnelle Gordon Click here to report this email as spam. -_�• -`i. Kevin Firnstahl From: Thomas King III <tjandiu|ieking@gmai|zom> Sent: Monday, March 16,202O10:36AM To: Kevin Finnstah| Subject: PUD amendment opposition T0the Dubuque city council, I'm writing this letter in strong opposition to the PUD amendment up for consideration to allow an emergency access road totie into the current Shady Oaks subdivision. VVeare inopposition for many reasons including: 1. Disruption to the existing neighborhood Throughout the planning process ,we, the adjacent neighbors of the sisters of charity/BVM/Mt. Carmel were reassured that there would be minimal if any disruption to our current neighborhood. Allowing a street to be added into our existing neighborhood would have immediate as well as future potential ramifications. This change in emergency access road only benefits the PUD. An alternative route away from the Grandview current exit would provide a safer, secondary route. Also , a route that would not impact the adjacent neighbors is what was promised with the original meetings. 2. Rain/storm water run off There has been no study that shows that this future road would not have any Negative impact on the current flow of water tothe first few lots of the subdivision. There is currently a huge amount of water run off that occurs in the first few lots of the subdivision and adding a road in this area would only add tofurther problems. 3. Pedestrians/children in the neighborhood There are many, many pedestrians that utilize Shady Oaks subdivision for walking and biking. This is along with the approximately twenty kids that live in the neighborhood. Adding an emergency road now, that could be later changed to a potentially more permanent road later would have a negative impact on the public's ability to safely use the subdivision for walking, biking, etc' Thanks for your time and consideration on this very important matter. Dr. 6\Mrs. Thomas and Julie King 1O81Shady Oaks Drive Dubuque, Iowa SJ003 1 Click here to report this email as spam. 2 Kevin Firnstahl From: Planning Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:16 PM To: Laura Carstens; Guy Hemenway; Kevin Firnstahl Subject: FW: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. I printed and put the copy with the BVM file for tonight's meeting. Jane Glennon Planning Services Secretary City of Dubuque 50 W. 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001 563.589.4210 From: Mark S [mailto:mjsupple@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:04 PM To: Planning <planning@cityofdubuque.org> Subject: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. 3/16/2020 RE: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. I am currently a resident of 1056 Shady Oaks Drive and am against the proposal to amend the proposed PUD to accommodate a secondary access road for the senior living community. 1) 1056 Shady Oaks was never informed or made aware of the said proposal until a neighbor had brought it to our attention. My understanding is that a letter of intent was supposedly sent out which we have yet to receive. 2) I've never seen an emergency access road run parallel to a main access road, this defeats the purpose of an "Emergency Access Road". From a topology point of view, Julien Dubuque Drive would be a more logical choice as the road leads in the opposite direction of the main road to the Senior Living Community. Regards Mark Supple Click here to report this email as spam. i Kevin Firnstahl From: Thomas King III <tjandjulieking@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:36 AM To: Kevin Firnstahl Subject: PUD amendment opposition To the Dubuque city council, I'm writing this letter in strong opposition to the PUD amendment up for consideration to allow an emergency access road to tie into the current Shady Oaks subdivision. We are in opposition for many reasons including: 1. Disruption to the existing neighborhood Throughout the planning process , we, the adjacent neighbors of the sisters of charity/BVM/Mt. Carmel were reassured that there would be minimal if any disruption to our current neighborhood. Allowing a street to be added into our existing neighborhood would have immediate as well as future potential ramifications. This change in emergency access road only benefits the PUD. An alternative route away from the Grandview current exit would provide a safer, secondary route. Also , a route that would not impact the adjacent neighbors is what was promised with the original meetings. 2. Rain/storm water run off There has been no study that shows that this future road would not have any Negative impact on the current flow of water to the first few lots of the subdivision. There is currently a huge amount of water run off that occurs in the first few lots of the subdivision and adding a road in this area would only add to further problems. 3. Pedestrians/children in the neighborhood There are many, many pedestrians that utilize Shady Oaks subdivision for walking and biking. This is along with the approximately twenty kids that live in the neighborhood. Adding an emergency road now, that could be later changed to a potentially more permanent road later would have a negative impact on the public's ability to safely use the subdivision for walking, biking, etc.. Thanks for your time and consideration on this very important matter. Dr. & Mrs. Thomas and Julie King 1081 Shady Oaks Drive Dubuque, Iowa 52003 1 Kevin Firnstahl From: Planning Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:16 PM To: Laura Carstens; Guy Hemenway; Kevin Firnstahl Subject: FW: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. printed and put the copy with the BVM file for tonight's meeting. Jane Glennon Planning Services Secretary City of Dubuque 50 W. 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001 563.589.4210 From: Mark S [mailto:mjsupple@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:04 PM To: Planning <planning@cityofdubuque.org> Subject: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. 3/16/2020 RE: IIW, P.C. Cody T. Austin / BVM-PHS Senior Housing Inc. I am currently a resident of 105,6 Shady Oaks Drive and am against the proposal to amend the proposed PUD to accommodate a secondary access road for the senior living community. 1) 1056 Shady Oaks was never informed or made aware of the said proposal until a neighbor had brought it to our attention. My understanding is that a letter of intent was supposedly sent out which we have yet to receive. 2) I've never seen an emergency access road run parallel to a main access road, this defeats the purpose of an "Emergency Access Road". From a topology point of view, Julien Dubuque Drive would be a more logical choice as the road leads in the opposite direction of the main road to the Senior Living Community. Regards Mark Supple Click here to report this email as spam. 1 Kevin Firnstahl From: kaylyn bodine <kaylynbodine@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 5:39 PM To: CtyClerk Subject: Meeting tonight Hello I am Kaylyn Hoffmann (Bodine) and I do not approve of the emergency road on Shady Oaks Drive. I grew up in this beautiful, well established neighborhood and knew safety was never an issue for me. With this ordinance change, you will be disrupting the flow of my childhood neighborhood where my parents still reside today. Before we know it, you will change this emergency road into a common route of access for all citizens that will disrupt this neighborhood and bring in unneeded traffic. Please find a different route that will not put elderly and families with small children at risk. Your route is not necessary and I know you can find a different way while leaving our peaceful neighborhood alone. Thank you for listening. Kaylyn Hoffmann (Bodine) Click https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/jfgIZYFW36nGX2PQPOmvUuhr9La_g-yvYLodjYl- 4M3MSXCx0vBrE9BEBezXMRvu3YPNxgXxCc-W4Hi4JZPuPA== to report this email as spam. 1 Kevin Firnstahl From: Kathy Bodine <bodinedbq@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 5:24 PM To: CtyClerk Subject: Rezoning This is Kathy Bodine on Shady Oaks Dr. I am against rezoning parcel on Shady Oaks Dr. for emergency vehicles to enter and exit property behind us. We live on a beautiful well established street and would like it to stay that way. I feel this is a stepping stone to turn it into a street. There is a lot of land behind us that they want to rezone . With over 400 residents who could reside there and many many acres not developed yet this could turn into a busy, busy road. Thank you for listening to me. I am a very concerned neighbor of the sisters. Kathy Bodine Click https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/Cgon6filySrGX2PQPOmvUikZGg4PuPFTJW2x0Seo9u2f9FRViAmwOBFtjEGsakjo3YPNxgX xCc-W4Hi4JZPuPA== to report this email as spam. 1 Kevin Firnstahl From: Jolene Horsfield <dalejhorse@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 5:15 PM To: CtyClerk Subject: Rezoning We are against the rezoning of the property in Shady Oaks for street access from the new development at Mt. Carmel. Dale & Jolene Horsfield 1059 Shady Oaks Drive Sent Pad Click https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/OUvDF- HC_wHGX2PQPOmvUvmldA89nuwIwnYKt9xtvUGvCcBaLucnNBEBezXMRvu3YPNxgXxCc-W4Hi4JZPuPA== to report this email as spam. 1 Kevin Firnstahl From: Kathy Bodine <bodinedbq@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 4:53 PM To: CtyClerk Subject: Rezoning property on Shady Oaks Dr. This is Kathy Bodine and I am against the rezoning for emergency vehicles to enter and exit the Development behind us. I feel this is a stepping stone for them to eventually turn it into a street. We are in a beautiful established neighborhood. Kathy Bodine Click https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/RPDh_TWfZ1XGX2PQPOmvUsk03K51hN5dJGoFIdGJKJI0t7GE8tApcgag0pxQp2MF3YPN xgXxCc-DL_bKPtQR4w== to report this email as spam. 1 HYDRANT FROM MY KITCHEN WINDOW DOCUMENT Al PHOTO NOT ENLARGED AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SCALE ON THE S HOOK..IT IS VERY CLOSE... HYDRANT FROM MY KITCHEN WINDOW IN RELATION TO THE ONE FIRE MARSHAL SAYS HE WILL USE DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. DOCUMENT 1 Single Family driveway 1 access point DOCUMENT B1 Table 5I-4.02: Agricultural Acute angle and Radius Acute angle Acute Radius Decrease (feet) Obtuse Radius Increase (feet) S5° to 90° 0 0 75° to S5~ 5 feet 5 feet 65° to 75c 5 feet 10 feet 60° to 65° 10 feet 15 feet Where the entrance radius specified is greater than the distance between the back of curb and the front edge of the sidewalk the radius may be reduced to meet the available space but should be no less than 10 feet, An option to the radius under this condition is the use of flared entrances. When a flare is used, it should be 3 feet wide and should be constructed from the back of curb to the sidewalk. If no sidewalk exists. flares should be 10 feet long. 3. For individual properties, the number of entrances should be as follows: a. Single Family (SF) Residential: Each SF residential property is limited to one access point. However, where houses are located on corner lots, have extra wide frontage, or on heav traveled roadway more than one access point may be allowed to eliminate backing out on a heavily traveled roadway. b. Multi -family (ME) Residential: Access is determined by information provided by the Owner Developer in a Trntfic Impact Report and by comments generated during the iurisclictlon En2weetreve,,v: and acceptance of that report. c. Commercial: Conunercial property having less than 150 feet ot'frontage and located mid - block is limed woone access point to the street. An exception to this rule may be where a building is constructed in the Huddle of a lot and parking is provided for each side of the building. A second access point may be allowed for commercial property having more than 150 feet of frontage_ For commercial property located on a confer, one access to each street may be alloyed, provided dimensions are adequate from the intersecting street to the proposed entrance, (See Section 5I-3 - Access Location, Spacing, Turn Lanes, and Medians). d. Industrial: Access is determined on a case -by -case basis. The Jurisdiction will consider good traffic engineering practice and may require information to be provided by the applicant in a Traffic Impact Report, (See Section 5I-3 - .Access Location, Spacing, Turn Lanes, and \t�,t; ,,,�� DOCUMENT B2 PRINCIPLE 7 CONFLICT AREAS DOCUMENT B2 Figure 5I-3.01: Types of Vehicular Conflicts n Diverging le..1°C;Merging v Weaving o Crossing C. Separate Conflict Areas (Principle 7) Separating conflict areas allows drivers to address one potential set of conflicts at a time_ The higher the speed, the longer the distance a vehicle will travel during a given perception -reaction time. Also, drivers need more tune to react to complex conflict areas. Hence minimum separation distances are a function of both the speed of traffic on a given section of roadway and the complexity of the decision with which the driver may be presented. The complexity of the problem, in turn, increases with both the number and type of conflicts and the volume of traffic_ Various methods that can be utilized to separate conflict areas inclgde the following: • 14inimum access spacing • Minimum corner clearance • Minimum property line clearance • Limit the number of accesses per property • Designate the access for each property Document B3 Speed Differentials Chapter 5 - Roadway Design E. Driveway Grades 5I-4 - Driveway Design Criteria 1. Slopes vs. Speed Differential: Driveway slope is important due to speed differential_ Turning vehicles must slow appreciably to enter a driveway_ The steeper the driveway, the more vehicles must slow in order to prevent "bottoming out", increasing the speed differential with through traffic and increasing the possibility of rear -end collisions_ Table 5I-4.04: Driveway Slope and Entry Speed Driveway Slope Typical Driveway Entry Speed Greater than 15% Less than 8 mph 14 to 15% 8 mph 12 to 13% 9 mph 10 to 11(3/0 10mph 8 to 9% 11 mph 6 to 7% 12 mph 4to5% 13mph 2to3% 14mph 0 to 2% About 15 mph Sauce: Oregon State University, 1998 A speed differential much above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety concerns. When the speed differential becomes very large (say, 30 to 35 miles per hour), the likelihood of traffic crashes involving fast-moving through vehicles colliding with turning vehicles increases very quickly. Rear -end collisions are very common on roads and streets when large speed differentials exist and the density of commercial driveways is high. When the speed differential is high, it is also more likely that when crashes do occur they will be more severe, causing greater property damage and a greater chance of injury or fatalities. Keeping the speed differential low is very important for safety reasons, as the table below indicates_ Table 51-4.05: Speed Differential and Crashes When the Speed Differential Between Turning and Through Traffic Is: The Ltlkelihood of Crashes Is: 10 mph Low 20 mph 3 times greater than at 10 mph 30 mph 23 times greater than at 10 mph 35 mph 90 times greater than at 10 mph Source: Oregon State University, 1998 DOCUMENT B4 Driveway slopes recommended roadway- The National Hi wav Institutes course workbook on Access Management recommends the following maximum driveway slopes for urban/suburban streets: • Arterial 3 to 4% • Collector 5 to 6°%0 • Local Less than S% (may use 9° 0 in special areas) These slopes were chosen to keep the speed differential at or below 20 miles per hour. See Figures 5I-4-02A and 5I-4-02B. Chapter 5 - Roadway Design 5 Revised: 2013 Edition 5I-4 - Driveway Design Criteria Figure 51-4,02A: Typical Section - Commercial/Industrial and Residential Entrance g, Roadway Paving Sidewalk (thickness same as driveway) Algebraic Difference Between gl and g2: a Commercialllndustriai: Not to exceed 9% b. Resictial: Not to exceed 12% Algebraic Difference Between g2 and g3: a. Commercial/Industrial: Not to exceed 6% b. Residential: Not to exceed 8% _Maximum Slope of g3 = 2% (ADA compliance) Crest 10 Vertaci! Corsi; (if mired) isting Entrance DOCUMENT B5 In researching the INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE which the city uses according to the Fire Chief of Dubuque, the code sites D106.3 for the distance between two fire apparatus access roads. These two accesses do not appear to meet this qualifi- cation as on this scale map that the PUD provided they this D106.3 Remoteness Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one-half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. Here is a map of the PUD. I used the measuring tool and it appears to be 2168.1 mi-.e..-„�. .<a�,»:,.x a . x 4 r,:�. w•,o-. c► :a«w. c,..,_a,.<::,,.,.F.:n... ■ ...., -m._ * + — o x the next map I shows the entrance that the BVM's are currently using and the "new access/ driveway" which appears to be less than 1/2 of the dimension that the length of the PUD which would not satisfy the code that the PUD needs to satisfy. DOCUMENT B6 SECOND MAP MEASUREMENT - C 0 Q H,U.x Wont psabecoc.9.1.1o+r,...A w...tfr:'rsertlx.I133‘d29M4Scslam,• G6...t<++,....C. S. + Li 0 '•.r land Records DOCUMENT B7 Highlighted indicates homes who are against you allowing the request of CONNECTING COMMERCIAL PUL* R1 ZONING DOCUMENT B 8 , ., =,, . ,,,,,-0, whir tonni. , „, • , , = , .,- ••, • : umng OW 19gas • -Mod mi • boc,k, ,•• - •• , ,== .., , i , • = = a aa a Sc. cd rem ard -aboat the pone/ ;eve., tenant t4 talka railmag now proosna k. al a/ tar Erato thir) earl $a do rated a nal el tarroannlet men ,,,re 7 Vikit , rooming nada haw rinkiterne Woke nam it* netriblecOO Croaaa oal monlarn i Vol*, olActeagentAerektrekinanaellj C4Art gr.. , a. tr.,. oar! Om !cc ca rms 'mut, ra Pe ,r.1,4•%, ci "wee ter,40,344 ,ty.1,r,,r4,1$ (nrrynnrµi noalacocameca mantra:al pork* novae, erceon Ovocrota RAU Wens and arribes Van are ant,* conerectoal re androt•••1•44 pop" Qsa some Orrotioper•pet occur* rn er slog ••••50,00)••••41 Tv c•pri den sleUxels MI aerf erdereocamint of oafac Wading% OnT Of Ono nee reeteted IMMO,* Of leen ra to Mow Of* or baler ecOmpoOr.d. owl toe Orat iierairre liv• ...•••••ta twit oopi soAdv ••• = *W1~ ••••••Wialid #041sontam•••1* •••411••0 iitiVir,‘,01•1 -•.' 6i4teu4ico Non IN itobs OW smi•14.***aptutcaroSItisaidal aor , geo,veat On 04 000,w,Afita dada 54 d t,094, f•M*4 NW,* 4 a carrells a ntordretie reoral ae=4 a r coma...are ecto 4 41%9,44 lo a commetaca evencl Mamma.. 0,4W tnni mon am Creak/1h NA plbrin1114 484 1,01,•8 :',..0.•••1 efii.1:1,1 Thia ;welts •Storaljnavoz+ forocitem NO laserefell arnareraatbra ogle nen &Kt, Oho MI 41,',..0 .0400**loos** Ow**. Netelikoh e•••• ••••••••t• meillenerd nailLto rood harre ha maenad Navy talk ad* tun wit crormantei red*Pdanorpret Ion beam erdaph ea ordure randove ead rrn , Weeds he rale* and rasopearee *Penh ha eadadenora end oloareerho ' Frooso, It, troweavivon**14,04.4voinuo tv maiwiaishawat, 0 , ,, A lootothwaitaind ratoick owt toptort two foroolvettit Imaukslet VA -en sornhre proposes a now n4 of prOcerty li,sr a col akmod ba te 1 1 meant t bang dined no or OM MLA, aCch C. *WO...3 We• "th raorang WWI apricall it, VC•on a Mance to protract lin or ler proose and INO nearty property horns re, van a dense Pa cornmeal on eara sa crone C.NTIMI4IS an be nada in heel eta shad and In parson at re Zmearop Agleam Cermsaeon and Cap C4urc* paCk 'mono Um •••=•flog pets** wooden open earnrohroben behead hp groat/int he nertenes and illor Ch ago" fagoting he aortra and or owned use pi property WIDOW tioiamittli41074,0Mitinsiew •,•,•,0,,,14 No., 4444bi..49. woarierhor Vol dat 4•=4416•048•• • t•••••=010, sneer and her derh•orterr rn &went pr 3080.4 0,1,ge t•.* DOCUMENT B9 1) ALLOWING ENCROACHMENT OF THOSE PRIVATE PROPERTIES. DEFINITION OF ENCROACHMENT as defined by Sudas. Encroachment: an advancement or intrusion beyond the lines or limits as designated and established by the City Code. DOCUMENT B10 PETITION The people in Shady Oaks Development include: Gortons 1845 S. Grandview 11 and Julie King 1081 Shady Oaks Mr. Mrs. Flynn 1047 Shady Oaks Brad Plummer 1041 Shady Oaks Kathy Bodine 1062 Shady Oaks Tracy John Tallent 1078 Shady Oaks Thiers 2 addresses on Shady Oaks Rank 209 Hidden Oaks Dawnelle Gordon 1023 Shady Oaks °donneII 1064 Shady Oaks Connie Bries 1056 Shady Oaks Mike Steele 1067 Shad Oaks Webber 1084 Shady Oaks Emily Duer S. Grandview Mike Garrity S. Grandview Mr. Chandlee S. Grandview Breslins Rank Matter nach Horstield Castaneda °Donnell Manternach DOCUMENT B11 DAWNELLE GORDON 2. 5-24.5CThe proposed development plan shall NOT WITH APPROPRIATE USE OR ENJOYMENT OF THE PROPERTY ON ABUTTING DISTRICTS. 3. 5-24.5 B THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS DESIGNED TO BE FUNCTIONALLY INTEGRATED INTO THE EXISTING CITY STREETS AND STORM WATER SYSTEM. WE ARE ALREADY AT MAX CAPACITY. DAWNELLE directly Apposite the proposed driveway has existing wate r issues. She has provided images to the City. THE CITY REQUIRES A PERMIT f0•t.!_CUM ASOC vEWAYcosst RICTON Mat. la a. Aepd.ea f I Carravcao' Crr Atttron Yo argotb contuc4. neCO OACI MOW *ter Cr c►.rye inr cu 4IDC niaaaplr. at 7S7ssISS t p '!e1 10,"*" F:.7.'T COS* 114,. Ore err mew' +Am 1 pee,e 1MM AIVIK d7lV fCr P'enne M ac.ve_aH 1 Ler under M lea I N qe •t71 Cr; o'W► 1"' 4(..CiFA^ Y{as1 `4t NW* endar4e ess to re zs*e7 et re pe0W. iNeve M "On** ed *Kee 111e1. set NP,IP Jr0 aoem el re pert' Corn re two 1R1 .VC1h ere, welomance so re cry M•Ifu Y.r 1..Ne4 Srvv,1 teM44 e&r ntetnay Id .. O1ti.s+n m o1 •t+eM r •MTV 1< ..A4 be Im * ace/ Code j 11-.7Pi C wglreetIN CeMillelet sealr Wawa irsosiIswA Tlawsions Ts'samonse '1`r ~We C11 re Mery geteeet that alee et a frN04on to re vowel et re rewo 1 Op TO WOO* * fer %KA brnN sa AO elavel i PNCeNarl l MR t1 re acumen pit is maw al /Pe erzeose G the Maw; property Y mussel, etu+pn n re r eemeete'1 as nay keen rer be t."3 .0~604 nrce wf b e+e prrrerrlaw O h PA1c Math verse ce.m 42%7 CoOt j a4.=.yr DOCUMENT B12 FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION SAFETY TO 1845 AND 1847 S. GRANVEIW I noted on the map below the difference and it is 150 FT. closer to go to the hydrant than the "new access/driveway". io it clearly is not as sufficient as using what we currently have in place. v.rt, .n. +�.5 n. a x i� v.o- I! S.rv-. "..i.�.e.�n.., w Y .�,. • } — O X Hydrant location for 1845 S. Grandview according to Hazard HUB Enter your property by Address, Neighborhood, City, or Zip 1845 S Grandview Ave, Dubuque, Iowa, 52003, USA Distance to Nearest Fire Hydrant = < 250 Feet from Reported Hydrant DOCUMENT B13 SIGHT DISTANCE D. Sight Distance I. Sight distance is based upon AASIITO stopping sight distance criteria. however, the height of an object is increased from 2.0 feet to 3.5 fret to acknowledge an approaching vehicle as the "object" of concern. Therefore, sight distance at an access location is measured from the driver's height of eye (3.5 feet) to the height of approaching vehicle (3.5 feet). An access location should be established where desirable sight distance is available, as shown below. Table 5L-4.03: Desirable Sight Distances Design Speed (mph) Intersection S'ght Distance (feet) Left Turn front Sire Right Turn from Stop and Crossing Maneuver 55 610 530 50 555 440 45 500 430 40 445 3S5 35 390 335 30 335 290 25 280 240 Note: the sight distances shown above are for a stopped passenger car to turn unto or cross a two lane roadway with no median and grades of 3°a or less. For conditions other than those stated, refer to the 2004 AASHTO "Green Book" for additional information. Source: Based on Exhibit 9-55 and Exhibit 9-58 of the 2004 AASIITO "Green Boot ." 3. On a four lane divided primary highway where access is proposed at a location not to be served by a median crossover, sight distance is required only in the direction of the flow of traffic. DOCUMENT B14 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE SECTION D104 COMMERCIAL AXD L1-DtSTRLAL DEVELOPMENTS 1104.1 Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height. Buildings or facilities exceeding30 feet (9144 mm) or three stones in height shall have not fewer than two means of se apparatus access for each structure. )104.2 Buildings exceeding 62,000 square feet in area. Buildings or facilities having a gross building Urea of more than 62,000 square feet (5760 rn) shall be provided pith two eparate and approved fire apparatus access roads. :xception: Projects having a gross building area of up to 124,000 square feet (11 520 m:) that have a single approved fire apparatus access road where all buildings are equipped uoughout with approved automatic sprinkler ststenu. 1104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall iagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. SECTION D102 REQUIRED ACCESS 1102.1 Access and loading. Facilities, buildings or portions of buildings hereafter constructed shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of an approved fire apparatus ccess road with an asphalt, concrete or other approved driving surface capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing up to 75,000 pounds (34 050 kg). /lark Burkle ire Marshal 1 West 9th Street tubuque, Iowa 52001-4839 563) 589-4161 office 563) 543-6522 cell 563) 589-4209 fax iburkle@cityofdubuque.org cityofdubuque.org We oppose the approval for PUD amendment 29-20due to the traffic patterns it will create. The roadway down to Shady Oaks will create a loop behind the area. It will bring more traffic along the backyards on S. Grandview where kids currently play. There is also kids running up and down the private lane in the back and this new traffic will cross this area. As cars go up thisdrive they will be met with a gate and then will end up using a private road to get back on the public street. This creates confusion for residents, drivers, and children playing up there. The developments goal to create a steep road down to Shady Oaks which already has standing water on it for days after a rain- fall will overwhelm the already stressed sewer system in the area. There is a ton of water coming down from S. Grandview already and this steeper incline will bring more right to one point. We are concerned that the neighborhood will be responsible for dealing with all the negative effects from this and the burden if things continue to deteriorate. it will also create a really steep road down to Shady Oaks. Where these two hills collide and the blind spots created with the retaining walls we feel the road will be dangerous to the comnity, children who play in the area walkers and other resi- dents. We are very concerned that people can be injured and harmed. Especially if this becomes a bike path that people use. The speed generated coming down the hills is extremely dangerous and we do not want to see anyone hurt or worse. This road was made for the small number of homes it services and the new road will add additional traffic and a lot of water run off which is already a huge issue for some of the homes on this end of the street. We are concerned that the neighborhood will bear the brunt of these issue financially and we are concerned that the project is so desired by the city that people may look past all of these issues and we are not against progress but would want the developers to go to the original plan of going to the softball fields or elsewhere. Water run off, Traffic Patterns just two reasons to Support Petition to Oppose PUD 29-20 z 946401 61tMr Ll tI4G - 64 Wd1S "`-- CIRCLE 1431,sr10 16 LNIT5 0EC310ARY ACM Kris Gorton started this petition to City Council of Dubuque PHR3r SmuUD NJRSNG - to BEDS A5315111) UN4C - 46 L60T9 1.19163RY CARE - 21 UNITS MAZE 2 HISOI ADERt1 U61610 - 119 LRAM PHA% 4 (3) R2C.11045T31'ES 300 LIMITS EACH PHASE 3 PRQPOSSED PUQUNITS PARKING REQUIRED (mtrims5 PL4?-452 VATS) --71-7 [1, MOM MEItE6'i CIRCLE H6US 4C- 16 LIWS MOTHER MOUSE- 23 L64TS 25 11 .25 4. 12 + 19 1M1ASt 1 A7 5TED UW4G- 40 UNITS 62 • .25 A. 15 MEM04Y CARE- 21 NF15 SE[LED 1J.l* 4T,- 60 10415 60 :.25 ♦ 30 + 45 Ehi5S-2 640E6VIDEMT LMi G-115 16415 W RlAsrt 98017010OIT U11143-84 UNITS nesite mats - 90 MITI 431 UPC'S 113 s 1.3 .172 84 • 1.5 +126 60. 1.5 135 512 575 PR14SD SAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD YELLOW IS NEW ROAD-575 UNITS (ADD 250 EMPOYEES + FUTURE ) BLACK IS LAND DEVELOPMENT OWNS AND ALL THOSE BUILDINGS RED LINE IS MY PRIVATE ROAD-3 FAMILY HOMES BLUE MY HOUSE THE UNMARKED ROAD IS NEIGHBORHOOD APPROX 30 FAMILY HOMES Petition signatures Comments Name Location Date Comment Michelle Mentz Dubuque, IA 2020.03.07 "I live near this neighborhood too and want it to stay a quiet residential street." Erika O'Donnell Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 "I do not want our neighborhood to be disrupted with an "emergency drive", connecting our quiet, residential neighborhood to a large planned unit development. This could go from a rarefy used "emergency exit" to an open access road, bringing much more traffic to a neighborhood frequented by walkers, bikers, runners and neighborhood playing children. The developers have other options for their "emergency drive" but this is the easiest and cheapest, therefore this is what they're pushing for, despite the detriment to our neighborhood." Dawnelle Gordon Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 "Please don't build this road across from my home. It Is directly East from my home and by paving It, it will bring water when it rains, straight towards my home. I already am downhill from the north and west side of my horn (to the north is paved as well)." Anna Schuster dubuque, lA 2020-03-07 "I love this neighborhood. If you plant a unit this big at the end of this quiet street and connect streets allowing traffic to flow all over from an agenda of greed and without thinking about how your decisions affect others -BOOM, no more (or less) wildlife, more noise, more traffic, more headache at Christmas when Reflections in the Park is held at Murphy Park. When this construction was started at Mt. Carmel, I was ok with it since it was "going to be contained" to the area around the convent Was anyone asked or surveyed regarding whether or not we would want this? No or this petition has no warrant. This would be a mess to our neighborhood and more in this case would equal less. I want less to be more for myself, my family, my neighbors and my friends. Please stop this from happening!!!" KC Schmitt Dubuque, IA 2020.03.08 "KC Schmitt" Heather Olson Dubuque, IA 2020-03-10 'Because quiet residential neighborhoods have a right to protect thelr property values." Name Kris Gorton Shelly Theisen Amy Fautsch Julianna Welsh Annemarie Day Kristin Clark Heather Kruse Trish McDonald Joan Bodnar -Noon Location Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA US Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA US Dubuque, IA Date 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-09 2020-03-10 2020-03-11 2020-03-11 2020-03-12 2020-03-15 Petition signatures Kris Gorton Dubuque, IA CATHERINE GIESE Dubuque, IA James Giese Palm Desert, CA Kelly Gorton MINNEAPOLIS I MN, MN JoAnn Giese Dubuque, IA Angel Lara Federal Way, US La'Kyrah Stacks Monroe, US chris norris Waco, US Anna Thier Dubuque, IA Bridget Foley Dubuque, IA austin ward Albany, OR Mary Castaneda Dubuque, IA Danielle Urbain Dubuque, IA Michelle Mentz Dubuque, IA Connie Wilgenbusch Epworth, IA Dubuque, IA Randv Mentz Dubuaue. IA Mike O'Donnell 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-06 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 Sara Calderon Davenport, IA 2020-03-07 Erika O'Donnell Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Jamie Lizabeth US 2020-03-07 Name Location Date Emily Freiburger Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Laura Heath Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Molly Anderson Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Susan Tonn Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Kim Kerkenbush Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Lidia Bertolini Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Jake Schmidt Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Dusty Bodine Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Kelly Venson Ashburn, VA 2020-03-07 Sara Carpenter Rebecca Edmonds Kathy Bodine Dawnelle Gordon Natalie Edmondson Tricia Kerth Robyn Wellington Manuel Cayro Lisa Kramer Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Dyersville, IA Dubuque, IA Jolene Horsfreld Dubuque, IA Anna Schuster dubuque, IA Julie Motsch Dubuque, IA Curt Gillilan Potosi, WI 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 Rebecca Plummer Dubuque, IA Dan Kieffer Dubuque, IA Raven Mueller Dubuque, IA Kaylyn Hoffmann Iowa City, IA Linda Zick Dubuque, IA Sue Klopfenstein Dubuque, IA Kaylena Robertson Dubuque, IA Jennifer Gutierrez Dubuque, IA Brenda Neuendorf Dubuque, IA Jessie Bernard Binghamton, US Bonnie Hancock Epworth, IA Amy Fautsch Dubuque, IA Megan McKahin Dubuque, IA Jason Carpenter Dubuque, IA Randy Thor Cuba city, WI Carrie Gleason Littleton, CO 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 2020-03-07 Amy Hulsizer Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Julianne Spahn Sherrill, IA 2020-03-07 Chad Chandlee Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Laura Chandlee San Francisco, CA 2020-03-07 Jenny Johnson Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Ashley Ungs Holy Cross, IA 2020-03-07 Name Location Date Brian Schuster Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Tony Wilgenbusch Omaha, NE 2020-03-07 Libby Donovan Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Ben Lundell Dubuque, IA 2020-03-07 Kelly Wink Cascade, IA 2020-03-08 Jennifer Manternach Dubuque, IA 2020-03-08 Delores Kass Dubuque. IA 2020-03-08 Bobby Koneru Omaha, NE Dana Heim Dubuque, IA STEVEN BOYLE Dubuque, IA KC Schmitt Dubuque, IA Dubuque, IA Christina Rader Dubuque, IA RICHARD CURIEL Des Moines, IA Sherri Goldstein Davenport, IA Rick Dryer Dubuque, IA Henry Goldstein Dubuque, IA Steven Trenkamp Eagle grove, IA Dubuque, IA chris miller Dubuque, IA Brian Markus Dubuque, IA Sara Hutchinson Dubuque, IA Fiona Breslin Tommy King 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-08 2020-03-09 2020-03-09 2020-03-09 2020-03-09 2020-03-09 2020-03-09 Bvm website 3-16 Document 25 1i bvmsisters.orgibvm-sisters-in-conversation-with-senior-li}ling-COtil "! {cveioper/ HOME ABOUT US GET INVOLVED SUPPORT OUR MISSION WHAT'S NEW SOCIAL JUS senior resi.entia an. ea t care services.' The living community will offer a range of housing options, allowing the BVM Sisters to remain within their home campus while providing senior living options to others in the Dubuque area as their health and living needs change. "We are excited and honored to work with the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary to ensure that their vision for senior housing and care options becomes a reality," said Dan Lindh, CEO and President of Presbyterian Homes & Services. Phase I of the project includes 60 new long term care center suites, 42 assisted living apartments and 20 memory care apartments. BVMs will continue to live in existing housing until construction is complete. Phase II of the project will include the addition of 112 senior living apartments. The four-story BVM Motherhouse, erected in 1892, will become a "town center" for the campus. Dining venues, a wellness center with swimming pool, and other amenities are projected. The Roberta Kuhn Center, which provides education and leisure opportunities for nearly 600 seniors from the greater Dubuque area, will continue. The Motherhouse at Mount Carmel currently houses 150 BVM sisters providing independent living, assisted living, memory care, and non -hospital 24-hr nursing care, with more than 250 employees. 'We're excited about the possibilities the collaboration with Presbyterian Homes opens up," Sister Teri commented. "As we searched for an organization to share in this venture, we looked for a group whose philosophy and values were similar to ours. We are convinced our organizations are a good fit." Sister Teri continued, "It's all about serving others in a community setting, creating opportunities for sharing values, providing quality care and meeting needs of people in Dubuque." — 7\7\ • > \ \ '\ • "-•`, ------------ 7," 5:is= of Chasity 131a4 Mount Carmel PUD Submittal Dubc.que, lova Figs= 1-1.: Conceptual £VD S&s Plan .c 9.4.1t1 0 40 -exana Vet tlC.1. are e tre. parr-rr.„ e 120 ow romwmterg. fro% arogwpnar 4,6se, 6C usalloscro h.ng esmievemrs. goimbiligfirlan O t7,:i0K. pirierqj aw•-..11. C=0.04 errs:norms,. t= 4:=314==x .:•=14 aurt,le ttrief% rt 0 F....Ma: Near. soK.Mr? trtsorpmr ••== kedkr 10=0,7 avemer =MM.= =;.6.1=1. .7,1= LAKOTA. fla LAMPS WSW se In this zoning request BVM is seeking to amend their last plan because it did NOT have an emergency exit and in an effort to meet fire code. I would like it noted that in speaking to Guy Hemenway and Mark Burkle I was informed that neither planning nor the fire department requested the abandonment of using the plan that had the BVM AND LAKOTA USED IN 2015 exiting at the Julien Dubuque Drive. See the map below. 401/0 Imowis Salmi • Mae.-M .=s•1mews •• organ ,111...pmenn look .ass M auu.r.r. • MOOa ra.Is.s..4worm • wlf.iFMF' ..:vcn 1 F. A., 3'04 Mount Carmel PUD Subanittsl ae*w..how Kra* Lt Cosorpoza3 PP THIS IS A MAP OF THE PLAN FROM 2015 LAKOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING I was told that the reason we are using the not using the Julien Dubuque Drive is due to Cost. I would imagine that there would be a large cost. However, It is a cost that is 1 invaluable to their project and they should be required to meet the needs of their PUD in a way that does not take away enjoyment of the current neighborhood to use their properties. (see city code attached B8 ) I would like it to reflect that the map that the people who did not oppose the initial project were shown a map that had the fire access down to the JU LI EN DU BUQU E ROAD. The 2015 Map shows fire access down to Julien Dubuque Road. The access is achieved by passing through property owned by the BVMs and private property that is currently zoned Planned Industrial. The fire access proposed in 2015 did not impact any existing residential properties. The proposed plan amendment differs from the original proposal and substantially impacts existing residential properties by passing through existing residential properties and connecting to an existing roadway serving an exclusively residential neighborhood. Public input from impacted residents was sought in 2015, and the site plan and possible impact was evaluated by City staff and neighbors, including a traffic study. The impact of the proposed changes have not been evaluated through the same process with appropriate evaluations from City Engineering, impact on neighboring properties, and a determination if the 2013 traffic study is still applicable. I would like the process to continue and this to go back to the Zoning Commission so that we can have the correct 1 and proper information when we go through the process. A change of exiting is very important material change and it has many ramifications. I respectfully request we go through this process with correct and proper information. Another point I would like to make is only people in 200' of the driveway were notified of this current change. There are still people within the radius of people next to this that were not informed that the map they were presented with in 2015 is incorrect so they were never informed of this material change because they do not live right by the driveway. This seems to be very upsetting to most people I speak with. I am here telling you the community feels like they have not been informed of material changes and I respectful request they be informed if they are within 200 feet of the development as this is a major change.. Can you tell me another time when an entrance or exit was changed in a PUD and people were not informed within 200 ft. of the PUD? Has CITY engineering seen the proposal with exiting to JULIEN DUBUQUE ROAD? HAVE THEY HAD A CHANCE TO EVALUATE EACH ROAD AS TO IMPACT ON NEIGHBORS? 1 IS THE TRAFFIC STUDY CONDUCTED IN 2013 STILL VALID? am curious as to how a traffic study done in 2012-2013 (page 3 of 13) the number of employees estimated at 214. The current employees on the website of the BVM today is 250. (see document ) As a matter of housekeeping I would like to correct the notes from the ZAC. 1. IIW engineer misstated that engineering had approved this plan at that time. That was not the case. 2. Wally W. said that 1847 would be safer with this driveway. That is incorrect information. There is a fire hydrant right next to the home at 1845 S. Grandview. The firetrucks would prefer to park on the street and drag the hose across the lawns which is 145 closer than the proposed driveway. (see document B12 ) I also went on line to Hazard Hub and some other places where you can put in your address and find the nearest hydrant. Both 1845 and 1847 S. Grandview came up as less than 250 ft. away which is very good! We contend that this information is irrelevant to the discussion and are confused by why it is sited as safer. Can someone 1 explain to me why it would be better to use a hydrant further away? am concerned that this misinformation had a direct effect on the outcome of that meeting. Due to the incorrect information that was presented as fact. I would like this to be directed back to the ZAC and them to be able to determine this with correct facts. It is not a fair and equitable process if we have council members deciding with misinformation. Can you please respond to this? I am concerned that the people in charge of this have not walked the neighborhood and are not aware of what is around us. When recommending a major change like this I would hope people would actually visit the sites they are proposing changes to. Who on the team recommending this change or providing information about it has actually been there? There is a fire hydrant outside my window. I am not sure why the dept would use one further away? Can someone speak to this? If you have not been there then you definitely do not realize how steep the incline is from the lane to shady oaks. There is also a massive undulation in the middle of the lot and you can see in all of the pictures the city is showing how much water runs down already...in the one where the sidewalk is you can see the ruts caused by of runoff as well as the branches pushed down hill and the grass all turned. All spring and summer that 1 bit of sidewalk is covered by mud. It is literally as waterfall when it rains hard. When you add a 20 wide driveway it is going to be a complete hazard and wash out Gordon's home. The large retaining walls will also and push water left and right and could really effect , Mr. Chandlee's home. I would bet he gets a wet basement after this is installed. The engineer from IIW said the fire marshal had approved the design of the driveway. At that point the engineers from the City had not seen a plan for the driveway at all? Is it protocol for a fire marshal to approve a WITHOUT consulting City Engineers? When was the last time the Fire Marshal approved a steep grade without Engineering? CURRENT PROPOSAL DOESN'T MEET SUDAS: Driveway requires more than 1 point of access to 1847 S. Grandview. (See Sudas 3a ) Document B1 1 Driveway CREATES UNDESIRABLE SPEED DIFFERENTIAL (DRIVEWAY GRADE CHAPTER 5 ROADWAY DESIGN TABLE 51-4.04 51-4.05) DOCUMENT B3 DRIVEWAY CREATES 9 NEW CONFLICT POINTS (51- 3.01) DOCUMENT B2 DRIVEWAY ENCOURAGES ENCROACHMENT ON TO PRIVATE PROPERTY (DOCUMENT B9) DRIVEWAY CREATES MASS AMOUNTS OF RUN OFF ONTO AN ALREADY OVERWHELMED SEWER SYSTEM. DIRECTLY AFFECTING HOUSE ACROSS FROM IT. SEE Document B11 DRIVEWAY DOES NOT MEET CURRENT RECOMMENDATION OF THE National Highwy Institute which recommends 5 and 8% . Document B4 DRIVEWAY HAS LARGE RETAINING WALLS WHICH WILL CREATE SITE LINE ISSUES AND ACCIDENTS. See Sudas Driveway Chapter 5. THIS DRIVEWAY MUST MEET CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH PROVISIONS OR REQUIREMENTS OF CODE. I WOULD SAY IT DOES IN THE FOLLOWING WAY. DRIVE WAY DOES NOT IMPROVE CIRCULATION FOR VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS (5-24.3) Violates Sudas Code: 1.Principle 7 driveway creates new 9 new conflict points. see doc B2) 2. Sudas allows only 1 access point unless a driver must back out of a driveway. This is not the case but creates a backing out situation that is undesirable according to code. Sudas Chapter 5 3A 1. Driveway is too steep based on Sudas requirements. Recommended MAX IS 8 DEGREES. Sudas Chapter 5 Roadway design see Doc. 2. Sight lines created will make viewing difficult when cross traffic happens. This driveway will be 20' wide are we expecting cross traffic? DRIVEWAY INTERFERES WITH APPROPRIATE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF ABUTTING DISTRICTS. (CODE 5-24.5C ) 1 1. SEE MAP OF NEIGHBORS AGAINST IT ( DOCUMENT B7) 2. SEE PETITION OVER 100 SIGNATURES - DOCUMENT B 10 3. SEE STATEMENTS OF NEIGHBORS BEFORE ZAC ZONING SHOULD DO THE FOLLOWING HELP SEPARATE USES TO REDUCE CONFLICT NOT CREATE IT LIKE THIS DOES (CITY WEBSITE) DOCUMENT B8 DRIVEWAY IS NOT FUNCTIONALLY INTEGRATED INTO THE EXISTING STORM WATER SYSTEM (5-24.5B) SEE NEIGHBORS PICTURES OF FLOODING SHE CURRENTLY DEALS WITH DOCUMENT B11 DRIVEWAY CREATES ENCROACHMENT- WHEN DRIVERS DRIVE UP THEY WILL BE MET WITH A GATE AND 1) BACK OUT ALL THE WAY TO PUBLIC STREET OR 2) DRIVE OVER 2 PRIVATE LOTS TO GET OUT. THIS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITIED BASED ON A LAWSUIT LOT 2 INSTRUMENT NUMBER 11936-1955 AS OWNERS OF LOTS 4 AND 5 ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DETER OTHER TRAFFIC FROM USING THE PRIVATE LANE. THIS ADDITIONAL OPENING TO A STREET CREATES AN OPEN INVITATION AND IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH PREVIOUS LAWSUIT. THERE IS ALSO A PREPETUAL EASMENT FOR 6 FT. ON EITHER SIDE OF THE PRIVATE ROAD FROM SOUTH GRANDVIEW EXTENDING TO LOTS 4 AND 5 THAT SHALL NOT BE BUILT ON. THIS DRIVEWAY WOULD BE ON TOP OF THAT EASEMENT. Creates OTHER conflicts as well. Abstracts state that no one located inside the SHADY OAKS SUBDIVISION is allowed to provide access to an outside individual without written permission from the developer. THE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO MEET CODE D104 PER THE FIRE MARSHALL OF DUBUQUE. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF REMOTENESS D104.5 (DOC B 5 AND B 6) I HAVE PROVIDEDED MAPS AS WELL WITH MEASUREMENTS TO SHOW THIS. AS OUR GOAL IS TO KEEP THE TENANTS SAFE ON THE PUD — ONCE THE BVM REMOVES THEIR FRONT ROADS THE ONLY WAY TO REACH THE FAR SIDE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT WILL BE THROUGH THE PARKIING LOT CONNECTIONS WHICH IS MUCH CLOSER AND DOUBLES DOWN ON THE REMOTENESS ISSUE. YOU WILL LITERALLY NOT BE ABLE TO REACH THE POINT PART OF THEIR PROPERTY. DOES EVERY BUILDING HAVE SPRINKLER SYSTEM ON THE BVM PROPERTY? IF NOT HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE \A/HEM TI-IEV ARE RENOVATING THE MAJORITY OF THEIR PROPERTY THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE? 1 IF SO THEN WHY ARE WE NOT USING THE EXCEPTION PROVIDED BY THE CODE? DRIVEWAY TO A COMMERCIAL PROPERY REQUIRES A TRAFFIC STUDY (SUDAS 3B) WOULD THIS DEVELOPMENT QUALIFY FOR THE EXCEPTION STATED IN D104? QUESTIONS CAN YOU SHOW ME EXACTLY WHERE THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE CURRENT CODE ALLOWING property zoned for planned, residenuai or planned unit aeveiopment to create a private driveway through property zoned as R1 with the intent for the private driveway to service the PUD? If there is not a provision for this should this be in front of the ZBA? WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE STATE FIRE inspector HE SAID ThIS 2ND EMERGENCY ACCESS IS NOT NEEDED YET AND WOULD NOT BE NEEDED FOR A LONG TIME. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY 1 IT IS SUCH A PUSH RIGHT NOW RATHER THAN WAIT UNTIL IT IS necessary? That would give us time to work with the BVM's to make adjustments and possibly work on other solutions. They had suggested that we use our private drive and we would like to discuss that option again and try to come to an agreement. Which requires nothing more than time. WHY IS THE CITY SO INTERESTED IN SHEPARDING THIS THROUGH WHEN THIS IS NOT INCREASING THE TAX BASE? HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE CURRENTLY AT BVM PROPERTY? HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO YOU PROJECT? THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS BASED ON 126 the current website places at the number of employees at 250. 1) Is the car study from 2012 still valid since they have since changed the road access and it is 8 years old? There are significantly more homes in Shady Oaks alone since this study was done. 2) How do you plan on accessing the undeveloped land? Can you provide an example of another local DEVELOPMENT THAT CONNECTS A PARKING LOT IN A PUD THROUGH A 1 RESIDENTIAL NEIGBHORHOOD AND DOWN A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY FOR STREET ACCESS? Secondary Access Mark auricle <Mburkle@cityofdubuque.org> Mon 3/9/2020 4:26 PM krisgor ton d esig n �c�gmail. com Guy Hememvay SECTION D104 COMMERCIAL :AND INDLSTRIALDEVELOPMENTS DI04.1 Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height. Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) or three stories in height shall have not fever than two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. D104.2 Buildings exceeding 62,000 square feet in area. Buildings or facilities having a gross building area of more than 62,000 square feet (5760 m) shall be provided pith two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. Exception: Projects having a gross building area of up to 124,000 square feet (11 520 m.) that have a single approved fire apparatus access road where all buildings are equipped throughout with approved automatic sprinkler �sanrs. D104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. SECTION D102 REQUIRED ACCESS D102.1 Access and loading. Facilities, buildings or portions of buildings hereafter constructed shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of an approved fire apparatus access road Stith an asphalt, concrete or other approved driving surface capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing up to 75,000 pounds (34 050 kg). Mark 8urkie Fire Marshal 11 West 9th Street Dubuque, Iowa 52001-4839 (563) 589-4161 office (563) 543-6522 cell (563) 589-4209 fax rnburkle@cityofdubuque.org 1 1 In this zoning request BVM is seeking to amend their last plan because it did NOT have an emergency exit and in an effort to meet fire code. I would like it noted that in speaking to Guy Hemenway and Mark Burkle I was informed that neither planning nor the fire department requested the abandonment of using the plan that had the BVM AND LAKOTA USED IN 2015 exiting at the Julien Dubuque Drive. See the map below. .101.0 1.0161 — _:AO.. w _ wax. m. Gr.w i*aN reu Mount Carmel PUD Submittal rke.�._�••• Pis,,,e LL C..o.paa.1 R"D 4.0 •,fir ...,L7 THIS IS A MAP OF THE PLAN FROM 2015 LAKOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING I was told that the reason we are using the not using the Julien Dubuque Drive is due to Cost. I would imagine that there would be a large cost. However, It is a cost that is 1 invaluable to their project and they should be required to meet the needs of their PUD in a way that does not take away enjoyment of the current neighborhood to use their properties. (see city code attached B8 ) I would like it to reflect that the map that the people who did not oppose the initial project were shown a map that had the fire access down to the JULIEN DUBUQUE ROAD. The 2015 Map shows fire access down to Julien Dubuque Road. The access is achieved by passing through property owned by the BVMs and private property that is currently zoned Planned Industrial. The fire access proposed in 2015 did not impact any existing residential properties. The proposed plan amendment differs from the original proposal and substantially impacts existing residential properties by passing through existing residential properties and connecting to an existing roadway serving an exclusively residential neighborhood. Public input from impacted residents was sought in 2015, and the site plan and possible impact was evaluated by City staff and neighbors, including a traffic study. The impact of the proposed changes have not been evaluated through the same process with appropriate evaluations from City Engineering, impact on neighboring properties, and a determination if the 2013 traffic study is still applicable. would like the process to continue and this to go back to the Zoning Commission so that we can have the correct 1 and proper information when we go through the process. A change of exiting is very important material change and it has many ramifications. I respectfully request we go through this process with correct and proper information. Another point I would like to make is only people in 200' of the driveway were notified of this current change. There are still people within the radius of people next to this that were not informed that the map they were presented with in 2015 is incorrect so they were never informed of this material change because they do not live right by the driveway. This seems to be very upsetting to most people I speak with. I am here telling you the community feels like they have not been informed of material changes and I respectful request they be informed if they are within 200 feet of the development as this is a major change.. Can you tell me another time when an entrance or exit was changed in a PUD and people were not informed within 200 ft. of the PUD? Has CITY engineering seen the proposal with exiting to JULIEN DUBUQUE ROAD? HAVE THEY HAD A CHANCE TO EVALUATE EACH ROAD AS TO IMPACT ON NEIGHBORS? 1 IS THE TRAFFIC STUDY CONDUCTED IN 2013 STILL VALID? I am curious as to how a traffic study done in 2012-2013 (page 3 of 13) the number of employees estimated at 214. The current employees on the website of the BVM today is 250. (see document ) As a matter of housekeeping I would like to correct the notes from the ZAC. 1. IIW engineer misstated that engineering had approved this plan at that time. That was not the case. 2. Wally W. said that 1847 would be safer with this driveway. That is incorrect information. There is a fire hydrant right next to the home at 1845 S. Grandview. The firetrucks would prefer to park on the street and drag the hose across the lawns which is 145 closer than the proposed driveway. (see document B12 ) I also went on line to Hazard Hub and some other places where you can put in your address and find the nearest hydrant. Both 1845 and 1847 S. Grandview came up as less than 250 ft. away which is very good! We contend that this information is irrelevant to the discussion and are confused by why it is sited as safer. Can someone 1 explain to me why it would be better to use a hydrant further away? am concerned that this misinformation had a direct effect on the outcome of that meeting. Due to the incorrect information that was presented as fact. I would like this to be directed back to the ZAC and them to be able to determine this with correct facts. It is not a fair and equitable process if we have council members deciding with misinformation. Can you please respond to this? I am concerned that the people in charge of this have not walked the neighborhood and are not aware of what is around us. When recommending a major change like this I would hope people would actually visit the sites they are proposing changes to. Who on the team recommending this change or providing information about it has actually been there? There is a fire hydrant outside my window. I am not sure why the dept would use one further away? Can someone speak to this? If you have not been there then you definitely do not realize how steep the incline is from the lane to shady oaks. There is also a massive undulation in the middle of the lot and you can see in all of the pictures the city is showing how much water runs down already...in the one where the sidewalk is you can see the ruts caused by of runoff as well as the branches pushed down hill and the grass all turned. All spring and summer that 1 bit of sidewalk is covered by mud. It is literally as waterfall when it rains hard. When you add a 20 wide driveway it is going to be a complete hazard and wash out Gordon's home. The large retaining walls will also and push water left and right and could really effect , Mr. Chandlee's home. I would bet he gets a wet basement after this is installed. The engineer from IIW said the fire marshal had approved the design of the driveway. At that point the engineers from the City had not seen a plan for the driveway at all? Is it protocol for a fire marshal to approve a WITHOUT consulting City Engineers? When was the last time the Fire Marshal approved a steep grade without Engineering? CURRENT PROPOSAL DOESN'T MEET SUDAS: Driveway requires more than 1 point of access to 1847 S. Grandview. (See Sudas 3a ) Document B1 1 Driveway CREATES UNDESIRABLE SPEED DIFFERENTIAL (DRIVEWAY GRADE CHAPTER 5 ROADWAY DESIGN TABLE 51-4.04 51-4.05) DOCUMENT B3 DRIVEWAY CREATES 9 NEW CONFLICT POINTS (51- 3.01) DOCUMENT B2 DRIVEWAY ENCOURAGES ENCROACHMENT ON TO PRIVATE PROPERTY (DOCUMENT B9) DRIVEWAY CREATES MASS AMOUNTS OF RUN OFF ONTO AN ALREADY OVERWHELMED SEWER SYSTEM. DIRECTLY AFFECTING HOUSE ACROSS FROM IT. SEE Document B11 DRIVEWAY DOES NOT MEET CURRENT RECOMMENDATION OF THE National Highwy Institute which recommends 5 and 8% . Document B4 DRIVEWAY HAS LARGE RETAINING WALLS WHICH WILL CREATE SITE LINE ISSUES AND ACCIDENTS. See Sudas Driveway Chapter 5. THIS DRIVEWAY MUST MEET CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH PROVISIONS OR REQUIREMENTS OF CODE. I WOULD SAY IT DOES IN THE FOLLOWING WAY. DRIVE WAY DOES NOT IMPROVE CIRCULATION FOR VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS (5-24.3) Violates Sudas Code: 1.Principle 7 driveway creates new 9 new conflict points. see doc B2) 2. Sudas allows only 1 access point unless a driver must back out of a driveway. This is not the case but creates a backing out situation that is undesirable according to code. Sudas Chapter 5 3A 1. Driveway is too steep based on Sudas requirements. Recommended MAX IS 8 DEGREES. Sudas Chapter 5 Roadway design see Doc. 2. Sight lines created will make viewing difficult when cross traffic happens. This driveway will be 20' wide are we expecting cross traffic? DRIVEWAY INTERFERES WITH APPROPRIATE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF ABUTTING DISTRICTS. (CODE 5-24.5C ) 1 1. SEE MAP OF NEIGHBORS AGAINST IT ( DOCUMENT B7) 2. SEE PETITION OVER 100 SIGNATURES - DOCUMENT B 10 3. SEE STATEMENTS OF NEIGHBORS BEFORE ZAC ZONING SHOULD DO THE FOLLOWING HELP SEPARATE USES TO REDUCE CONFLICT NOT CREATE IT LIKE THIS DOES (CITY WEBSITE) DOCUMENT B8 DRIVEWAY IS NOT FUNCTIONALLY INTEGRATED INTO THE EXISTING STORM WATER SYSTEM (5-24.5B) SEE NEIGHBORS PICTURES OF FLOODING SHE CURRENTLY DEALS WITH DOCUMENT B11 DRIVEWAY CREATES ENCROACHMENT - WHEN DRIVERS DRIVE UP THEY WILL BE MET WITH A GATE AND 1) BACK OUT ALL THE WAY TO PUBLIC STREET OR 2) DRIVE OVER 2 PRIVATE LOTS TO GET OUT. THIS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITIED BASED ON A LAWSUIT LOT 2 INSTRUMENT NUMBER 11936-1955 AS OWNERS OF LOTS 4 AND 5 ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO DETER OTHER TRAFFIC FROM USING THE PRIVATE LANE. THIS ADDITIONAL OPENING TO A STREET CREATES AN OPEN INVITATION AND IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH PREVIOUS LAWSUIT. THERE IS ALSO A PREPETUAL EASMENT FOR 6 FT. ON EITHER SIDE OF THE PRIVATE ROAD FROM SOUTH GRANDVIEW EXTENDING TO LOTS 4 AND 5 THAT SHALL NOT BE BUILT ON. THIS DRIVEWAY WOULD BE ON TOP OF THAT EASEMENT. Creates OTHER conflicts as well. Abstracts state that no one located inside the SHADY OAKS SUBDIVISION is allowed to provide access to an outside individual without written permission from the developer. THE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO MEET CODE D104 PER THE FIRE MARSHALL OF DUBUQUE. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF REMOTENESS D104.5 (DOC B 5 AND B 6) I HAVE PROVIDEDED MAPS AS WELL WITH MEASUREMENTS TO SHOW THIS. AS OUR GOAL IS TO KEEP THE TENANTS SAFE ON THE PUD — ONCE THE BVM REMOVES THEIR FRONT ROADS THE ONLY WAY TO REACH THE FAR SIDE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT WILL BE THROUGH THE PARKIING LOT CONNECTIONS WHICH IS MUCH CLOSER AND DOUBLES DOWN ON THE REMOTENESS ISSUE. YOU WILL LITERALLY NOT BE ABLE TO REACH THE POINT PART OF THEIR PROPERTY. DOES EVERY BUILDING HAVE SPRINKLER SYSTEM ON THE BVM PROPERTY? IF NOT HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE WHEN THEY ARE RENOVATING THE MAJORITY OF THEIR PROPERTY THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE? 1 IF SO THEN WHY ARE WE NOT USING THE EXCEPTION PROVIDED BY THE CODE? DRIVEWAY TO A COMMERCIAL PROPERY REQUIRES A TRAFFIC STUDY (SUDAS 3B) WOULD THIS DEVELOPMENT QUALIFY FOR THE EXCEPTION STATED IN D104? QUESTIONS CAN YOU SHOW ME EXACTLY WHERE THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE CURRENT CODE ALLOWING a property zoned for planned residential or planned unit development to create a private driveway through property zoned as R1 with the intent for the private driveway to service the PUD? If there is not a provision for this should this be in front of the ZBA? WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE STATE FIRE inspector HE SAID ThIS 2ND EMERGENCY ACCESS IS NOT NEEDED YET AND WOULD NOT BE NEEDED FOR A LONG TIME. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY 1 IT IS SUCH A PUSH RIGHT NOW RATHER THAN WAIT UNTIL IT IS necessary? That would give us time to work with the BVM's to make adjustments and possibly work on other solutions. They had suggested that we use our private drive and we would like to discuss that option again and try to come to an agreement. Which requires nothing more than time. WHY IS THE CITY SO INTERESTED IN SHEPARDING THIS THROUGH WHEN THIS IS NOT INCREASING THE TAX BASE? HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE CURRENTLY AT BVM PROPERTY? HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO YOU PROJECT? THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS BASED ON 126 the current website places at the number of employees at 250. 1) Is the car study from 2012 still valid since they have since changed the road access and it is 8 years old? There are significantly more homes in Shady Oaks alone since this study was done. 2) How do you plan on accessing the undeveloped land? Can you provide an example of another local DEVELOPMENT THAT CONNECTS A PARKING LOT IN A PUD THROUGH A 1 RESIDENTIAL NEIGBHORHOOD AND DOWN A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY FOR STREET ACCESS? Secondary Access Mark Burkle <Mburkle@cityofdubuque.org> Mon 3/920204:26 PM la isgor tondesign Zagmail. cot Guy Hemeneay SECTION D104 CO\L\MERCLAL AND LNDUSIRIAL DEVELOPMENTS D104.1 Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height. Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) or three stories in height shall have not fewer than two means of fire apparatus access for each structure_ D104 2 Buildings exceeding 62.000 square feet in area. Buildings or facilities having a Boss building area of more than 62,000 square feet (5760 m:) shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. Exception: Projects having a gross buildnrg area of up to 124,000 square feet (11 520 m.) that have a single approred fire apparatus access road where all buildings are equipped throughout with approved automatic sprinkler ystems. D104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. SECTION D102 REQUIRED ACCESS D102.1 Access and loading. Facilities, buildings or portions of buildings hereafter constructed shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of an approved fire apparatus access road with an asphalt; concrete or other approved driving surface capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing up to 75,000 pounds (34 050 kg). Mark 8urkie Fire Marshal 11 West 9th Street Dubuque, Iowa 52001-4839 (563) 589-4161 office (563) 543-6522 cell (563) 589-4209 fax mburkle@cityofdubuque,org 1