Zoning QHQ S Holliday Dr W NW ABuesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
October 1, 2003
To: Mayor Duggan & City Council
cio Ms. Jeanne Schneider, City Clerk
City of Dubuque
City Hall @ 13th & Central
Dubuque, IA 52002
Re: QHQ request for rezoning property located south of Holliday Drive, west of
the Northwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural District to C-3
Dear Jeanne:
We hereby request that the above noted rezoning item be placed back onto the
City Council agenda for the October 6, 2003 Council meeting.
We will be available at the meeting to review items discussed at the September
23rd mediation meeting with the neighbors to answer any and all of the Council
questions that may be asked regarding the project.
Respectfully submitted,
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
cc: Tim Quagliano
rage i ox t
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Keith and Lugene Berning" <bernings@mchsi.com>
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:03 PM
Request to Deny/Delay Rezoning of Property Near the Northwest Arterial
Dear Mr. Duggan:
At the next Ci~ Council meeting, you will be considering a request to rezone (to C-3 Commercial) the land
west of the Northwest Arterial and south of United Rental Center (south of Asbury Rd.). t live on Cametot
Drive, and rezoning of this property would directly and negatively affect my neighborhood.
I respectfully request that you deny or delay the rezoning request by QHQ Properties until a realistic
compromise can be worked out between Dr. Tim Quagliano, from QHQ, and the neighbors most directly
impacted by this rezoning.
I have two pfima~ concerns. First, the already busy traffic pattern on the Northwest Ar~eriat would be
worsened by this rezoning either by adding more traffic to the Asbury RdJNorthwest Artedal intersection or by
adding another full access street to the Northwest Artedat. Second, any businesses with late night hours
would disrupt our neighborhood if a significant buffer is not added. Please ensure any business that would
operate into the night time hours are not allowed to locate in this area
The plan for this property as it currently stands will negatively impact my neighborhood. Please deny or delay
the request to rezone until these negative impacts can be reasonably resolved.
Sincerely,
Keith Beming
4612 Camelot Drive
583-1914
8/4/2003
rage I oI I
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To.'
Sent:
Subject:
<Jmjungbluth~aot.com>
<patriciacline@mchsi.com>; <jconnors63@mchsi.com>; <jmarkham~comerenergy.com>;
<aeml0@mchsi.com>; <danielenicholson@mchsi.com>; <rbuoll@mchsLcom>;
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:12 PM
Opposition to rezoning of QHQ property - NW Artedal & Asbury
Dear City Council Members:
I am once again writing in opposition to the rezoning of QHQ's property at the NW Arterial and Asbury Road. I did
not think it would be on the August agenda since Mr. Quagliano has not bean willing to sit down with our
neighborhood to come to a compromise. As a neighborhood we expected that we would have had an opportunity
to roach a compromise pdor to going back to the City Council. We have tried numerous times to roach out to him
but he does not seem interosted in truly negotiating.
t have many of the same concerns I stated in my last e-mail to you and also some new ones:
· This property has always been planned residential We looked into that pdor to building our home and QHQ
probably knew that pdor to purchasing the property. Had it been planned commercial, we would have built
elsewhere.
· Thero is already other property in the area that is either planned or alroady zoned commercial that is not being
used at this time. If new businesses wish to be located on the west end of town, I'm sure they can find an
appropriate location on which to build without being this close to a residential neighborhood.
· I am concerned about the traffic problems that are starting to occur on Asbury at this location. High volume
traffic into these types of commercial businesses will only add to the already increased volume of traffic in this
area.
· Mr. Buesing stated that the berm that currently exists on the artedal would be taken down. This would add to the
traffic noise as well as take away the only barrier that we have to block the view of the artedal traffic.
· I truly believe building commemial this close to my property will lessen the value of our home, which is our only
mai asset. If the residential portion was built along side of the commemial portion or at least knowing in advance
that commercial would be next door, the value of the home would be pdced accordingly. Here, this was not the
· We have not received the list of businesses that QHQ would like to include on this land, but from what I am
hearing, the types of businesses he is looking at are not compatible with a rosidential neighborhood.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to and consider my concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary Jungbluth
4911 Twilight Drive
8/4/2003
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
<Jcjungbluth@aol.com>
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Monday, August 04, 2003 4:10 PM
Sent on Behalf of Pat Meehan re: QHQ
Please forgive that this is coming from my email. Mr. Meehan has not been able to send this himself and asked
me to do so.
Dubuque City Council,
I just wanted to give my 'two cents' worth regarding the city council meeting tonight and the proposed re-zoning of
the QHQ properties.
First, I'm not opposed to development in the proposed property as long as concerns of the neighborhood are
addressed. My only concerns are how will it be developed? In other words how will the berm be designed? What
will the tree barrier look like? And how will the water run-off be handled? rm also concemed about what type of
businesses will go in there. (I was told no taverns but that's about all I was told.) And also, what time will these
businesses open and close? (I think it's fair to say that nobody wants a 24 'Quicky Mart' next door to him or her or
an open till 2AM type fast food restaurant.
But having said all this, Dr. Quagliono and I have spoken over the phone a few times in the past few weeks and
discussed some of the above concerns. It did seem as though we were making some progress, but I strongly
stressed that I was only speaking for myself and made a point to tell him that he needed to attend a neighborhood
meeting to listen/discuss other neighbor's thoughts/questions/concerns. He originally was planning to attend, but
because one neighbor (John Jungbluth) was going to be there, Dr. Quagliono decided not to attend and had Ken
Buessing address the neighborhood meeting. Although Mr. Buessing did an excellent job explaining the best he
could about how the berm and the layout would be designed, he was unable to answer other questions that the
neighbors had.
To be pe~ectly honest with you, I was hoping we would have a resolution and soma mutual agreement between
both parties before tonight% meeting (rm know rm tired of dealing with all of this), but unfortunately we don't. I
don't know what the resolution is, but I can tell you the neighbors are very willing (and wanting) to work together
on this with QHQ but because of some personality dispute Dr. Quagliono will not meet with us if John Jungbluth is
present. I do not think it is fair tha~ we ask Mr. Jungbluth to not attend these meetings and I also do not think it's
fair that Dr. Quagliona will not attend if Mr. Jungbluth is there (Personally, I think the whole thing is ridiculous)
especially when Mr. Jungbluth was very willing and even tded to contact Dr. Quagllono to resolve this matter.
To close, I ask and hope that you to make the right decision tonight and ask again to please consider the
neighborhoods concerns when that decision is made. Thank you for time in reading this and look forward to
seeing you all tonight.
Patdck Meehan
2465 Samantha Drive
Dubuque, Iowa 52002
8/5/2003
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, IA 52001
(563) 556-4389
To:
City of Dubuque Council
c/o Ms. Jeanne Schneider, City Clerk
City of Dubuque
City Hall
13th and Central Ave
Dubuque, IA 52001
August 4, 2003
Re:
QHQ Request for Rezoning Property Located South on Holliday Drive, West of the
Northwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural District to C-3
Dear Mayor & Council Members:
Further discussions regarding zoning boundaries:
In point of fact, by the restrictive covenants included in the documents received by the
Samantha Drive neighbors when they purchased their lots, they agreed to "not object to any
rezoning modifications to the adjoining QHQ property". Since some of them have
collectively determined that they may unilaterally breach this previously agreed upon
covenant, there is now a need for a super majority at the Council table to approve the
proposed rezoning. It is certainly possible that such a majority within the Council may exist,
but QHQ also recognizes that this type of a majority is sometimes difficult to forge on many
Council topics. The covenant is a legitimate contractual agreement between QHQ and the
Developer of the Samantha Drive area. The Developer complied with the agreement by
including the covenant in the title documents before he sold any lots. The covenant was put
in place to make the neighbors aware before they purchased residential lots that rezoning of
the adjoining property would be requested and to ensure the property owners would not
object. If the affected property owners abided by their covenant, no super majority vote of
the Council would be required.
In this case, it is also possible, but certainly not efficient or easy to seek assistance from the
courts to determine that the neighbors' opposition is illegal and therefore not valid. QHQ is
confident that if asked to decide the question, a court would hold that each resident subject to
the covenant who has objected to the rezoning request is in violation of the covenant. Rather
than proceed down these kinds of expensive and otherwise offensive alternate paths, we
believe that a modification of the zoning boundaries may eliminate this potential problem. It
will also provide even greater assurances to the Samantha Drive neighbors that the property
directly adjacent to their lots will not be rezoned and will remain trees and some types of
grasses.
QHQ therefore proposes that a band of land 75 feet wide perpendicular and adjacent to all of
the Samantha Drive property owners be removed from the rezoning request and remain
zoned as it is presently. With this amendment, two things occur. The first is that no
commercial buildings and/or other commercial facilities of any type can be built on the 75
feet adjacent property. That provides an additional assurance that neither QHQ nor any
future property owners would place buildings or other structures them. The second is that by
eliminating this property from the area proposed for rezoning, the super majority requirement
is no longer required since now there will be less than the twenty percent (20%) area of
objecting adjoining property owners. The City Planning Services office has prepared a letter
accompanying this proposal that confirms that belief. As a result of this amendment, only a
simple majority vote of the Council is required for approval of the rezoning request.
Therefore, the amended request accomplishes the goals of the restrictive covenants and
provides the buffer desired by the neighboring residential property owners.
QHQ asks that this modification be included within the rezoning request. Technically, the
area proposed for mzoning would be modified to include only the following:
All of Lot B of Holliday Addition and Lot 2 of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of
Section 20, T89N, R2E except for a 75 foot wide band perpendicular to and directly
adjacent to the Embassy West No. 3 Subdivision and the City of Asbury.
Your consideration of the above item at the Council table is appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
For Tim Quagliano
QHQ Development
MEMORANDUM
August4,2003
TO:
FROM:
Michael Van Milligen, City Manager
Jeanne Schneider. City Clerk
Barry Lindahl. Corporation Counsel
Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager ~U--~'~
SUBJECT: Percentage of Opposition for QHQ Rezoning
Planning Services staff have reviewed petitions of property owners in opposition to the QHQ
~ezomn9 along Holliday Drive iust east of Samantha Drive. There are four contiguous areas of
opposition within 200 feet of the subject property, as shown on the attached map.
We have included two petitions of opposition, the last of which was filed at 2:30 p.m. on Monday,
August 4.
The first area includes the properties at 4760 Asbury Court Place. 4917 and 4911 Twilight Drive and
2425, 2445 and 2465 Samantha Drive. This area of opposition totals 94.786 square feet.
The second area of opposition is 2420 and 2400 Samantha Drive with a total of 32.799 square feet.
The third area of opposition includes the property at 2340 and 2360 Samantha Drive with a total of
34,275 square feet.
The fourth area of opposition includes the properties at 2200.2220. 2240, 2260. 2280 and 2300
Samantha Drive. This area totals 43,012 square feet.
The total area in opposition ec uals 204.872 square feet The area of opposition; therefore, equals
29.24% of the 700.559 square feet within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning area
It will require a super-majority of Council members to approve a rezoning for this property.
Additionally, QHQ has proposed reducing the area requested to be rezoned Their proposal is to
shift the western boundary of the area to be rezoned 75 feet to the east (see attached map). If the
boundary were shifted this would reduce the percentage of opposition to 18.61%
This memo is provided for your information
LC/mkr
Attachments
We the undersigned, object to the rezoning of the property south of
Holliday Drive and west of the Northwest Arterial. We are requesting
that the City Council deny the request to rezone the property from AG
Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial zoning district.
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY OF DUBUQUE
Iq, ANNING SERVICES BEPARI'ME~
We the undersigned, object to the rezoning of the property south of
Holliday Drive and west of the Northwest Arterial. We are requesting
that the City Council deny the request to rezone the property ~om AG
Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial zoning district.
NAME
ADDRESS
.°41'~ ~ '~" ~
QHQ Rezoning Request- Holiday Drive
Property in Opposition = 29.24% as of 8/4/03 3:00 pm
QHQ PROPERTIES
Property in Opposition
242O
Red Violet
~'~ 2365 '
2345
2320
2245
22:
j22~¢~ 2200
2215
2205
/ Property in Opposition
Property in Opposition
200
400 Feet
Buesin & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, IA 52001
(563/556-4389
August 4. 2003
To~
City of Dubuque Council
c/o Ms. Jearme Schneider, City Clerk
City of Dubuque
City Hall
13th and Central Ave
Dubuque. IA 52001
ge~
QHQ Request for Rezoning Property Located South on Holliday Drive, West of the
Northwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural District to C-3
Dear Mayor & Council Members:
Further discussions regardin! zoning boundaries:
In point of fact, by the restrictive covenants included in the documents received by the
Samantha Drive neighbors when they purchased their lots, they agreed to "not object to any
rezoning modifications ro the adjoining QHQ property". Since some of them have
collectively determined that they may unilaterally breach this previously agreed upon
covenant, there is now a need for a super majority at the Council table to approve the
proposed rezoning. It is certainly possible that such a majority within the Council may exist.
but QHQ also recognizes that this type of a mai ority is sometimes difficult to forge on many
Council topics. The covenant is a legitimate contractual agreement between QHQ and the
Developer of the Samantha Drive area. The Developer complied with the agreement by
including the covenant in the title documents before he sold any lots. The covenant was put
in place to make the neighbors aware before they purchased residential lots that rezoning of
the adjoining property would be requested and to ensure the property owners would not
object. If the affected property owners abided by their covenant, no super majority vote of
the Council would be required.
In this case, it is also possible, but certainly not efficient or easy m seek assistance from the
courts to determine that the neighbors' opposition is illegal and therefore not valid. QHQ is
confident that if asked to decide the question, a court would hold that each resident subject to
the covenam who has objected to the rezoning request is in violation of the covenam. Rather
than proceed down these kinds of expensive and otherwise offensive alternate paths, we
believe that a moditleation of the zoning boundaries may eliminate this potential problem. It
will also provide even greater assurances to the Smuantha Drive neighbors that the property
directly adjacent to their lots will aot be rezoned and will remain trees and some types of
grasses.
QHQ therefore proposes that a band of land 75 feet wide perpendicular and adjacem to all of
the Samantha Drive property owners be removed fi'om the rezoning request and remain
zoned as it is presently. With this mnendment, two things occur. The first is that no
commercial buildings and/or other commercial facilities of any type can be built on the 75
feet adjacent propert_y. That provides an additional assurance that neither QHQ nor any
future property owners would place buildings or other structures there. The second is that by
eliminating this property from the m'ea proposed for rezoning, the super majority reqmrement
is no longer required since now mere will be less than the twenty percent ~20%1 m'ea of
objecting adjoining property owners. The City Planning Services office has prepared a letter
accompanying this proposal that confirms that belief. As a result of this amendment, only a
simple majority vote of the Council is required for approval of the rezoning request.
Therefore, the amended request accomplishes the goals of the restrictive covenants and
provides the buffer desired by the neighboring residential property owners.
QHQ asks that this modification be included within the rezoning request. Technically, the
area proposed for rezoning would be modified to include onI¥ the following:
Ail of Lot B of Holliday Addition and Lot 2 of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of
Section 20, T89N, R2E except for a 75 foot wide band perpendicular to and directly
adjacent to the Embassy West No. 3 Subdivision and the City of Asbury.
Your consideration of the above item at the Council table is appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
Ke~meth L. Buesing, PE & LS
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
For Tim Quagliano
QHQ Development
: Q Q Rezoning Request - Holiday Drive
Property in Opposition = 18.61%
Boundary Moved 75'
Reduced Area Proposal
QHQ PROPERTIES
perty in Opposition
491
0,.491 2440
i~ 24051
~l:~o~et--
2325
2305
2:
2320
Boundary Moved 75'
Property in Opposition
Property in
/,'¢'roperty in Opposition
2220
2225_~
~,~ ~ 2200
2215
2205
200 400 Feet
View from corner of Twilight Dr and Re Violet Dr looking NE towards intersection of NW Arterial and Asbury Rd. The roofs of
houses are Samantha Dr homes. Please note the following: spotty deciduous trees (partial seasonal blockage), signage, lighting and no burm
for traffic noise (which currently exists for most of NW Arterial).
Looking west at intersection of Red Violet and Samantha Dr. Note the following: current burro hides all traffic
AND noise from NW Arterial. Also, land to be rezoned is not obscured by mature trees in drainage ditch. Now insert
heavy ~raf~c business and signage.
This picture is taken from Camelot Dr looking north onto QHQ property. Note Samantha Dr homes on left and
QHQ land, which ends at current tree height. Even with trees, Samantha Dr will be exposed to entire view of the rear of
all C3 bnildings. Proposed barrier has no effect on visual or noise concerns.
Tree height
Land height
I Signage
3
Picture of neighborhood meeting on Samantha Dr looking West at potential intersection sight for NW Arterial
with stop lights. Note: due to height of land and no restrictions on C3 development, the views from the decks will be of
traffic, dumpsters, bails of cardboard and delivery trucks.
4
" TYPICAL 3E.TENTtBN PEN]3 CRRSS SEC
AND i FO[
THE SIDE
]TTDM
- UP
MIX:
BLUEGRAS 70%
'EGRAS: 10~.
'l' POX
WIDTH VARIES BN RAT~: S BE '~
STA 0+00 TO 5* = 3.0' T 5:5' WIDE PBUNDS 1,OOO SI FDET
STA 5+50 TD 23 = 5.5 Ti 8.0' WIDE DING AREA
PR E CH.AI EL ROSS SE
1
885
END OF
13+39.87 EI-E'
88-0
REMOVE M.,
BEGIN 12" 1
t3+42,3-tC
870
uJVPI E _=881.88
-2. LEN=70
PLUG
IP WM
L"r
IVER' OVER
8;'5.31 ', '
ou T'=~'ZO.B1.
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, IA 52001
(563) 556-4389
August 4, 2003
To~
City of Dubuque Council
c/o Ms. Jeanne Schneider, City Clerk
City of Dubuque
City Hall
13th and Central Ave
Dubuque, IA 52001
Re~
QHQ Request for Rezoning Property Located South on Holliday Drive, West of the
Northwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural District to C-3
Dear Mayor & Council Members:
Further discussions regarding zoning boundaries:
In point of fact, by the restrictive covenants included in the documents received by the
Samantha Drive neighbors when they purchased their lots, they agreed to "not object to any
rezoning modifications to the adjoining QHQ property". Since some of them have
collectively determined that they may unilaterally breach this previously agreed upon
covenant, there is now a need for a super majority at the Council table to approve the
proposed rezoning. It is certainly possible that such a majority within the Council may exist,
but QHQ also recognizes that this type ora majority is sometimes difficult to forge on many
Council topics. The covenant is a legitimate contractual agreement between QHQ and the
Developer of the Samantha Drive area. The Developer complied with the agreement by
including the covenant in the title documents before he sold any lots. The covenant was put
in place to make the neighbors aware b_efore they purchased residential lots that rezoning of
the adjoining property would be requested and to ensure the property owners would not
object. If the affected property owners abided by their covenant, no super majority vote of
the Council would be required.
In this case, it is also possible, but certainly not efficient or easy to seek assistance from the
courts to determine that the neighbors' opposition is illegal and therefore not valid. QHQ is
confident that if asked to decide the question, a court would hold that each resident subject to
the covenant who has objected to the rezoning request is in violation of the covenant. Rather
than proceed down these kinds of expensive and otherwise offensive alternate paths, we
believe that a modification of the zoning boundaries may eliminate this potential problem. It
will also provide even greater assurances to the Samantha Drive neighbors that the property
directly adjacent to their lots will not be rezoned and will remain trees and some types of
grasses.
QHQ therefore proposes that a band of land 75 feet wide perpendicular and adjacent to all of
the Samantha Drive property owners be removed from the rezoning request and remain
zoned as it is presently. With this amendment, two things occur. The first is that no
commercial buildings and/or other commercial facilities of any type can be built on the 75
feet adjacent property. That provides an additional assurance that neither QHQ nor any
future property owners would place buildings or other structures there. The second is that by
eliminating this property from the area proposed for rezoning, the super majority requirement
is no longer required since now there will be less than the twenty percent (20%) area of
objecting adjoining property owners. The City Planning Services office has prepared a letter
accompanying this proposal that confirms that belief. As a result of this amendment, only a
simple majority vote of the Council is required for approval of the rezoning request.
Therefore, the amended request accomplishes the goals of the restrictive covenants and
provides the buffer desired by the neighboring residential property owners. -
QHQ asks that this modification be included within the rezoning request. Technically, the
area proposed for rezoning would be modified to include only the following:
All of Lot B of Holliday Addition and Lot 2 of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of
Section 20, T89N, R2E except for a 75 foot wide band perpendicular to and directly
adjacent to the Embassy West No. 3 Subdivision and the City of Asbury.
Your consideration of the above item at the Council table is appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS'~x
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
For Tim Quagliano
QHQ Development
Cline moved adoption of the Resolution and set this for Public Hearing on 6/16/03 at a meeting to
commence at 6:30 P.M. in the public library auditorium and that the City Clerk publish notice in the
manner prescribed by law. Seconded by Nicholson. Motion carried 7-0.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS
Applicants are invited to address the Council regarding their desire to serve on the following
Boards/Commissions:
Community Development Advisory Commission (One at-large and one Iow/moderate income
vacancy to expire 2/15/04 and two Iow/moderate income vacancies to expire 2/15/05) Applicants:
Gina Bell (At-Large), Sr. Paula Maloy, SVM (At-Large), David Shaw (Low/Moderate Income) Gina
Bell and Sr. Paula Maloy both spoke requesting consideration for appointment.
Historic Preservation Commission (One unexpired three-year term for Old Main District to expire
7/1/03, one three-year term for Cathedral District to expire 7/1/03, and one three-year term for At-
Large to expire 7/1/06 - currently James Gibbs) Applicants: Michael Coty (Cathedral District),
James E. Gibbs (At-Large), Christine Olson (At-Large) Michael Coty and Christine Olson both
spoke requesting consideration for appointment.
Investment Oversight Advisory Commission (Two three-year terms to expire 7/1/06 - Terms of
Lassance and Melendez): Applicants: Paul Lassance and Hiram Melendez. No one spoke.
Library Board Of Trustees - Mayor Appointment (Two four-year terms to expire 7/1/07 - Terms
of Lindsay and Lynch) Applicants: Alan Avery and Susan Lindsay. No one spoke.
Zoning Advisory Commission (Two three-year terms to expire 7/1/06 - Terms of Hardie and
Roush) Applicants: Stephen Hardie and Ben Roush. No one spoke.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Nicholson moved to suspend the rules to allow anyone present to address the Council if they so
desire. Seconded by Connors. Motion carried 7-0.
Mayor Duggan tumed control of the meeting to Mayor Pro-Tem Cline due to possible conflict of
interest.
Michalski moved that the following item be removed from the table: Seconded by Connors.
Motion carried 7-0.
QHQ Properties - Request to Rezone (Tabled at May 19, 2003 Meeting): Proof of publication on
notice of hearing to consider rezoning property located south of Holliday Drive, west of the
Nodhwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural Distdct to C-3 General Commercial zoning district at the
request of QHQ Properties and Zoning Advisory Commission recommending approval, with
conditions; Communication from Mary Jungbluth in opposition to the rezoning of property located
west of the Northwest Artedal and south of Asbury Road; Communication from Susan and Patrick
Meehan sharing concerns about the proposed rezoning of property adjacent to their home,
presented and read.
An Ordinance Amending Appendix A (the Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Dubuque Code of=
Ordinances by reclassifying hereinafter described property located south of Holliday Ddve, west of
the Northwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General Commemial zoning district, with
conditions, presented and read.
Ken Buesing of Buesing & Associates spoke introducing Tim Quagliano (applicant) and Attorney
Steve Juergens, and gave the history of the property.
John Jungbluth, 4911 Twilight; Patdck and Susan Meehan, 2465 Samantha Dr.; Mark Lockwood,
2215 Samantha Dr.; Danielle Putchio, 2220 Samantha Dr.; all spoke in objection to the proposed
rezoning.
7
Attorney Steve Juergens, 200 Security Bldg., spoke clarifying the letters concerning the mention
of the covenants.
Public Works Director Mike Koch explained future traffic light updates.
Nicholson requested that two conditions be added to the Ordinance - additional screening with
replacement as necessary and no drinking establishments be allowed in the commercial
development.
Nicholson moved to close the public hearing and table the issue until the applicant brings it back.
Seconded by Michalski. Motion carried 6-0. Council directed the applicant and neighbors to work
together to reach a mutually agreeable solution to the issues presented.
Mayor Duggan returned and took control of the meeting.
Vacating Petition - Railroad Street in Centre Grove Addition: Proof of publication on notice of
hearing and City Manager recommending approval of a request from Flint Drake, representing the
estate of Edward J. Zalaznik, for the vacating of Railroad Street in Centre Grove Addition,
presented and read. Markham moved that the proof and communication be received and filed.
Seconded by Cline. Motion carded 7-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 190-03
RESOLUTION DISPOSING OF CITY INTEREST IN LOTS 2'IA AND 22A OF CENTRE GROVE
IN THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, DUBUQUE COUNTY, IOWA
Whereas, pursuant to resolution and published notice of time and place of hearing, published in
the Telegraph Herald, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Dubuque, Iowa
on this 23r~ day of May, 2003, the City Council of the City of Dubuque, Iowa met on the 2nd day of
June, 2003, at 6:30 p.m. in the Public Library Auditorium, 360 West 11 Street, Dubuque, Dubuque
County, Iowa to consider the proposal for the sale of real estate described as:
Lots 21A and 2ZA of Centre Grove in the City of Dubuque, Dubuque County, Iowa
Whereas, the City Council of the City of Dubuque, Iowa overruled any and all objections, oral or
written to the proposal to sell such real estate, except for easement as noted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE,
IOWA:
Section 1. That the sate of City of Dubuque real property described as Lots 21A and 22A of
Centre Grove in the City of Dubuque, Dubuque County, Iowa to the Edward J. zalaznik Trust
dated June 15, 1999, be and the same is hereby approved for the cost of publication, platting and
filing fees. Conveyance shall be by Quit Claim Deed.
Section 2. The City of Dubuque reserves unto itself a perpetual easement including the right of
ingress and egress thereto, for the purpose of erecting, installing, constructing, reconstructing,
repairing, owning, operating, and maintaining sanitary sewer lines as may be authorized by the
City of Dubuque, Iowa as shown on the Plat of Survey of Lots 21A and 22A of Centre Grove in the
City of Dubuque, Dubuque County, Iowa.
Section 3. That the Mayor be authorized and directed to execute a Quit Claim Deed, and the City
Clerk be and is hereby authorized and directed to deliver said deed of conveyance to the Edward
J. Zalaznik Trust dated June 15, 1999, upon receipt of the purchase price in full.
Section 4. That the City Clerk be and is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy
of this resolution in the offices of the City Assessor, Dubuque County Recorder and Dubuque
County Auditor.
Passed, approved and adopted this 2nd day of June, 2003.
Terrance M. Duggan, Mayor
Attest: Jeanne F. Schneider, CMC, City Clerk
Markham moved adoption of the Resolution. Seconded by Cline. Motion carried 7-0.
8
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Keith and Lugene Beming" <bernings@mchsi.com>
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:03 PM
Request to Deny/Delay Re. zoning of Property Near the Northwest Arterial
Dear Mr. Duggan:
At the next City Council meeting, you will be considering a request to rezone (to C-3 Commemial) the land
west of the Northwest Arterial and south of United Rental Center (south of Asbury Rd.). I live on Camelot
Ddve, and rezoning of this property would directly and negatively affect my neighborhood.
I respectfully request that you deny or delay the rezoning request by QHQ Properties until a realistic
compromise can be worked out between Dr. Tim Quagliano, from QHQ, and the neighbors most directly
impacted by this rezoning.
I have two pdmary concems. First, the already busy traffic pattem on the Northwest Arterial would be
worsened by this rezoning either by adding more traffic to the Asbury Rd./Northwest Artedal intersection or by
adding another full access street to the Northwest Arterial. Second, any businesses with late night hours
would disrupt our neighborhood if a significant buffer is not added. Pieese ensure any business that would
operate into the night time hours are not allowed to locate in this area
The plan for this property as it currently stands wilt negatively impact my neighborhood. Please deny or delay
the request to rezone until these negative impacts can be reasonably resolved.
Sincerely,
Keith Beming
4612 Camelot Ddve
583-1914
8/4/2003
Page I of 1
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:.
<Jmjungbluth~aot.com>
<patdciacline@rnchsi.com>; <jconnors63@mchsi.com>; <jmarkhamt~omerenergy.com>;
<aeml0@jnchsi.com>; <danielenicholson@mchsLcom>; <rbuoll@mchsi,com>;
<jschneid@drtyofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:12 PM
Opposition to rezoning of QHQ property - NW Arterial & Asbury
Dear City Council Members:
I am once again writing in opposition to the rezoning of QHQ's property at the NW Arterial and Asbury Road· I did
not think it would be on the August agenda since Mr. Quagliano has not been willing to sit down with our
neighborhood to come to a compromise. As a neighborhood we expected that we would have had an opportunity
to reach a compromise prior to going back to the CH Council. We have tried numerous times to reach out to him
but he does not seem interested in truly negotiating.
I have many of the same concerns I stated in my last e-mail to you and also some new ones:
· This properly has always been planned residential. We looked into that prior to building our home and QHQ
probably knew that prior to purchasing the property. Had it been planned commemial, we would have built
elsewhere.
· There is already other property in the area that is either planned or already zoned commercial that is not being
used at this time. If new businesses wish to be located on the west end of town, I'm sure they can find an
appropdata location on which to build without being this close to a residential neighborhood.
· I am concerned about the traffic problems that are starting to occur on Asbury at this location. High volume
traffic into these types of commercial businesses will only add to the already increased volume of traffic in this
area·
· Mr. BuesJng stated that the berm that currently exists on the arterial would be taken down. This would add to the
traffic noise as well as take away the only barrier that we have to block the view of the arterial traffic.
· I truly believe building commercial this close to my property will lessen the value of our home, which is our only
real asset If the residential portion was built along side of the commercial portion or at least knowing in advance
tflat commemial would be next door, the value of the home would be priced accordingly. Here, this was not the
case.
· We have not received the list of businesses that QHQ would like to include on this land, but from what I am
headng, the types of businesses he is looking at are not compatible with a residential neighborhood.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to and consider my concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary Jungbluth
4911 Twilight Drive
8/4/2003
vag¢ i oi ~
Jeanne Schneider
From:
1'o:
Sent:
Subject:
"Keith and Lugene Beming" <bemings~mchsi.com>
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:03 PM
Request to Deny/Delay Rezoning of Property Near the Northwest Arterial
Dear Mr. Duggan:
At the next City Council meeting, you will be considering a request to rezone (to C-3 Comrr~rcial) the land
west of the Northwest Arterial and south of United Rental Center (south of Asbury Rd.). I live on Camelot
Ddve, and rezoning of this property would directly and negatively affect my neighborhood.
t respectfully request that you deny or delay the rezoning request by QHQ Properties until a realistic
compromise can be worked out between Dr. Tim Quagtiano~ from QHQ, and the neighbors most directly
impacted by this rezoning.
I have two primary concerns. First, the already busy traffic pattern on the Northwest Arterial would be
worsened by this rezoning either by adding more traffic to the Asbury RdJNorthwest Artedal intersection or by
adding another full access street to the Northwest Arterial. Second, any businesses with late night hours
would disrupt our neighborhood if a significant buffer is not added. Please ensure any business that would
operate into the night time hours are not allowed to locate in this area
The plan for this property as it currently stands will negatively impact my neighborhood. Please deny or delay
the request to rezone until these negative impacts can be reasonably resolved.
Sincerely,
Keith Beming
4612 Camelot Drive
583-1914
8/4/2003
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subje~t:
<Jmjungbluth@aoLcom>
<patriciacline@mchsLcom>; <jconnors63@mchsi.com>; <jmarkham@comerenergy.com>;
<aeml0@mchsi.com>; <danielenicholson@mchsi.com>; <rbuoll@mchsLcom>;
<jschneld~cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:12 PM
Opposition to rezoning of QHQ property - NW Arterial & Asbury
Dear City Council Members:
I am once again writing in opposition to the rezoning of QHQ's property at the NW Arterial and Asbury Road. I did
not think it would be on the August agenda since Mr. Quagliano has not been willing to sit down with our
neighborhood to come to a compromise. As a neighborhood we expected that we would have had an opportunity
to reach a compromise prior to going back to the City Council. We have tried numerous times to reach out to him
but he does not seem interested in truly negotiating,
I have many of the same concerns I stated in my last e-mail to you and also some new ones:
· This properly has always been planned residential. We looked into that prior to building our home and QHQ
probably knew that prior to purchasing the property. Had it been planned commemial, we would have built
elsewhere.
· There is already other property in the area that is either planned or already zoned commercial that is not being
used at this time. If new businesses wish to be located on the west end of town, rm sure they can find an
appropriate location on which to build without being this close to a residential neighborhood.
· I am concerned about the t~affic problems that are starting to occur on Asbury at this location. High volume
traffic into these types of commercial businesses will only add to the already increased volume of traffic in this
area.
· Mr. Buesing stated that the berm that currently exists on the artedal would be taken down. This would add to the
traffic noise as well as take away the only barrier that we have to block the view of the arterial traffic.
· I truly believe building commercial this close to my property will lessen the value of our home, which is our only
real asset. If the residential portion was built along side of the commercial portion or at least knowing in advance
that commercial would be next door, the value of the home would be priced accordingly. Here, this was not the
· We have not received the liat of businesses that QHQ would like to include on this land, but from what I am
hearing, the types of businesses he is looking at are not compatible with a residential neighborhood.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to and consider my concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary Jungbloth
4911 Twilight Drive
8/4/2003
rage x o~ 1
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Keith and Lugene Beming" <bemings@mchsi.com>
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:03 PM
Request to Deny/Delay Rezoning of Property Near the Northwest Arterial
Dear Mr. Duggan:
At the next City Council meeting, you will be considering a request to rezone (to C-3 Commercial) the land
west of the Northwest Ar[erial and south of United Rental Center (south of Asbury Rd.). I live on Camelot
Drive, and rezoning of this property would directly and negatively affect my neighborhood.
I respectfully request that you deny or delay the rezonieg request by QHQ Properties until a realistic
compromise can be worked out between Dr. Tim Quagliano, from QHQ, and the neighbors most directly
impacted by this rezoning.
I have two pdmary concems. First, the already busy traffic pattern on the Northwest Arterial would be
worsened by this rezoning either by adding more traffic to the Asbury Rd./Northwest Artedal intersection or by
adding another full access street to the Northwest Arterial. Second, any businesses with late night hours
would disrupt our neighborhood if a significant buffer is not added. Please ensure any business that would
operate into the night time hours are not allowed to locate in this area
The plan for this propert7 as it currently stands will negatively impact my neighborhood. Please deny or delay
the request to rezone until these negative impacts can be reasonably resolved.
Sincerely,
Keith Beming
4612 Camelot Drive
583-1914
8/4/2003
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
~ent:
Subject:
<Jmjungbluth@aol.com>
<patridaciine@mchsi.com>; <jconnors63@mchsi.com>; <jmarkham~comerenergy.com>;
<eaml0@mchsi.com>; <danieienicholson@mchsi.com>; <rbuoll@mchsi.com>;
<jschneid@cityofdubuque.org>
Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:12 PM
Opposition to rezoning of QHQ property - NW Arterial & Asbury
Dear City Council Members:
I am once again writing in opposition to the rezoning of QHQ's property at the NW Ar~rial and Asbury Road. I did
not think it would be on the August agenda since Mr. Quagliano has not bean willing to sit down with our
neighborhood to come to a compromise..A~ a neighborhood we expected that we would have had an opportunity
to reach a compromise prior to going back to the City Council· We have tried numerous times to reach out to him
but he does not seem interested in truly negotiating.
I have many of the same concerns I stated in my last e-mail to you and also some new ones:
· This property has always been planned residential. We looked into that prior to building our home and QHQ
probably knew that pdor to pumhasing the property. Had it bean planned commercial, we would have built
elsewhere.
· There is already other prope~'y in the area that is either planned or already zoned commercial that is not being
used at this time. If new businesses wish to be located on the west end of town, I'm sure they can find an
appropriate location on which to build without being this close to a residential neighborhood.
· I am concerned about the traffic problems that are starting to occur on Asbury at this location. High volume
traffic into these types of commercial businesses will only add to the already increased volume of traffic in this
area.
· Mr. Buesing stated that the berm that currently exists on the arterial would be taken down. This would add to the
traffic noise as well as take away the only barrier that we have to block the view of the artedal traffic.
· I truly believe building commercial this close to my property will lessen the value of our home, which is our only
real asset. If the residential portion was built along side of the commercial portion or at least knowing in advance
that commercial would be next door, the value of the home would be priced accordingly. Here, this was not the
· We have not received the list of businesses that QHQ would like to include on this land, but from what I am
hearing, the types of businesses he is looking at are not compatible with a residential neighborhood.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to and consider my concems.
Sincerely,
Mary Jungbluth
4911 Twilight Drive
8/4/2003
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
July 16, 2003
To: Mayor Duggan & City Council
C/o Ms. Jeanne Schneider, City Clerk
City of Dubuque
City Hall @ 13th & Central
Dubuque, IA 52002
Re: QHQ request for rezoning property located south of Holliday Drive, west of
the Northwest Arterial, from AG Agricultural District to C-3
Dear Jeanne:
As a follow-up to our conversations this a.m. we hereby request that the above
noted rezoning item be placed back onto the City Council agenda for the August
4, 2003 Council meeting.
We will be available at the meeting to review items discussed with the neighbors
since the June 2 public hearing and to answer any and all of the Council
questions that may be asked regarding the project.
Respectfully submitted,
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
cc to: Tim Quagliano
Page 1 of 2
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Lockwood, Mark" <MDLOCKWOOD@BamsteadThermolyne. com>
<rbuoll@mchsi.com>; <aeml0@mchsi.com>; <danielenicholson@mchsi.corn>;
<jmarkham@comerenergy.com>; <jconnors63@mchsi.com>; <patriciacline@mchsi.com>;
<jsch neid@cityofdubuq ue.org>; <ctymg r@cityofdu buque.org>
Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:37 PM
QHQ Property Rezoning Request:. Update from Neighborhood Meeting
Re: QHQ Property Rezoning Request: Update from Neighborhood Meeting.
Dear Council Members
We were asked by council members for an update of our neighborhood meeting
with QHQ in regards to their rezoning request to C3. We apologize for the
short notice of last Friday's meeting and thank you for consideration to
attend.
The meeting was well attended by the neighborhood. Mr. Buesing represented
QHQ with his office manager who took notes. Dr. Quagliano decided not to
attend citing a personal conflict with one of the neighbors.
Dr Quagliano had told the neighborhood representatives that he may not
attend if this person was allowed to participate. The neighborhood
investigated the issue, found little basis and concluded that anyone
effected by the rezoning has the basic right to participate in a civil
mauner. We offered to mitigate the personal conflict between the parties.
The person involved also made calls to Dr. Quagliano in attempts to resolve
the issue, since he is not even sure what the personal issue is. The calls
were not returned. Unfortunately, this resulted with no QHQ owner available
to explain - negotiate expectations for the rezoning. Mr. Buesing did his
best to speak for his understanding of the intentions of QHQ.
The meeting started with Mr. Buesing announcing that Dr. Quagliano would not
be attending and that he was recording the meeting on a tape recorder. We
decided that the vegetation was too tall to find lot markers. The markers
would have been used to determine the 50 foot buffer for drainage slope. We
kept to thc sidewalk and continued down Samantha Dr. We pointed out our
concerns about visibility from the street, decks and back yards especially
as we got to the high ground of Samantha Dr pointing out that Twilight was
higher yet. We voiced concerns over noise pollution from businesses and
late night business delivery tracks. It was then pointed out that the burm
along NW Arterial, which blocks traffic noise, was planned to be removed.
The neighborhood would be exposed to more traffic noise. We also were to
discuss the limits proposed by QHQ on the C3 business, but none have been
received to discuss. The more issues that came up, the neighborhood became
more frustrated since there were no QHQ owners there to explain their
intent.
To conclude the meeting we voiced our concern that the council meeting was
just over a week away, yet we had felt like there had been very little
7/29/2003
Page 2 of 2
progress on negotiations. Mr. Buesing offered to move the rezoning to the
following council meeting. This would give us time to meet again.
By the time we concluded, the neighborhood was concerned with more issues
than when we started. We look forward to me~ing with QHQ owners to develop
a resolution as time is drawing shorn
Again, thank you for your time and protection of our neighborhood,
Concerned Neighbors Promoting Appropriate Development
7/29/2003
Buesintl & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
July 31, 2003
To: City of Dubuque Council
Cio Ms. Jeanne Schneider, City Clerk
City of Dubuque
City Hall @ 13th & Central
Dubuque, IA 52002
From: Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS representing QHQ Development
Re: QHQ request for rezoning property located south on Holliday Drive, west of the Northwest Arterial,
from AG Agricultural District to C-3
In response to the request of Ann Michalski and/or Dan Nicholson at the June 2nd Council meeting,
Tim Quagliano, Tom Casey and I have had one face to face meeting with representatives of the
Samantha Drive neighbors who live adjacent to the proposed development. These are the folks who
purchased the property along Samantha Ddve and built homes there and have subsequently objected
to the QHQ development proposal even in light of Paragraph pp in their restrictive covenants. That
paragraph states that they could "not object to any rezoning modifications to the adjoining QHQ
property". The meeting June 9th meeting was very cordial. Exhibit A is my notes of the items
discussed at the meeting. Subsequent to that meeting, vadous proposals and another meeting has
been held.
Based upon the items discussed at that first meeting, there was a follow-up proposal dated July 15th,
Exhibit B, that we prepared to attempt a compromise between the two parties. Following the proposal,
a response from the Concerned Neighbors Promoting Appropriate Development, (CNPAN), Exhibit C,
was received. This document substantially expanded the items involved in the rezoning discussion far
beyond anything that had been brought up and discussed at the odginal neighborhood meeting. On
Friday, July 25th, another meeting was held attended by many more neighbors and this author. Tim
Quagliano had stated from the beginning of the negotiations that he would meet only with the
Samantha Drive neighbors, and when Exhibit C opened our proposed July 25th meeting to almost
anyone, he stood by his initial word
Based upon Tim's review of discussions at the last meeting and especially the vast difference between
the original proposal that was framed out of discussions in the first meeting and the CNPAN letter reply,
it would appear that further negotiations would be long, drawn out and most likely bear very little fruit.
Given these conditions, we would ask the Council to consider the fact that we have attempted to
negotiate in good faith per your directions. The results of our negotiations can be reviewed in the
attached documents.
Since negotiations appear to us to not be reaching any reasonable conclusions, we have respectfully
asked that the Council to further consider our request for rezoning.
Please be advised of the following:
If it is the wish of the Council to impose those conditions outlined in our July 15th proposal to the
Samantha Drive neighbors, that is acceptable to us.
If you also wish to restrict the uses that may be allowed in the C-3 zone such that a Bar/tavern is not
allowed, that is also acceptable. It is our understanding that this restriction would not eliminate a
restaurant that also serves liquor.
These restrictions would set up the safeguards that we are willing to comply with even in the absence
of any agreement with the CNPAN group or the Samantha Drive neighbors.
Overall, we would like to conclude that this final step in our rezoning efforts for our original 50 acres of
property has not been initiated without giving very serious review of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Some things in the 1997 plan have not and will not be realized such as the continuation of Red Violet
Ddve from Radford Road and connecting to Asbury Road via Holliday Drive. Other items included in
the plan such as the fact that the entire QHQ property is supposed to be a combination of commercial
and residential was accomplished by the development of Samantha Drive in conjunction with the
placement of the restriction in the subdivision covenants. Ken Moore, the developer of Samantha Drive
area had the property rezoned single family residential and could have proposed multifamily living units
for that area but chose not to.
Given the rezoning approvals and now the very real possibility of access to the Northwest Arterial, this
area fits very specifically within the definition of a C-3 Zoning Classification. That is an area that
"provides commercial uses which are designed to serve the motodng public or uses requiring highway
or arterial locations for their most beneficial operation". We believe that this property fits very well
within this definition and should therefore be rezoned to C-3. Your approval of our rezoning application
is respectfully requested.
Respec~ully submitted,
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
For Tim Quagliano,
QHQ Development
Encl: Chronology of Events, QHQ rezoning
Exhibits A, B, C, & D
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, IA 52001
(563) 556-4389
July 31, 2003
Chronology of Events QHQ rezoning
July, 1997 Dubuque Comprehensive Plan came out and shows the area between Asbury Road and the
Northwest Arterial and Sunnyslope Estates as a combination of commemial and residential development. It
shows that there is no access to the Northwest arterial from this area. It does show a direct highway connection
east from Radford Road through Sunnyslope and then north to Asbury Road.
Fall, 1998
Council.
QHQ requests rezoning for all 50 acres of their property. The request was denied by the City
Spdng, 1999 Aldi's Grocery store request rezoning for the northerly 16.5 acres of the property. The area is
approximately the northerly 875 feet of the original 50-acre parcel. This rezoning request includes the area that
now makes up the AIdi's grocery, United Rental and the new branch office of Dubuque Bank & Trust. This
rezoning request was approved
Fall, 1999 A portion of the QHQ property that is located adjacent to the Sunnyslope Subdivision is sold to
Ken Moore of Ken Moore Construction for some type of residential development. Ken Moore requests that the
property be rezoned from AG to single family residential. Rezoning was approved.
Winter & Spring, 1999-2000 The property adjacent to Sunnyslope is developed as single family residential
homes. It is called Embassy West No. 3. There is a homeowner association created as a part of the
development. Samantha Drive is created. Contrary to the Dubuque Comprehensive Plan, no road access or
easements from Samantha Drive to the remaining QHQ property to the east is included or required. As required
in the contract of sale between QHQ and Ken Moore, a clause was inserted into the Restrictive Covenants that
these property owners understand that development will be occurring in the adjacent land to the north and east
and that they are not allowed to oppose this adjoining development, thereby effectively creating a buffer between
the existing Sunnyslope people who opposed the original QHQ rezoning and the remaining QHQ property. These
covenants were known to each Samantha Ddve property owner before the property owner purchased their
property as they were filed of record and shown in each abstract of title.
Spdng 2000 to Fall 2001 The 160 acres adjacent to the QHQ property on the east side of the Northwest
Artedal south of Asbury Road is proposed for development (Plastic Center). The commercial area includes
property extending some 2200 feet south of Asbury Road. Two intersections from the development onto the
Northwest Artedal are approved one with a full-signalized interchange and the other with a dght-in and right-out
configuration. These are located 1000 and 2000 feet south of Asbury Road respectively.
Spdng & Summer 2003 The remaining OHO property is proposed for rezoning. A concept plan is
prepared which tdes to define how the area would most likely be developed. Accesses onto the Northwest
Artedal lines up with those approved for Plastic Center. The existing Holliday Ddve is extended south to those
accesses.
May 7, 2003 The remaining QHQ property rezoning request is unanimously approved by the Zoning
Commission after a public headng.
June 2, 2003 Council meeting where the rezoning request and public hearing are heard. Councilman
Nicholson requested that two conditions be added to the Ordinance, 1. Additional screening to fill in the present
bare spots with replacement as necessary and 2. That no drinking establishments be allowed in the
development. The Council requests that negotiations with the neighbors be held.
June 9, 2003 A meeting was held with representatives from Samantha Drive. Attached as Exhibit A are my
notes from the meeting.
July 15th, 2003 A letter proposal was prepared and submitted to the representatives of the Samantha
Drive neighbors outlining some of the key items that we could accomplish as a part of the development. Copy
attached as Exhibit B. Shortly after this letter was submitted, we made a telephone request for a walk-through
meeting of the Samantha Ddve neighbors for Friday evening, July 25th or some other appropriate time. The July
25th date was agreed.
July 22, 2003 A written response was received by a group known as the "Concerned Neighbors Promoting
Appropriate Development". Copy of their letter is attached as Exhibit C. Many new items not covered at the June
9, 2003 meeting were brought up. Possible attendees at the July 25th meeting were enlarged to include not only
the Samantha neighbors, but any and all interested neighbors as well as the members of the City Council
July 26, 2003 A second neighborhood meeting was held with the neighbors. The July 15th proposal was
reviewed. Present were the Samantha neighbors and a number of other neighbors and or interested folks. The
neighbors wanted to talk about not only the 7/15/2003 letter but the response to Concerned Neighbors Promoting
Appropriate Development letter. A copy of my notes from this meeting is attached as Exhibit D.
August 4, 2003 Dubuque City Council Meeting to address the rezoning request.
EXHIBIT A
June 9th, 2003
Meeting with Samantha Drive Representatives
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting EnEineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
June 9, 2003
Mr. Tim Quagliano
2140 J.F. Kennedy Road
Dubuque, IA 52002
Re: Northwest Arterial Development
My notes from the discussions with the neighbors for this evening:
Met with:
Pat Meehan, 2465 Samantha
Susan Meehan, 2465 Samantha
Danette Putchio, 2220 Samantha
Mark Lockwood, 2215 Samantha
Discussions started with getting background information in place and a review of some of the
aspects of the project with these representative neighbors. Discussed how the development of
Samantha Drive proceeded with regard to the covenants, etc. Presented a fax from the
records to Eldon Digman, long time realtor that indicated that Quality Properties was planning
on rezoning property to commercial. Mark wants copy of fax for his information. Will be
provided.
Discussion started w/Danette talking about ali of the storm water runoff that will now be
coming down the drainage way behind their houses. I indicated to her that I thought that we
could complete the design of the site in such a manner that only the water from the 3 to 1
areas, which sloped to their property, drained in their direction. All of the remaining water
would be channeled down Holliday Ddve and to the City's storm water detention area.
The discussions got into what the slope from the edge of the drainage way toward the
Northwest Arterial would look like. I used some papers and pens to show the trees, the sloped
area and the flatter area that would face Holliday Drive. In general, the concept is to bring the
property adjacent to Holliday Drive up to the level of the road or higher, allow the water to flow
toward the road and to the seed the sloped area and plant with conifer type trees. It was
suggested that they should be patterned and not just placed in a row. It was indicated that this
could be done.
There was a concern raised specifically by the Meehans that they were very close to the C-3
zoned area and how could they distance their property away from the site. I indicated that
there was a "dead" area for development between the drainage way and their home that would
not be altered. This parcel was not defined in size at the meeting but is a triangle about 50' by
100'. The only way that this could be used for development was to relocate the drainage way
and that in my view was not practical. Then, a sloping area at 3 to 1 would be built away from
their property. I defined 3 to 1 as a slope that could be ridden on a riding lawn mower and
could be grassed and treed as may be necessary. The actual width was not defined at this
time, since that information would come out of any final design.
There was concern about the limiting the type of development that would be possible on the
back lots (those closest to them). The kind of limits suggested were closing times, no Burger
Kings, controlled loading and refuse areas, etc. It was also suggested that we should review
the things allowed in C-3 and see if there might be some of the ugly ones that could be
eliminated. That would make it a C-3 with conditions. Tim indicated that he would review and
see what might make sense.
Mark indicated that in general, there was concern about the pollution from noise, smell, and
light. Those kinds of things needed to be best addressed and it may be possible that no
matter what, addressing them may not make it ok with for development as may be defined by
the neighbors.
It was addressed by Susan Meehan that they be kept in the communication loop when
something is proposed so that they can have input. Lights loading dock locations, hours of
operations, etc. Discussion ensued that any new owner may have all of the right in the world
to not be successful and wind up selling to a new party who may not have any discussions with
these neighbors.
Mark wanted a copy of the topographic drawing. Tim will review same and determine if ok.
We are to review items discussed, scheduled to do this 6/10 @ 1:30 and determine what might
be reasonable. I suggested that we prepare a written proposal (won't be in legaleze, might be
in engineeringeeze) where we could talk through the process again. It was suggested also
that a drawing showing the sloping area, the trees, the existing profile, etc. be shown and then
the neighbors might get some sort of feel of what they would see on the other side of the
swale.
Got a copy of the Meehan's presentation to City Council so that we have a listing of the items
that they would like to be addressed for peaceful coexistence.
EXHIBIT B
July 15, 2003
Proposal to Samantha Drive Representatives
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
July 15, 2003
Pat & Susan Meehan
2465 Samantha Drive
Dubuque, IA 52002
Re: Northwest Arterial Development
Dear Pat & Susan:
As a follow-up to the neighborhood meeting, Tim & I have sat down and tried to put in writing
some of the key items that we had discussed. Our goal was put those items into a written
proposal to you and your neighbors regarding the development.
It is our understanding that the following items emerged from our discussions and we believe
that these should be incorporated into our proposal:
Provide a minimum of a 50 feet wide earthen barrier adjacent to the Embassy West
properties where no development would occur. This barrier is proposed to be the area
where a grade change will occur between the Embassy West lot owners drainage way
and the area where development will happen along both sides of Holliday Drive. This
barrier will be graded such that it will slope at a rate of approximately three to one. It
will be seeded in grasses and will have conifer (evergreen) trees and/or shubs planted
in it. The plantings will not be in rows, but will be spaced out within the barrier to
provide further visual separation between the lot owners and any development along
Holliday Drive. An example of the type of barrier may be best seen by driving along
Cora Drive behind the new Mercy Medical facilities. There are two substantial
differences; a.) Cora Drive is located in what was originally the drainage swale. All of
the homes are located directly adjacent to the swale. In our situation, the swale is
between the rear of the home and the barrier providing a much greater feeling of
isolation from the barrier and any subsequent development behind it and; b.) There are
no conifer trees on the barrier, which would further minimize any view of any
development behind Cora Drive.
All drainage from rains and the resultant storm water in the entire development, not just
the area proposed for rezoning will be directed down Holliday Drive and will not
discharge into the drainage way behind the Embassy West lots. The discharge of the
storm water will be onto the City owned property adjacent to and east of the Embassy
West lots. Therefore, the amount of storm water discharging into this drainage way will
not increase, but will decrease as the result of this development. The only area that will
drain toward the Embassy West lots will be the runoff directly from the 50 foot plus wide
barrier itself.
There will be no pedestrian or vehicular access from Samantha Drive or the Embassy
West lots to any part of the proposed commercial development, thus minimizing any
contact between the adjacent properties.
=
Any development within the lots along the west side of Holliday Drive will have seventy-
two degree cut light fixtures. These lights focus the light down onto the commercial
areas and minimize the amount of lighting that may spread beyond the Holliday Drive
area.
In return for agreeing to the above items, Tim would anticipate that the Embassy West lot
owners will, after their review of these development restrictions on the adjoining property along
Holliday Drive, withdraw their objections to the proposed rezoning. This withdrawal would be
completed by the signing and dating of a "Memo of Withdrawal".
Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please feel free to call my office.
Respectfully submitted,
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
CC.'
Dr. Tim Quagliano
Pat & Susan Meeehan
Mark Lockwood
Danette Putchio
EXHIBIT C
July 22, 2003
Concerned Neighbors Promoting Appropriate
Development Response
Concerned Neighbors Promoting Appropriate Development
P.O. Box 3318
Dubuque, IA 52004-3318
July22.2003
Mr. KeunethL. Buesing
1212 Locust S~eet
Dubuque, IA52001
Re: Northwest Arterial Development
Mr. Buesing,
As a neighborhood group, we are in receipt of your informational letter to Pat and Susan Meehan, Mark
Lockwood and Danette Putchio. We will assume that your letter represents QHQ Properties in the City
Council directed "negotiations" with the neighbors of QHQ Properties land adjoining the Northwest
Arterial and Holliday Drive.
We found your letter to be very informative relative to the current plans for barrier construction,
drainage and lighting for the QHQ Properties. Based on the information that we have at this tune, these
are all items we expected to be in the original plans presented to the City Council earlier this year.
Respectfully, we as a neighborhood group, in the spirit of cooperation would like to propose some
additional plans and approaches to this property that will allow us to work with QHQ Properties. With
the following measures in place, we as a group will support the rezonlng with QHQ before the City
Council.
As you know, prior to building or purchasing their homes, the families in this neighborhood expected to
have residential neighbors. This expectation was set by builders, realtors, the Board of Realtors, the
City's Comprehensive Plan and City Planning staff. With that in mind please review the following:
In lieu of an all residential development of single family homes and townhomes, we the neighbors in the
area surrounding the property in question would propose the following be written into your proposal to
the City Council. This will also be entered into the record in order for any proposed zoning changes to
be approved. These restrictions shall be binding on any future owners of this property.
In order to protect and save the natural barrier of trees that exists between the neighbors'
properties.and .QHQ's property, QH.Q will co..nstmct a new drainage ar.e.a on its own property
To me north and east o~the current drainage ditch. This new drain~e~ ditch shall connect at
the north end to the existing culvert near 3,sbury Court Place and v~ll empt,j into the
retention basin on the soutti end. The ditch shall be constructed per city engmeer plans for
appropriate drainage
Once the new drainage ditch is created, the soil taken from that will be used to create a new berm
on the east edge of the new drainage ditch. Grass will be planted on this berm and it will be
mowed regularly to keep a park like look and feel. On top of the berm, at 15-foot intervals, 15-20
foot tall pine trees will be planted to create an additional, year round, buffer between the
neighbors and the QHQ properties.
The first segment of land on the other side of the berm will be zoned and designated specifically
for townhomes.
Beyond the townhomes the property will be rezoned to C-1 with the following restrictions.
a. No businesses that sell alcohol
b. No businesses may stay open later than 9:00 pm and no business can receive deliveries
or truck traffic prior to 7:00 am
c. All trash receptacles shall be kept in a decorated and fenced in enclosure d. No signs
shall be permitted higher than 10 feet other than those signs directly on the Northwest
Arterial
e. All lighting must be directed in an easterly direction away from the residential areas.
f QHQ is directly responsible for any violations of this agreement by its tenants,
leaseholders or buyers.
g. All violations will be resolved within 30 days of QHQ's receipt of written notice.
We look forward to your positive response to our proposal. If you have any questions they can be
addressed either through mail to the P.O. Box above or at the property walk- through on Friday, July 25,
2003 at 6:30 pm.
For that walk-through, we have invited any and all interested neighbors as well as the members of the
city council.
As a neighborhood group concerned with our families and our community, we believe this proposal
represents a reasonable compromise between these two parties. The proposal allows for the integrity and
sanctity of the residential neighborhood while offering QHQ Properties with the opportunity for gaining
a reasonable profit from the development of this land.
Sincerely,
Concerned Neighbors Promoting Appropriate Development
cc: QHQ Properties
EXHIBIT D
July 26th
Meeting w/all neighbors and any other interested
parties
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
July 26, 2003
Mr. Tim Quagliano
2140 J.F. Kennedy Road
Dubuque, lA 52002
Re: Northwest Arterial Development
My notes from the discussions with the neighbors for last evening:
Deb McDonough and I met at 6:30 Fdday eve with:
Pat Meehan, Danette Putchio, Mark Lockwood, John Jungbluth, John's neighbor who lives at the corner of Red
Violet and Twilight, A couple who had just moved into the neighborhood, and several other folks who's name we
did not get dudng the introductions and further discussions.
I explained that the purpose of the meeting per our original concept, pdor to receiving the Concerned Neighbors
Promoting Appropriate Development (CNPAD) letter was to review and detail our ideas of what was in our letter
proposal to them. This proposal was the result of the face to face meeting between Tim and I and the Samantha
Ddve representatives on June 9th.
We started the discussions and spent time explaining how the 3 to 1 sloped grassy barder would fit adjacent to
the drainage way behind the houses. I offered to walk up the side of the existing hill and define how wide the 50
feet was. A question regarding the difference between Cora Ddve and here was raised regarding the relative
elevation of the houses versus the barrier. I agree that there are places along Samantha Drive where the houses
sit up higher than they do along Cora Ddve in relation to the Medical Associates.
We also had discussions about the drainage direction as we had proposed. I think it was further clarified.
There was a question about what would happen to the earthen berm along the Northwest Artedal adjacent to the
QHQ property. I indicated that I did not know for sure, but some parts of it and maybe all of it would be lowered.
One neighbor indicated that even seeing Aldi's from somewhere in or on the deck of his house was a problem.
There was also discussions that trees were promised along the far side of the drainage way with the Aldi's
development. I indicated that I knew about the ones near the Asbury folks, but was unaware of any on the east
side of the swale adjacent to the ditch. A Sunnyslope neighbor indicated that there was no trust between him and
the developer.
There was further discussions about the history of any access road through the site from Red Violet for either care
or pedestrians. I indicated again that there was absolutely no way there could be any access since Tim
Quegliano no longer had control of any of the property that adjoined Samantha Drive and that there were no
existing easement access for either care or pedestrians.
Mark indicated that he was glad to have received the information that we promised to him from the first meeting,
but that he expected to see a map of the site showing the general location of the top of the berm. I indicated that I
did not remember promising that to him from the previous meeting, but would review with Tim the possibility of
providing some kind of a rough drawing.
Near Meehan's home at the north end, I indicated that the portion of the drainage way that was still on QHQ
property had to remain as is under any development concept that I could fathom and that it also seemed
reasonable that these trees stay also.
There was talk about the drainage-way and how Ken Moore was going to finalize the Embassy West # 3
development. I indicated that I thought that Ken had submitted a letter to the City requesting that the subdivision
be approved in its final form and that there had been no response from the City. My further research showed that
we had prepared a tetter last spring for Ken to submit to the City to finalize the subdivision. I talked about the
length of the grass that I expected to see on the barrier. It was not going to be blue grass, but something taller
that would do a much better job of soaking in and controlling rainwater than a mowed 2 inch long bluegrass.
One ofthe neighbors talked aboutthe fact that she could nowseecars over thetrees frem her house. Does this
mean that she would not be totally protected by the barrier and/or it's rows of trees. I indicated to her that if she
could see cars now, she would most likely be able to see those same care in the future when the development
was completed.
Reviewed the location of the Embassy West Subdivision in relation to the City property between them and the
QHQ property. Other than at the very north end, the ditch is owned by either the Samantha Drive property
owners or the City. QHQ owns none of it and therefore doesn't have a final say in those trees. I indicated
however that we, with Ken Moore had fought long and hard to keep them through the development of Samantha
Drive subdivision.
There was discussions about the City's reworking of the storm water detention facilities to the south of the
development and the fact that this took all of the trees to the south. Could the City do the same thing on their
property between the neighbors and QHQ? I said that technically, yes they could, but since that project was now
completed and they hadn't taken any of those trees then, I would not expect them to take any more in the near
future. But no promises here, since they are not ours.
John Jungbluth indicated that he would not be happy with any solution that did not completely assure him that the
City would not take the trees.
Dannette indicated that noise is a major concern, thus the criteda in their CNPAN letter is the only way to address
that item.
John Jungbluth asked if we would consider another drainage way. I answered simply "no". We then got into a
discussion about negotiations, but my answer was still "no".
There was some discussions about the possible location of detention basins, and having one higher up on the hill
the last time. I indicated that I didn't know for sure, but barring other items of concern, we would normally try to
locate them near the lowest portion of the development where water would typically discharge.
There was discussions that the two complete sides need to get together and that now it seems that one side won't
sit down with the group meaning Tim,
It was also indicated that there were other issues that need to be addressed.
I explained that in the CNPAN letter, there were some items that no commemial tenant would accept such as a
ten foot tall sign limit or no alcohol sales at all.
In closing, it was defined to me that there were some items that the some neighbors felt that they absolutely had
to have:
A barder that was really a barrier
trees, not just little guys
Control on noise, smells, and use of property on the other side of the drainage way.
Control of the lights
I indicated that to get through all of these issues, (and some other ones in the letter that did not even come up in
these discussions) that these negotiations could easily go way way past August 4th. They agreed.
I said that I would take their concerns and review with Tim and he would decide how to proceed.
Further talk ensued about his non-presence and my further talk ensued about his willingness to negotiate with the
Samantha Drive people, but not with everyone nor the City Council at such a forum as this.
Group indicated that further negotiations would have to be with everyone, not just Samantha Drive folks.
Meetin9 broke up at about 8:30 pm.
Laura Carstens
City Planner
50 W. 13th Street
City Hall
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
ORDINANCE NO. 77-03
(563) 589-4210
SPACE ABOVE TItIS LINE
]FOR RECORDER
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A (THE ZONING
ORDINANCE) OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE CODE OF ORDINANCES
BY RECLASSIFYING HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTH END OF HOLLIDAY DRIVE, WEST OF THE
NORTHWEST ARTERIAL FROM AG AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO
C-2 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT AND TO C-3
GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WITH CONDITIONS.
NOW, TH~EREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF DUBUQUE, IOWA:
Section 1. That Appendix A (The Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Dubuque
Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by reclassifying the hereinafter-described
property from AG Agricultural District to C-2 Neighborhood Shopping Center
District, with conditions, to wit:
The portion (regardless of how such portion is in the furore
finally subdivided and platted) of Lot 2 of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the
NE 1/4 Section 20, T89N, R2E, in the City of Dubuque, Iowa,
now shown as Lots 8, 9, and 10 on the preliminary Zoning Plan
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference incorporated
herein.
Section 2. That Appendix A (The Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Dubuque
Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by reclassifying the hereinafter-described
property from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial District, with
conditions, to wit:
The portion (regardless of how such portion is in the
furore finally subdivided and platted) of Lot B and Lot 2
of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 Section 20, T89N, R2E,
in the City of Dubuque, Iowa, now shown as Lots 1
through 7, inclusive, and Lot 11 on the preliminary Zoning
Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference
incorporated herein.
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 immediately upon publication, as
provided by law.
Passed, approved and adopted this 6th day of October ,2003.
Patricia A. Cline, Mayor Pro-Tem
Attest:
Jeanne F. Schneider, CIty Clerk
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
Pursuant to the Iowa Code Section 414.5 (2001), and as an express condition ofrezoning
of the property described as:
Lot B and Lot 2 of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 Section 20, T89N,
R2E, and to the center line of the adjoining public right-of-way, all in
the City of Dubuque, Iowa,
which is the subject of Ordinance No. 77-03, a copy of which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, the undersigned property owners, agree
to the following conditions, all of which the property owner further agrees are
reasonable and are imposed to satisfy public needs which are caused directly by the
rezoning:
A) Conditions:
1)
That the north right-in/right-out access shall be installed concurrently
with the extension of Holliday Drive.
2)
That the southern access shall be installed when Plastic Center, Inc.
constructs the signalized intersection located approximately 2,000 feet
south of the Asbury Road and Northwest Arterial intersection.
3)
Prior to construction on each lot within the above-described property, an
earthen barrier shall be constructed along the boundary ofthe lot which lies
adjacent to Embassy West No. 3 Subdivision. The barrier will be graded
such that it will slope at a rate of approximately three-to-one (3:1), with the
grade rising from the property line to the east. The barrier shall be to a
minimum of fifty feet (50') and to a maximum of seventy-five feet (75')
in width, extending from the property line to the east. The barrier will be
seeded in grasses and shall be planted with conifer (evergreen) trees. The
trees shall initially be a minimum of seven feet (7') to eight feet (8') in
height and shall be planted at the top of the barrier. The trees shall be
planted in a zig-zag pattern approximately fifteen feet (15') apart.
4)
All lots within the above-described property shall have seventy-two degree
(72°) cut light parking lot fixtures which focus light downward and thereby
minimize the amount of lighting which would otherwise spread to
surrounding areas. All lighting on lots within the above-described property
shall otherwise comply with City of Dubuque Zoning Ordinance
provisions.
5)
All exterior storage and trash collection areas and the materials contained
therein shall be visually screened from view. The screening shall be a
completely opaque fence, wall or other feature not exceeding a height of
ten feet (10') measured from the ground level outside the line of the screen.
Exposed materials to construct the opaque screen shall be similar in
appearance to materials used for exterior building walls. Colors of the
screen shall match those of the building. All exterior entrances to a
screened storage or trash area shall be provided with a gate or door of
similar design to that of the screen. Gates and doors shall be closed at all
times other than when a vehicle or personnel are using the entrance for
access to and fi.om the screened area.
In lieu of opaque screening, exterior storage or trash collection areas may
be screened with evergreen plant materials selected and designed so that
they will eventually screen the area from all off-site visibility. In such
cases, if initial plantings are of six foot (6') height or greater, the
requirements for other opaque screening shall be omitted.
6)
The provisions of the City of Dubuque Zoning Ordinance shall apply to the
construction and maintenance of signs on lots within the above-described
property.
B)
Reclassification of the Subject Property_. The City of Dubuque, Iowa may initiate
zoning reclassification proceedings to the AG Agricultural District (which
rezonmg will include the removal of the performance standards in Section A
above) if the property owner fails to complete any of the conditions or provisions
of this Agreement.
c)
Modifications. Any modifications of this Agreement shall be considered a zoning
reclassification and shall be subject to. the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance
governing zoning reclassifications. All such modifications must be approved by
the City Council of Dubuque, Iowa.
D)
Recording. A copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Dubuque
County Recorder as a permanent record of the conditions accepted as part of
this rezoning approval within thirty (30) days of the adoption of Ordinance No.
~-~ -03.
E)
Construction. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted as though it
were part of Appendix A of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Dubuque, also
known as the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dubuque, Iowa.
F)
This Agreement shall be binding upon the undersigned and his/her heirs,
successor and assignees.
ACCEPTANCE OF ORDINANCE NO. 77-03
I, Timothy J. Quagliano, representing QHQ Properties, having read the terms
and conditions of the Resolution No. 77-03 and being familiar with the
conditions thereof, hereby accept this same and agree to the conditions required
therein.
Dated in Dubuque, Iowa this 6th day of October, 2003.
QHQ Properties, an Iowa General
Parmership
Timothy J. Quagliano, General Partner
T B OF HOLL~DAY
DITION AND LOT ~
F ~ OF THE SE
1/4 OF THE NE 1/4
SEC. 20 T89N, R2E
TOTAL AREA =
24.3 ACRES +/--
PROROSEB RIGHT
tN~RIGHT OUT
IN~£RSECTION DUMMERCIA[
1100! FEET FROM
AsJ~uRY ROAD
PRO
ZONING
C-3
PROPOSED
ZONING
C-2
LOT 10
ZDNIh~5 PLAN
@HQ PRDPERTI£S
DUBUQUE, IOWA
LDT 3
LOI 4
IN/ RIGHT OUT
LEGEND
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING DITCH LINE
gED CONNECTION
TO APROVED FULL
INTERSECTION FOR
PLASTIC CENTER
LOT 5
¢-3
LOT G
BUESING & ASSOCIATES
CDNSULTING ENGINEERS
LOCATION MAP
Prepared by: Laura Carstens, City Planner Address: 50W. 13th St., C~ Hall Telephone: .589-4210
ORDINANCE NO.
-O3
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A (THE ZONING ORDINANCE) OF
THE CITY OF DUBUQUE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY RECLASSIFYING
HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTH END OF
HOLLIDAY DRIVE, WEST OF THE NORTHWEST ARTERIAL FROM AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO C-3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WITH
CONDITIONS.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DUBUQUE, IOWA:
Section 1. That Appendix A (The Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Dubuque
Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by reclassifying the hereinafter-described
property from AG Agricultural Distdct to C-3 General Commercial District, with
conditions, to wit:
Lot B and Lot 2 of 2 of the SE % of the NE ¼ Section 20, T89N, R2E, and to
the centerline of the adjoining public right-of-way, all in the City of Dubuque,
Iowa.
Section 2. The foregoing amendment has heretofore been reviewed by the
Zoning Advisory Commission of the City of Dubuque, Iowa.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon publication, as
provided by law.
Passed, approved and adopted this day of
2003.
Attest:
Terrance M. Duggan, Mayor
Jeanne F. Schneider, City Clerk
We the undersigned, object to the rezoning of the prOperty south of
Holiday Drive and west of the Northwest ArteriAl. We are requesting
.... 4v' -c.
that the Zoning Advisory Commission ~it~(l~e r~equest to rezone the
property from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial
zoning district.
NAME
City of Dubuque City Council
City Hall
50 W. 13m Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
May 27, 2003
Dear City Council Members,
We would like to express our grave concern about the possibility that tbe area
directly bordering our home is being considered for rezoning by the City of Dubuque.
While economic growth and development is someth/ng tbat we generally support, we do
not support it when its location is directly attached to existing family neighborhoods.
We purchased our new home on Samantha Drive with the understanding that the
area adjacent and across from our lot was zoned as agricultural with the only possibility of
it being changed to residential lots for single homes or condominiums. Our realtor assured
us of this land's intent. We loved the serenity and privacy that Samantha Drive allowed
us, and this was by far the biggest factor in our purchase of this home. If the existing open
land is rezoned to residential, the people interested in developing those lots would be given
a choice whether to build their homes next to United Rentals and Aldi Grocery Store.
Their land value would be determined with the adjacent commercial development in
consideration. Our property was purchased and assessed based upon the neighboring
residential neighborhoods only, and I feel we would be gravely cheated if our land values
would fluctuate now after we have already entered into our mortgages.
Our covenant agreement does state that we will not oppose any rezoning of the
adjacent land. I guess we should have seen through that clause and realized the intended
purpose that this clause possesses for the resale of this land. Ironically, with the topic of
violation of our covenant, Ken Moore the developer of our subdivision is most largely at
fault. He has violated his own directive for project completion within one year. He has a
foundation on Twilight Drive that has sat vacant for three years and is a huge safety issue
as a large gaping cement hole. All yard landscaping and finishing is to be completed
immediately after the completion of a home. There are houses still in our subdivision that
Ken Moore has yet to finish the yard, and families that have hired other landscape
companies to finish due to the complications with Ken Moore. All creek areas are to be
free of debris and rubble. Yet, Ken Moore has yet to clean out the brush that he bulldozed
into the creek adjacent to our house, even though our purchase agreement with the
Dubuque Board of Realtors stated that he must complete this task.
Our daughter is three years old and we hope to have more children some day. Our
neighborhood is a beautiful area with privacy and peacefulness that is beyond compare to
other neighborhoods. We had a choice in purchasing this land knowing the existing zoning
regulations and conditions. Should the City Council decide to change this area, it would be
a great disservice to the children in our neighborhood who would no longer be able to ride
their bikes and tricycles on our street. Heavy truck traffic and direct access entries to the
Northwest Arterial would violate our trust in Dubuque and our rights by not allowing us
the choice to determine what types of neighborhoods we purchased our home in. Our
neighborhood is deeply upset by this proposition and we are pleading that it stay an
agricultural area, with the possibility of changing only to residential development in the
furore. Please consider our pleas for assistance in this. We are not trying to be
unreasonable in our requests. We want the land to be rezoned for only residential purposes
due to the fact that the adjacent land being R4 is why we purchased our homes in this
neighborhood. Please do not rob us of the value of our homes and our quiet nights without
semi dehveries at all hours. There are plenty of commercial land development
opportunities north of Asbury Plaza. As the pictures enclosed clearly demonstrate, a
sufficient barrier is not present and there are gaping holes in the buffer zone. We would be
looking constantly at commercial properties which was not our intention when we
purchased our home.
Sincerely,
Susan and Patrick Meehan
2465 Samantha Drive
Dubuque, IA 52002
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne Schneider
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
<Jmjungbluth@aol.com>
<jsch neid@cityofdubuque.org>
Wednesday, May 28, 2003 1:45 PM
Rezoning of land west of NW Arterial and south of Asbury Road
Dear Mr. Duggan:
I am writing to express my complete disapproval for rezoning the property south of Aldi/Jiffy Lube and west of the
Ar~dal to commercial.
As a property owner close to that area, there are many concerns I have.
1. We moved to Dubuque from Minneapolis 6 years ago. Before we built our house we took the time to look at
the overall comprehensive plan for the City of Dubuque. Since this land was and still is planned for residential
only, we were very comfortable building our home on Twilight Drive. I realize the plan is not "set in stone", but it is
the ONLY document we had to go by. If I knew this area would have bean strongly considered for commercial
use, I would have built my house in Asbury. There are not a lot of locations available to build on the west side of
Dubuque, and we really wanted to live in this area.
2. We have only one major asset and it is our home. I believe the value of our home will drop considerably if
commercial is built so close by.
3. Traffic in this area has already become an issue with the new power center. When I was out yesterday, the line
of fl'affic from the light at the arterial was almost backed up to the new light by Hardees. This will only get a lot
worse with extra commercial traffic.
4. There is almost no barrier between the houses that currently exist and the proposed rezoned site. There is a
very small group of"scrap" trees (box elders, etc.) and plenty of areas that have no trees at all. I believe there
are still drainage issues to be worked out in that area and that may require what little trees that are there to be
taken down.
There is plenty of other land available for commercial development. I'm sure QHQ properties has been soliciting
business and will say he has potential buyers but the fact is that these businesses could easily be located in
areas that are already planned commercial. If QHQ had reviewed the comprehensive plan when they pumhased
the property, just like we did, they would know that this land was planned for residential development and not
commercial. He has also indicated that he feels people won't be willing to build their homes close to the Arterial
but that concern is not valid and has bean proven wrong based on the number of houses near the Arterial just
south of this area.
t would appreciate it if you would consider what this kind of change would do to the many property owners who
live in this area. We were wilting to build our homes in good faith, based on the overall city plan. If you are voting
on this issue, I strongly feel you should vote no to the rezoning of this area as commercial.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Mary Jungbluth
4911 Twilight Drive, Dubuque
5/28/2003
Buesing & Associates Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1212 Locust St.
Dubuque, lA 52001
(563) 556-4389
May 12, 2003
Jeanne Schneider, Clerk
City of Dubuque
50 W 13th Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
Re:
Re-Zoning Request of
QHQ Development
Dear Jeanne:
On behalf of QHQ Properties and myself, we are asking for your approval to
table our rezoning item that is currently scheduled for the May 19, 2003 City
Council meeting. Due to a conflict in our schedules, we would not be able to
attend this meeting date. We would like to re-schedule our rezoning issue to the
June 2nd meeting.
If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to call our office.
.~ctf:y submitted,
Kenneth L. Buesing, PE & LS
Buesing & Associates, Inc.
ACCEPTANCE OF ORDINANCE NO.
-O3
I, Tim Quagliano, representing QHQ Properties, having read the terms and
conditions of the Resolution No. -03 and being familiar with the conditions
thereof, hereby accept this same and agree to the conditions required therein.
Dated in Dubuque, Iowa this //'/ day of /~
2003.
By
City H,41
(563) 5894210 office
(563) 589-4221 fax
planning@cityo fdubuque.org
May 12, 2003
The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
City of Dubuque
City Hall - 50 W. 13th Street
Dubuque IA 52001
RE: Rezoning
Applicant: QHQ Properties (tabled)
Location: South of Holliday Drive, west of the Northwest Arterial
Description:
To rezone property from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General
Commercial zoning district.
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 request originally was scheduled for a public hearing on Apdl 2nd. The request
was tabled to May 7thto allow for additional notification of property owners along
Samantha Drive.
Ken Buesing, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the request, reviewing the
site impact traffic study, existing layout of the property, proposed accesses to the
Northwest Arterial, and extension of Holliday Drive.
Staff reviewed surrounding zoning and land use, the comprehensive plan designation
for the subject property, the history of the rezoning request for the subject parcel, and
their analysis of the traffic study.
There were several public comments in opposition to the proposed commercial zoning.
Speakers expressed concern regarding impact on property values, increases in traffic,
and inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Correspondence in support and in
opposition was received, including a petition.
The Zoning Advisory Commission discussed the request, reviewing the location of
adjacent single-family homes, anticipated impact of the development on the
surrounding street system, and location of proposed street accesses.
QHQ Rezoning
May 12, 2003
Page 2
Recommendation
By a vote of 6 to 0, the Zoning Advisory Commission recommends that the City
Council approve the request with the conditions: (1) That the north right-in/right-out
access shall be installed concurmntiy with the extension of Holliday Drive; and (2) That
the southern access shall be installed when Plastic Center, Inc. constructs their
signalized intersection approximately 2,000 feet south of the Asbury Road and
Northwest Arterial intersection.
Wdtten opposition by property owners within 200 feet of the area proposed for
rezoning is 23.25%. Opposition greater than 20% requires a three-fourths super
majority vote by the City Council to approve the request.
A simple majority vote is needed for the City Council to deny the request.
Respectfully submitted,
Eugene Bird, Jr., Chairperson
Zoning Advisory Commission
Attachments
cc: Mike Koch, Public Works Director
E^RLY SPRING PHOTO
EARLY SPRING PHOTO
EARLY SPRING PHOTO
EARLY SPRING PHOTO
HAY 6TH PHOTO
NAY 6TH PHOTO
NAY 6TH PHOTO
NAY 6TH ~HOTO
Ci~ of Dubuque
Planning Se~ices Department
Dubuque, IA 52001-4864
Phone: 563-589-4210
Fax: 563-589-4221
PLANNING APPLICATION FORM
[] Vadance
[] Conditional Use Permit
I--tAppeal
[] Spedal Exception
[] Limited Setback Waiver
r~[Rezoning
[] Planned District
[] Preiiminaw Plat
[] Minor Final Plat
[] Text Amendment
[]Simple Site Plan
[] Minor Site Plan
[] Major Site Plan
[] Major Final Plat
[] Simple Subdivision
I-tTemporaw Use Permit
[] Certificate of Economic Non-Viabilib/
[] Ceddficate of Appropriateness
[] Other:
Please type or print leqibly in ink
Proper~y owner(s): ~
Address: 3/[30 D3doje Street [Jlit #6 City:
Fax Number:
Applicant/Agent: Tim quagliano
Address: 1500 De]hi Street
Suite 2200
Fax Number: 563-557-59".~
city: Dubt~ue
Mobile/Cellular Number:
Phone: 563-590-5708
DubJque State: Io~l Zip: 52003
Mobile/Cellular Number: 56.3-599-4039
Phone: 563--5~7-5930
State: ][~ Zip: .rv~fiO1
Site location/address: South oF tblliday Drive, ~ of NW Arterial
Existing zoning: AG Proposed zoning: C-3 Historic District:
Landmark:
Legal Description (Sidwell parcel ID# or lot number/block number/subdivision): Lot B & Lot 2 oF 4 oF
[blliday Addition & LOt 2 of 2 oF the SE 1/4 oF the ~E 1/4, Sec. 20, l~, R2E
Total property (lot) area (square feet or acres):. 25.3
Describe proposal and reason necessary (attach a letter of explanation, if needed): ~ ~fl~G3d'led Exhibit A
CERTIFIO~TION: I/we, the undersigned, do hereby certify that:
1. The information submitted herein is true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge and upon
submittal becomes public record;
Fees are not refundable and payment does not guarantee approval; and
Ail additional required written and graphic materials are attached.
Date:
Date:
Fee: ~1~- ~' Received by: .~Z/~
~Site/sketch plan ~ Conceptual Devel~ent Plan
~mprovement plans ~ Design review proje~ description
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
Date: ~/J/~..2 Docket:
[] Photo [] Plat
[] Floor plan [~]Other:
EXHIBIT A
Applicant is requesting a rezoning of Lot B & Lot 2 of 4 of Holliday Addition & Lot 2 of 2 of the
SE ¼ of the NE ¼ Sec. 20, T89N R2E as necessary to continue with the commercial
development along and adjacent to the NW Arterial. Applicant envisions access onto the NW
Arterial to accommodate traffic requirements. Applicant has been contacted on numerous
occasions by smaller and medium sized businesses within the C-3 zoning classification with an
interest in locating their operations onto this site. This request and associated documents have
been prepared in response to this.
Proposed Area to be Rezoned
Applicant: QHQ Properties
Location: South of Holliday Drive,
west of the Northwest Arterial
Proposed Area
to be Rezoned
Description: To rezone property from
AG Agricultural District to C-3
General Commercial zoning district.
~ o o~..
(
~ ....... i~
~_.~ ........ .r---~2 =~ ~ .~
Z
W
SHEET
QHQ PROPERTIES
NW ARTERIAL and ASBURY ROAD
DUBUQUE, IOWA
SITE IMPACT TRAFFIC STUDY
April 22, 2003
PRINTED
~PR ~ ~ 2003
YAGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES
Prepared for:
Dr. Tim Quagliano
QHQ Properties
2140 ,IF Kennedy Road
Dubuque, Iowa 52002
Prepared by:
Jeffrey C. Rhoda, P.E.
Yaggy Colby Associates
215 N. Adams
Mason City, Iowa 50401
641/424-6344
INTRODUCTION
The QHQ development is a multi-use land development proposed at the southwest comer
of the intersection of the NW Arterial and Asbury Road in Dubuque, Iowa~ The proposed
development includes commercial/retail and office/business development. A copy of the
proposed development concept plan is included in the appendix. Access to the proposed
development is provided through the existing Holliday Drive off of Asbury Road from
the north. Access to the property from the east is provided by two entrances offthe NW
Arterial. The ftrst entrance is I,I00 feet south of the Asbury Road intersection and is a
proposed right-in/right-out only entrance. The second entrance is another 1,000 feet
south, opposing the approved full access intersection for the Plastic Center developmem.
This entrance will also operate as a fight-in/right-om access until development on the east
side of the ~ Arterial warrants the construction ora full entrance.
The area bordering the proposed development to the southwest ~s single family
residential. The area immediately north of the development area ~s commercial
development, including an Aldi's Grocery Store, United Rental, Jiffy Lube, a car wash,
and other small buisness offices.
The area north of the proposed development across Asbury Road, known as Asbury
Plaza, is currently experiencing additional growth of the existing commercial and retail
area.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The NW Arterial and Asbury Road both serve as arterial roadways for the northwest
section of Dubuque. The NW Arterial is a divided four-lane roadway and provides for
left-mm lanes at the Asbury Road intersection. A northbound fight-mm lane is also
provided. Asbury Road is a two lane roadway and provides tef~-mm lanes for the east
approach to the NW Arterial intersection. The west approach of Asbury Road to the NW
Arterial intersection is a four-lane undivided roadway with left-mm lanes that transitions
the outside through lane to a ri~:ht-mrn lane.
Traffic control at the NW Arterial and Asbury Road intersection is provided by a fully-
actuated, eight-phase traffic signal with pedestrian phases provided.
Iowa Department of Transportation Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes on
the NW Arterial in 2001 were 11,600 vpd south of Asbury Road and 8,100 vpd north.
The AADT for Asbury Road in 2001 was 11.600 vpd east of the NW Arterial and 15,400
vpd west.
A comparison of the I997 AADT volumes for the NW Arterial and Asbary Road
intersection indicate strong grow-th for the traffic volumes. The north approach to the
NW Arterial and Asbury Road intersection experienced an average 10% per year increase
in volumes. The south approach experienced an average 12% per year increase, the east
Page 1
?~
approach an average 10% per year increase, and the west approach an average 25% per
year increase.
The traffic volumes utilized for analysis in this study were based on the PM Peak Hour
provided in the April 24, 2002. Snyder & Associates, thc Traffic Study Update of the
Asbury Plaza development. The volumes utilized for analysis were from the Snyder
report for the Phase 1 opening day estimates. A diagram illustrating the estimated
volumes from the Snyder report is provided in the appendix.
Capacity analysis of the NW Arterial and Asbury Road intersection as well as the Asbury
Road and Holliday Dr. (SE Entrance - Asbury Plaza) intersection was conducted in the
Synder report for the Phase I opening day conditions. Results of the capacity analysis
indicated NW Arterial intersection is performing at an acceptable Level-of-Service (LOS)
C operation under the Phase 1 traffic estimates. The results of the Holliday Dr. (SE
Entrance - Asbury Plaza) intersection analysis indicated the operation of the intersection
with stop control on the side streets provided an unacceptable operation for movements
exiting the Asbury Plaza site. The report recommended the installation of a traffic signal
at the Holliday Dr, intersection.
The analysis of the impact from the QHQ Properties development assumes the traffic
signal at the intersection of Asbury Road and the Holliday Dr. intersection will be
installed as a part of that project.
TRIP GENERATION
The proposed QHQ development is comprised of two main land uses:
Commercial/Retail and Office/Business. Determination of the estimated trips generated
by the proposed development were developed utilizing information provided in the
Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation manual, 64 Edition. Adjustments
to the estimated trips were made for pass-by and internal attraction based on information
provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Handbook. The
results of the trip generation determination are summarized in the Trip Generation
Estimates uable in the appendix.
Distribution of the estimated raps throughout the adjacent roadway network was
estimated based on the parterus of the existing traffic volumes and assumptions relating
m the interaction of the new development with existing developments. Distribution of
the generated traffic is illustrated in the Development Trips Generated diagram in the
appendix.
Based on this assumed distribution the generated traffic was added to the existing
volumes from the Snyder report and adjusted for pass-by traffic. The estimated turning
movement volumes at each entrance and intersection are ilinsrrated in the Existing -
QHQ Development diagram in the appendix.
Page 2
CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Based on the estimated turning movements (Existing ~- QHQ) capacity analysis
evaluations was conducted at the following intersections:
· Asbury Road and NW Arterial - Signalized
· Asbury Road and Holiday Dr. (SE Em. - Asbury Plaza) - Sig~nalized
· North Drive (QHQ Properties) and NW Arterial - Unsignalize~RI/RO
South Drive (QHQ Properties) and NW Arterial - Unsignalized RI/RO
The results indicate the Asbury Road intersection with Holliday Dr. operates at
acceptable Level-of-Service (LOS) B. However, queue lengths for the EB Left, NB
Lt./ThnffRt., and the SB Thru/Lt. exhibit len~,~chs that are beyond the storage capacity of
the lanes. The queue lengths for the north-south approaches on Holliday Dr. will simply
extend into the development sites. The queue length for the eastbound left tam lane will
either spill out into the thru lane or begin to block the usage of the westbound left mm
lane for the next entrances to the west.
The NW Arterial intersection will perform at an acceptable LOS for the overall
intersection. The EB Left, WB Thru, NB Left, and SB Thru/Rt. exkibiting LOS D
operations. These movements also exhibit queue lengxh estimates that could extend
beyond the capacity of the lanes.
The North Dr. and South Dr. intersections with the NW Arterial (right/in - right/out)
operate at an acceptable LOS.
IM3PROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
The LOS results indicate the Holiday Dr. and NW Arterial intersections with Asbury
Road operate at a generally acceptable LOS. In order to eliminate the LOS D and long
queue operations a couple improvements could be made.
Improving the operation of the Holliday Dr. and NW Arterial intersections with Asbury
Road is accomplished through the reconfiguration and/or the addition of extra approach
lanes. The north and south approaches to the Asbury Road and Holliday Drive
intersection would be widened or reconfigured to accommodate dedicated left mm lanes.
The thru and fight mm movements can operated together in a single lane.
The intersection of Asbury RoM and the NW Arterial would include widening to create a
dual left-mm lane for the northbound lefts. The east approach would be widened to
proyide a dedicated westbound right mm lane.
These proposed Lmprovements would allow all the intersection movements to operate at
LOS C or better and maintain queue leng~d~s within or very close to the provided storage
len~mths.
Page 3
The need for these improvements is created by the short-term restrictions on the NW
Arterial with the rig~ht-in/right-ont entrances for both the North Drive and South Drive
entrances. The future construction of a fail. signalized intersection at the South Drive
location in conjunction with the Plastic Center development wili provide a much needed
second access point for the site traffic.
FORECAST TRAFFIC
The forecast year 2025 was evaluated based on the traffic volumes in the April 24, 2002,
Snyder & Associates, Inc Traffic Study Update of the Asbury Plaza development. In
addition, the estimated traffic generated by the proposed Plastic Center development was
also included in the forecast estimate. A 2025 traffic volume diangram
Capacity analysis evaluations were conducted under the assumption the South Entrance
access on the N~V Arterial would be a full intersection with a traffic signal. The lane
configurations for this intersection would provide dedicated [eft turn lanes for ail
approaches. The lane configurations for the Asbury Road and Holliday Dr. intersection
follow those proposed in the Improvement Alternatives section.
The results of the capacity analysis indicated the intersections would generally operate at
acceptable LOS. The Asbury Road and Holliday Dr. intersection and the NW Arterial
and South Entrance intersection exhibit LOS C or better operation and queue lengths
within the provided storage for ail movements.
The Asbury Road and NW Arterial intersection required several lane additions to provide
an acceptable overall LOS operation. Dual left turn lanes, dedicated right turn lanes, and
two thrn lanes are needed on all approaches to exhibit an overall intersection operation of
LOS C. However, some of the movements still exhibit LOS D operation with queue
lengths that exceed the lane capacities.
CONCLUSION
The proposed QHQ develbpment traffic, with restrictions from the right-in/fight-out
movements on the NW Arterial for the near famre, will not produce significantly
negative impacts to the existing roadway system. Minor lane config'uration
improvements as described in the Improvement Alternatives section could provide
improved operations for the short-term as well as the long-range 2025 traffic projections
at the Asbury Road and Holliday Dr. intersection. The future creation of a fall,
signal/zed intersection at the South Entrance in conjunction with the Plastic Center
development is needed to maintain efficient and safe traffic operations while providing a
second access point for the QHQ development.
The forecast year 2025 traffic estimates will require significant upgrades in lane
configurations for the NW Arterial and Asbury Road intersection to accommodate the
system demands.
Page 4
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
,/ZONING
LOT B & LOT 2 OF
4 OF HOT.T.mAY
ADDITION AND LOT 2
OF 2 OF THE SE
~/~ OF THE ~S ~/~
SEC. ZO T89N, R2E
,TOTAL AREA =
2~.3AC1~S
I
PRDRDSED RIGHT
IN~,RIGHT OUT
IN~:ERSECTION
llOO! FEET FROM
AS~URY ~DAD
P~S~
C-3GENERAL
~ I*'IT 10
LE~ 9
LDT 8
847 ~
LOT '3
LD'r 4
!..D'F 5
LOT6
APPROVED RI~T
IN/ RIGHT OUT
LEGEND
PRDPD:~.D LOT LINE
_EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING CONTOUR
BL~SING & ASSOCIATES
--PROPOSED CONNECTION
TO APRDVED FULL
INTERSECTION FOR
PLASTIC CENTER
LDCATIDN MAP
EXISTING TREELINE
REZONING STAFF REPORT Zoning Agenda: April 2, 2003
Property Address:
Property Owner:
Applicant:
Property south of Holliday Ddve, west of the Northwest Arterial
QHQ Properties
Tim Quagliano
Proposed Land Use: Commemial
Proposed Zoning: C-3
ExiSting Land Use: Vacant
Existing Zoning: AG
Adjacent Land Use:
North - Commercial
East - Commercial
South - Residential/detention basin
West- Residential
Adjacent Zoning: North - PC
East - PC
South - R-1
West- R-1
Former Zoning:
1934 - County; 1975 - County; 1985 - AG Total Area: 25.3 acres
Property History: The subject property was proposed for rezoning to PUD Planned Unit
Development with a PC Planned Commercial District designation in January 1999. The Zoning
Advisory Commission recommended approval of the request with several conditions. The
City Council denied the request. Subsequently, a new application was submitted and a
reduced Planned Commercial Distdct was approved by the City Council in March 1999 on the
north portion of the parcel.
Physical Characteristics: The subject property generally drains to the southeast to an area
currently owned by the City of Dubuque and is used as a regional storm water detention
facility. The subject property has frontage along the Northwest Arterial (Highway 32) and
abuts residential property on the west side.
Concurrence with Comprehensive Plan: The subject property was designated for a
mixture of commercial and multi-family residential development.
Impact of Request on:
Utilities: Existing City water and sewer utilities are adequate to serve the proposed
development through extensions along Holliday Drive.
Traffic Patterns/Counts: Holliday Ddve is built to a collector street standard; however.
there are no traffic counts available. The Northwest Arterial is classified as a major
artedal and based on IDOT traffic counts taken in 2001, this section of the Northwest
Arterial carries approximately 12,600 average daily tdps. Asbury Road is classified as a
minor artedal and carries approximately 15,400 average daily trips.
Public Services: Existing public services are adequate to serve the site.
Environment: Staff does not anticipate any significant adverse impact to the environment
provided adequate erosion control is provided during all phases of development of this
property, and that adequate storm water control is provided.
REZONING STAFF REPORT Page 2
Adjacent Properties: The proposed rezoning to commercial zoning will increase the
volume of traffic in the immediate area and increase ambient light and noise levels.
CIP Investments: None proposed.
Staff Analysis: The requested rezoning is from AG Agricuitural to C-3 General Commercial
The proposed development provides for the extension of Holliday Drive to terminate in a cul-
de-sac with two proposed accesses to the Northwest Arterial. These two accesses coincide
with previously approved accesses for the Plastic Center, Inc. project on the east side of the
Northwest Arterial.
The applicants have requested C-3 General Commercial zoning to allow for a wide range of
business uses that would be a good t'r[ with the contacts they are receiving from small and
medium sized businesses interested in locating their operations to this site. The subject
property is bordered on the north by planned commercial, to the east by planned commercial,
to the south by residential and the City's regional storm water detention basin and to the west
by residential.
The current Comprehensive Plan designates the QHQ Property for a mixture of commercial
and multi-family residential. The Comprehensive Plan looked at the entire parcel from Asbury
Road to the City's detention area as one parcel, and anticipated that the highway frontage
would be most conducive to multi-family and commercial.
The City of Dubuque water and sewer service are adequate to serve the site with the
necessary extensions. Storm water control will be required as part of any new development
of the property.
Access to the area will be provided by an extension of Holliday Drive of approximately 1,400
feet resulting in a total length of Holliday Drive of approximately 2,400 feet. The applicants
are proposing two accesses to the Northwest Arterial. The first access would be
approximately 1,000 feet south of Asbury Road and is proposed as a right-in/right-out
intersection. The second access is proposed as a full intersection approximately 2,000 feet
south of Asbury Road. These two accesses coincide with previously approved accesses for
Plastic Center, Inc. on the east side of the Northwest Arterial. Attached to this staff report is a
memo from Public Works Director Mike Koch outlining Engineering staff's comments on the
submitted traffic study and the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding street
network.
Planning staff recommends that the Zoning Advisory Commission review Section 6-1.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance that establishes criteria for reviewing rezoning requests.
Reviewed:
Date:
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
MEMORANDUM
April 30, 2003
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Kyle Kritz, Planning Services
Michael A. Koch, Public Works Director:~
QHQ Traffic Study
This is a summary of the findings of the traffic study performed by Yaggy Colby
Associates analyzing the effect of extending existing Holliday Drive and rezoning
the additional property into a mixture of commercial/retail and office/business
uses.
Access to the development will be through the existing signalized intersection of
Holliday Drive and Asbury Road. Accesses are also planned onto the Northwest
Arterial 1,100 feet south of Asbury Road and a second access 2,100 feet south
of Asbury Road. The northerly connection to the Northwest Arterial will be a
right-in/right-out only access. The southerly connection will initially operate as a
right-in/right-out access, until an already approved traffic signal is constructed by
the Plastic Center at some point in the future. This connection would then tie into
the signalized intersection with full access in all directions. A diagram of the full
build-out access plan is attached.
The traffic study is divided into two parts:
1. Phase I analyzes the two proposed right-in/right-out connections; and
2. Phase II analyzes one right-in/right-out connection and one fully-signalized
intersection.
The proposed development is anticipated to generate 911 additional vehicle trips
during the PM peak hour. Of these, 337 would be entering and 574 would be
exiting the site.
The following is a summary of the traffic impacts of this additional traffic at the
various access points.
Page 2
April 30, 2003
Holliday Drive and Asbury Road Intersection
The existing signalized intersection at Holliday Drive currently operates at a Level
of Service (LOS) "B". The additional traffic generated by the QHQ development
would initially cause a slight increase of 1.3 seconds in the average delay per
vehicle. This will not have a detrimental impact on the operational Level of
Service at the intersection.
In the Year 2025 projections, this intersection shoutd still operate at a Level of
Service "B". With the additional QHQ traffic, this is anticipated to drop, but only
to a Level of Service "C" operation.
Asbury Road and Northwest Arterial Intersection
The traffic signals at Asbury Road and the Northwest Arterial currently operate at
a Level of Service "C". With the full build-out of the QHQ development, this
intersection is expected to drop to a Level of Service "D" operation, adding
approximately 20 seconds of average delay time to entering vehicles. This
increase in the average delay at the intersection is caused by the limited potential
of the right-in/right-out access onto the Northwest Arterial to disperse the
additional traffic over several access points. The future construction of a fully-
signalized intersection at the south access to the Plastic Center development will
make a significant improvement to this Level of Service.
In the projected Year 2025, either with or without the QHQ development, dual left
turns will be needed on all four approaches to the intersection; and six lanes will
be needed for the Northwest Arterial to maintain a Level of Service "C" operation.
Without these improvements, the intersection is anticipated to fail during peak
hour traffic and would operate at a Level of Service "F". (These findings are
consistent with the traffic study performed for the Plastic Center development.)
North Drive and Northwest Arterial
Because access at this location will be limited to right-in/right-out, both the
opening year and projected 2025 traffic with the QHQ development are
anticipated to operate at a Level of Service "A".
South Drive and Northwest Arterial
Initially because the drive will be limited to right-in/right-out, it should operate at
a Level of Service "A' with the QHQ development.
Page 3
April 30, 2003
tt is assumed for analysis considerations that this drive will be signalized by the
Year 2025. This signalized drive is expected to operate a Level of Service "A"
operation for projected Year 2025 without the QHQ traffic, and a Level of Service
"B" operation with the additional QHQ traffic.
Conclusion
The traffic analysis shows little effect on traffic delays with or without the QHQ
development as currently planned except for the intersection of Asbury Road and
the Northwest Arterial. Because of the limited potential use of the right-in/right-
out, a significant amount of additional traffic would be forced to utilize Holliday
Drive, and therefore, the Asbury/Northwest Arterial intersection, causing this
additional delay. The signalization of the south drive could mitigate some portion
of the anticipated delay at the Asbury/Northwest Arterial intersection.
The previously mentioned addition of two (2) lanes to the Northwest Arterial and
the addition of dual left turns for all four approaches to the Northwest Arterial will
be needed by the Year 2025 with or without the QHQ development.
MAK/vjd
cc: David Ness, Civil Engineer
Attach.
QHQ Rezoning I 'roperty in Opposition
'~ 200' Radius
- Rezoning Bounda[y
Property in Opposition
2420
2400
.)380
Property
2325
2305
2245
2215
2OO
Feet
April 24~ 20C~
Zonin~ Adviso~ Commission
City Hal~
Dubuque, IA 52001
APfl
Cfl'Y OF DUBUQUE
PLANNING SF.A'VICES DEPARTMENT,
PUBLIC HEARING ~VLA. Y 7, 2003
QHQ PROPERTIES - WEST OF NORTHWEST A~RTERIAL
Dear members of the Zoning Advisory Commission:
Let' s review the intersection of Asbury Road and Northwest Arterial.
NW This urea is zoned commercial, partially developed with the potential for heavy
commercial use. Them is an access directly onto the Northwest A~terial with the future intention
to install a traffic light on the arterial.
NE Presently AG, but close by is the Church of the Resurrection and its school. This has
scheduled heavy traffic.
SE City' officials have designated this as heavy commercial with the promise of two accesses
directly on the arterial.
SW The property adjacent to the comer roadways is already developed commercial with an
extra traffic light on Asbuty Road.
This intersection is already a traffic nightmare!
The city of Dubuque has zoned more than half of this intersection for commercial developers. I
am happy for our retailers, but enough is enough.
Prudent and responsible zoning would zone the property at issue at this public hearing as
residential, not mom commercial.
If this property was residential it would follow the residential zoning and development directly to
the south and the west It would make for a nice complete area of homes. Residential zoning
would he less vehicle traffic. Residential building lots within the city limits of Dubuque are
This urea cannot handle any mom commercial development I live in the affected neighborhood,
and ifI didn't live here, I would still insist proper planning now is necessary to avoid major
problems in the near future.
Please deny the appliealion to rezone the QHQ property as C-3 General Commercial
Sincerely,
~ t0 I-ngh Cloud Dr.
Dubuque, 520o2
City of Dubuque
Attention: Eugene Bird
Zoning Advisory Commission
City Hall
50 W. 13~ Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
1
We would hke to express our grave concern about the possibility that the area directly
bordering our home is being considered for rezoning by the City of Dubuque. Wl~le economic
growth and development is something that we generally support, we do not support it when its
location is directly attached to existing family neighborhoods.
We purchased our new home on Samantha Drive with the understanding that the area
adjacent ~md across fr6m' our lot was zoned as agricultural with the only possibility of it being
changed to residential lots for single homes or condominiums. Our realtor assured us of this
land's intent. We loved the serenity and privacy that Samantha Drive allowed us, and this was
by far the biggest factor in our purchase of this home. If the existing open land is rezoned to
residential, the People interested in developing those lots would be given a choice whether to
build their homes next to United Rentals and Aldi Grocery Store. Their land value would be
determined with the adjacent commercial development in consideration~ Our property was
purchased and valued based upon the neighboring residential neighborhoods only, and I feel we
would be gravely cheated if we were not given the opportunity to have our property assessed
based upon the appropriate surrounding propeffies. ·
It is my understanding that property owners with land that directly lies within 200 feet of
the property in question for rezoning are to be notified via written communication prior to the
vote about the proposition to change. I have personally never been provided with information
about the possible change for the property in question from the city, nor have any of my
neighbors on Sumantha Drive, all with property also within 200 feet of the agriculturally zoned
land. This is a violation of our rights as property owners and should automatically prevent a vote
on this property due to inappropriate procedural methods in the arrangement of this vote for
Wednesday, April 2.
Our daughter is three years old and we hope to have more children some day. Our
neighborhood is a beautiful area with privacy and peacefulness that is beyond compare to other
neighborhoods. We had a choicein~purchasing this land Imowing the existing zoning regulations
and conditions. Should the City Council decide to change this area, it would be a great
disservice to the children in our neighborhood who would no longer be able to ride their bikes -'
and tricycles on our street. Heavy truck traffic and direct access entries to the Northwest Arterial
would violate our trust in Dubuque and our rights by not allowing us the choice to determine
what types of neighborhoods we purchased our home in. Our neighborhood is deeply upset by
this proposition and we are pleading that it stay an agricultural area, with the possibility of
changing only to residential development in the future. Please consider our pleas for assistance
in this.
Sincerely,
Susan and Patrick Meehan
,2465 Samantha Drive
Dubuque, IA 52002
We the undersigned, object to the rezoning of the property south of
Holiday Drive and west of the Northwest Arterial. We are requesting
that the Zoning Advisory Commission deny the request to rezone the
property from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial
zoning district.
NAME
ADDRESS
We the undersigned, object to the rezoning of the property south of
Holiday Drive and west of the Northwest Arterial. We are requesting
that the Zoning Advisory Commission deny the request to rezone the
property from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial
zoning district.
ADDRESS ·
We the undersigned, object to the rezoning of the property south of
Holiday Drive and west of the Northwest Arterial. We are requesting
that the Zoning Advisory Commission deny the request to rezone the
property from AG Agricultural District to C-3 General Commercial
zoning district.
ADDRESS
MAY - 6 2003
CITY OF DUBUQUE
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
107 ii. 18th. St. Cedar FalLs, IA. 30613 (319) 266-9999
March 20, 2003.
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Salvatore Cracco and I own "Little Italy" an Italian restaurant in Cedar Falls, Iowa. Little Italy is an
authentic full service Italian pizza, pasta and seafood restaurant. I have been in contact with QHQ Properties
and am very interested in opening a restaurant on North West Arterial Dr. in Dubuque Iowa. Due to its location
QHQ Properties' proposed site would be ideal for our type of operation. Therefore we are in favor of the
rezoning of this land and look'forward to bringing Italian and Seafood to Dubuque.
Thank you,
Salvatore Cracco
President
Little Italy Inc.
Page 1 of 1
kyle kritz
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
<Slccmall @aol.com>
<kkrilz@cityofdubuque. org>
Monday, May 05, 2003 7:08 PM
QHQ Zoning Request for property on Holiday Street
Dear Mr. Krifiz:
I would like to express my support of QHQ'S zoning request I have been
interested in that area of your city for as a potential location for one of my
clients. I feel that the additional access to the artedai would be a big plus
for the property.
Sincerely yours;
Merlin Lawrence
Vice President Dial Land Development
MAY -6 2008 .
Cl~ OF DUBUQUE
PI..ANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
March 29, 2003
Zoning Advisory Commission
c/o City Planning Services
City Hall, 50 West 17 Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
APR 7 2003
CITY OF DUBUQUE
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Dear Commission Members,
We are writing in support to C-3 zoning change from residential for a prope~y currently
held by QHQ Properties located West of the Northwest Arterial and South of Aldis and
United Rental Center. The current adjoining commercial properties have been excellem
neighbors and have shown only increased property value in our neighborhoods over the
past few years. - -
We would like to support the growth of a retail base in th.is area. We also fully support
any potential job creations. Please let Dubuque grow.
Thank you,
Jennifer and Ronald Tigges
Property owners at:
4927 Wild Flower Drive(1 block from Samentha Drive)
Dubuque, IA 52002
March 27, 2003
CITY OF DUBUQUE
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
City Zoning Advisory Committee
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Lawrence Hutchison. My wife and I and our two young children reside at 4942 Red Violet Drive
on the west side of Dubuque. We recently received an informational letter fiom one of our neighbors and we are
expecting to receive a petition in regards to a parcel of property owned, I believe, by QHQ Properties, just east
of our subdivision. This parcel of land is located directly south of Aldi's, just offthe Northwest Arterial.
Apparently there is a concern with some in the neighborhood that development of this land will be detrimental to
their property values and bothersome in other asundry ways. However, it is my contention and those of some of
my other neighbors, who may not be quite as vocal as I, that development of this property is actually beneficial
not only to our local community but to the community at large. I think Dubuque in general, as well as the
neighboring township of Asbury would benefit dramatically fi'om further development of this area as well as the
other area around Northwest Arterial and Asbury Road.
A large concern, which of course we would share, is if a thoroughfare involving Red Violet or one of the other
private streets through SunnySlope would be used to access that area or to connect Northwest Arterial to Red
Violet Dr. Certainly if that were the case, I would be markedly concerned because of the danger to our small
children. However, it appears the only reasonable access to that'area is directly offNorthwest Arterial or via the
access road behind Aldi's. Given that commercial type access, I think requiring only residential housing there
would be unreasonable.
Further development of reataurants or businesses will bring more people, income and taxes into the community.
Although one might like to look out their back window or offtheir back deck and see trees and grass and wide
open spaces, one must defer to the common good. We would much rather see development of this area and
thus concentrate on commercial development around the Northwest Arterial crossroads than see that ~
..... ~qm~rely~;:f/ //
,~-~en~ l~'-I~utchison, M.D.
/
LRH/jkJ
Law Offices Of
FUERsTE~ CAREW~ COYLE~ JUERGENS & SUDMEIER~ P.C.
900 SECURITY BUILDING
151 WEST §TH STREET
DUSUQUE, IOWA 52001-6832
W~ C. FUEKSTE
ALLAN J. CA~EW
MICB. AF~ J. COYLE
· STEPHEN J. JUERGEN$
ROBEKT L. SUDMEIER*
DOUGLAS M. HENry
Ms. Kelly Larson
Dubuque Human Rights Commission
City Hall
13th and Central
Dubuque, IA 52001
September 10, 2003
Re: QHQ Re-Zoning Request
Dear Ms. Larson:
(563) 556-7134
mail~£ccis.com
WRITER'S D/KECT
E-M~IL ADDRESS
siuer eens,~£ccis.com
As you know, we represent QHQ Properties.
We understand that the neighbors opposing QHQ's re-zoning request have rej, ect~d
the proposal for mediation outlined in my August 29, 2003 letter to Mr. Mark Lockwood.
We also understand that the neighbors will mediate only if QHQ agrees to a l~ee mediator
provided by the City.
Please be advised that QHQ would be willing to engage in a mediation process
with Hiram Melendez acting as mediator. We propose that a mediation session be held
on Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 1:30 p.m. at either City Hall or City Hall Annex. Dr.
Quagliano will be personally present at the mediation, together with two (2)
representatives. The neighbors group would be represented by three (3) representatives
of its choice, who have authority to make binding agreements toward a resolution of all
issues in this matter. The positions of the parties for mediation and the ulthnate outcome
of the mediation may be reported by either party to Dubuque City Council and individual
City Council members.
We understand that you are willing to attempt to arrange the mediation. We ask
that we have the neighbors' reply to this proposal by the close of business on Thursday,
September 18, 2003, so that Dr. Quagliano and his representatives can schedule
accordingly.
FUERSTE, CAREW~ COYLE, JUERGENS & sUDMEIER, P.C.
Ms. Kelly Larson
Page 2
September 10, 2003
We assume that you will contact Mr. Melendez to make any necessary
arrangements with him.
We hope to hear from you directly.
Very truly yours,
FUERSTE, CAREW, COYLE,
JUERGENS & SUDMEIER, P.C.
SJJ:kad
cc: Dr. Tim Quagliano
Kenneth L. Buesing
BY: ' . ~)c~
Dubuque city Council Members (Terrance M. Duggan, Daniel E. Nicholson;
Ann Michalski, John Markham, Roy Buol, Joyce Connors, and Patricia Cline)