Planning, Programming & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

It is 400 pm. No, you're good. I will go ahead and call this uh planning, programming, zoning meeting to order. Um, first up, I I need an approval of the December 9th, 2025 agenda. So, move Rucker. Second, Shelberg. There's a motion, a second. Any discussion? All those in favor of approving the agenda signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? I. Motion carries. Uh next up on go ahead go through the meeting minutes and when someone's comfortable with that uh I'll entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes.

So moved Shelberg second. Cher there's a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor of approving the meeting minutes signify by saying I. I. Thank you. I

um and that's just a little bit of lag on the video. Oh, I know he's voting yes. Uh, at this time, we will um allow people at in the council chambers to come up and speak on non-aggenda items. Um, if you do speak on agenda items or non-aggenda items, just make sure you state your name and address. Is there anybody on Zoom that would like to speak on non-aggenda items? All right, we'll move on here to new business. The time is 4:03 p.m. and a hearing is scheduled at this time for a request by RNK Properties LLC for a site plan amendment for a 12,000 square ft industrial building and a 12,000 ft phase 2 addition located in the M2P planned industrial district located northeast of 4050 Lever C Road. Pages 7 through 18 in the packet. Uh, at this time we should receive and place on file a statement of verification signed by John Dornoff stating, "I, John Doornoff, do hereby certify that all properties within 250 ft of the proposed site plan amendment are currently owned by the city of Waterlue. Therefore, no notice letter was sent. Could we have a motion to receive and place this notice on file?"

So, moved you. Second, Shelberg. All right. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Um, for those of you who wish to speak for or against this request, we would ask that you please come to the microphone and identify yourself by name and address. The members of the commission should also identify themselves before speaking into the microphones. Staff report. The request, this is Tamala with staff. The request to construct the new 12,000 foot industrial building and 12,000t phase 2 addition would not appear to have a negative impact upon the surrounding area as it would appear to be compatible with the industrial character of the area and zoning classification. The development would not appear to have a negative impact on existing pedestrian or traffic conditions in the area. The site in question would be accessed from Warp Drive. No trails or sidewalks are located adjacent to the site in question. The site is zoned M2P plan industrial district and has been and and has been since the adoption of ordinance 4077 on March 3rd, 1995 when it was reszoned from A1 agricultural district north, east, south, and west industrial uses and vacant lots zone M2P plan industrial district. Your property is not located within a flood plane according to the 2024 FEMA flood plane maps. The warehouses to the west of the site in question have been developed in 2023 and 2024 with the Waterl Regional Airport buildings to the east of the site in question built in 1993. Multiple lots of the west are currently vacant. The request does not appear to have negative impact on drainage. There is an 8 in water man along Warp Drive. A varying in width storm water management and drainage easement exists along the rear property line and a 10- foot public utility easement exists along the front property line.

Among other purposes, the M2P plan industrial district aims aims to provide greater flexibility and diversification of land uses and building locations. Therefore, the site plan amendment meets all the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The applicant is proposing to build a 12,000 foot industrial building and a 12,000 foot phase 2 addition located in the M2P plan industrial district located northeast of 4050 Levery Road. According to the site plan, the front yard setback is 116 ft, rear yard setback is 204 ft and the sideyard setback to the west property line is 61 ft and the proposed phase 2 addition would be 71.88 ft from the southeast corner to the east property line. The vehicle use area is set back 60 ft from the established street rightway and south south lot line parallel to warp drive and set back 5 ft from the west lot line which complies with the 5 foot minimum setback requirement. Request the request for an operator to have negative impact on the surrounding area of traffic conditions in the area. Planning will need a landscaping plan prior to issuance of a building permit. The parking requirement is one parking space for each 250 square feet of office floor area and one space for each two persons employed on the maximum shift. The interior layout indicates approximately 98.05 square feet of office space which would require four parking spaces and applicant and an applicant notified planning that there would be 10 people employed on the maximum shift between the field and office which would require five parking spaces. According to the site plan, the applicant is proposing 16 parking spaces, including one handicap space. The vehicle use area is indicated to be hard surfaced. Um though the site plan does not indicate parking on said gravel area. To reiterate the ordinance, vehicle parking should not be permitted on the gravel

area. Equipment and product storage can be gravel, but staff would not want to see such storage areas in the front yard. The building will be 21 feet and 10 1/2 in tall. Uh therefore, because of the greater flexibility allowed in the M2P plan industrial district, the building elevations meet all the requirements of the zoning ordinance. [snorts] Uh the future land use map designates this area as industrial. The request is in conformance with the future land use map and current plan for the area. Therefore, staff recommends that the request by RNK Properties LLC for a site plan amendment for 12,000 foot industrial building in a 12,000 foot phase 2 addition located in the M2P plan industrial district located northeast of 4050 Levery Road would be approved for the following reasons. The request is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and future land m land use map for this area. The request would not appear to have a negative impact on traffic conditions in the area. The request for have a negative impact upon the surrounding area and would be compatible with the surrounding development and with the following conditions. That the site plan is updated to change gravel areas in the front yard to be landscaped and a dust-free surface such as seal co seal coat or treated with an oil emulsion. Uh condition two is that the site plan meets all applicable city codes, regulations, etc. including but not limited to parking, landscaping, screening, drainage, etc.

This is Shre note that [snorts] was a change in that recommended condition there. The original one um noted to suggest to remove all gravel areas after further review um with the applicant based on their needs. um the recommended conditions [clears throat] changing it to allow as long as it's a dustfree surface and put some landscaping to help screen it a little bit. And it was also noted it's kind of in the middle of the industrial park. So, it's not going to be a real high visibility spot.

All right. Thank you. Uh is there anyone on the commission that has questions for staff? No. Okay. Um, is the applicant here? Come on up. State your name, address, uh, tell us a little bit about what's going on here. Nick Brewer, 12643 Wav, Cedar Falls, representing RNK Properties. Um, just to kind of clear things up as far as the what was referred to as the gravel parking, the intent there is to use a compacted recycled asphalt pavement product there. It's not going to be used for parking purposes. It's it's mostly intended for unloading equipment where would you typically damage the concrete. It's going to be a softer repable surface we can use for that, but certainly wouldn't be used for permanent parking. And then in addition to that, we'd propose some landscaping screening along that frontage as well. So, but if there's any other additional questions on that topic or any others,

Mr. Shider with staff, he noted that the intent to do a recycled asphalt which would meet the intentless what we were going. Another thing to note on the exhibit on screen, I think we had shown in a more recent update pulling back that front recycled asphalt to the setback line and also the rear um recycled asphalt area was extended to the setback line as well. So just a slight There you go. Perfect. Great. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh any any questions for the applicant? Nope. Um is there anybody on the council chambers that would like to speak on this agenda item? Is there anybody on Zoom that would like to speak on this agenda item? Quiet batch. Um hearing no one wanting to speak on this. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing. So move viewing. Second. Sure. Uh there's a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing signify by saying I. I. Any opposed?

Motion carries. Um with that, I will entertain a motion on the agenda item. Um I will I will clarify that um when you read the following conditions because you don't have them in front of you. Um, we can How do we go do that? You want to read it? Yeah, I'll I'll read that condition [snorts] for you.

This is Showberg. I'll make a motion to approve the request by RNK Properties LLC for a site plan amendment for a 12,000 foot industrial building in a 12,000 foot phase 2 edition located in M2P Plain Industrial District located northeast of 4050 Levery Road with the following conditions. read by Cody. All right. Those conditions are that the site plan is updated to change the gravel areas in the front yard to be landscaped and made of a dust controlled surface such as seal coat or rock rock treated with oil emulsion. And two, that the final site plan meets all applicable city codes regulations, etc. including but not limited to parking, landscaping, screening, drainage, etc. Uh that was a motion. Do we have a second?

Second, Pope. All right. There's a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Uh hearing none. All those in favor of approving the agenda item signify by saying I. I opposed. Motion carries. Sorry.

Celebration [snorts] there. Thank Thank you for coming out. Uh next up, uh please use the updated materials passed out here. Uh, the time is 4:13 p.m. And a hearing is scheduled at this time for a request by the city of Wateroo to reszone approximately 4.86 acres from R3 Multiple Residence District to R1 RP Planned Residence District located at 310 Upland Drive, pages 19 through 27. At this time, we should receive and place on file a statement of verification signed by Alyssa Little stating, "I, Alyssa Little, do hereby certify that a copy of the attached letter, aerial photo, and site plan was mailed to each individual on the attached list by regular mail on November 20th, 2025. Could we have a motion to receive and place this notice on file?"

So move, record, so move do. Okay, we got a motion and a second. Um all those in favor of placing receiving and placing this notice on file signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? I. Motion carries. Staff report.

This door off staff. The request reszone. The property does not appear to have a negative impact on surrounding area. The area is largely made up of residential and the reszone would make the property site plan specific. The area in question has been zoned R3 multiple residence district since the adoption of zoning ordinance in 1969. Surrounding land uses under zoning as follows. To the north, US Highway 63 and residential zoned R21 and2 family residence district. To the south, Upland Drive and residential zoned R2 one2 family residence district. To the east is private fairway lane and residential zone R3 multiple residence district. And to the west is US Highway 63 residential and sports fields zoned R21 and2 family residence district and A1 agricultural district. There was no concerns expressed during the tech review committee. Staff did receive a request from the owners of two 2221 Fairway [snorts] Lane to keep a portion of property zoned R3 for their possible future expansion. The city of Waterl is proposing to reszone this property from R3 multiple residence district to R1 RP planned residential district for future construction of single family homes. The site was home of the Parkway Gardens Care Center built in 1966, closed in 2013. The building sat mostly empty for the past 12 years with off and on uses and became dilapidated but has now been demolished [clears throat] last time I checked. Um the city is working on options for the redevelopment of the former nursing home site. R1RP will restrict the red the redevelopment to one and two family homes. Staff could also reszone a portion R3RP for the expansion of the Birdie cottages or reszone the entire site R3 RP and designate the northerly lot for um Birdie Birdie expansion and designate

the other lots for one and two family development. Both site plan layouts show improvements to the private street and conversion to a public street for long-term maintenance. Both sites plans would plan for city to um construct new street layout, plot lots for development and partner with housing builders, construct homes on the site. Um the staff wanted to get get to this hearing to PNZ for further discussion, public input, and from the neighbors and general public. Staff would recommend tableabling this item today to gain the input and comments and further refine the site plan and redevelopment for the site using um one of the two updated layouts or revision from the comments. Therefore, staff recommends the request by the city of Waterlue to reszone approximately 4.86 86 acres from R3 multiple residence district to R1RP plan residence district located at 310 Avenue be tabled until the January 13th, 2026 meeting for the following reasons. To gain public input, neighborhood input, and the necessary actions for the best best layout possible.

Thank you. Any questions from commissioners for staff?

Commissioner Sh. I uh I guess [snorts] so the these are just proposed obviously site plans trying to get a developer to take a look at this and I'm just looking at it right now and I see like construction cost. I know this is all hypothetical but I'm like okay so you're really gaining four lots by doing that expan expanding on Pelican Road it looks like and punching it through. I'd looked at this site in the past and uh it looks like you're truly only gaining because if you delete the road there, you could add two lots back in. So when I look at construction costs at 1.3, two million, is that in, you know, our best interest to add that when you take that times only four lots at maybe you're getting5 to $7,000 of property taxes a year. just honest question or do you just like and the other question I guess would be on top of that is fairway lane because I know that's private so are we required to fix that up then when we do this

Jamie Kudson city engineer and these the two options that you just got were just kind of looked at this morning um so to answer your second question first the hope is that we can work with the property owners along Fairway Lane to get the property that we need in order to turn Fairway Lane into a public road that's been I can't tell you the number of calls I've received over the years because it is private and it needs help desperately. It's a mess and it's it's a mess. So that's that's the idea is that we'd be able to work with those to get it converted to a public street reconstructed is all of that.

Um as far as the rest of it, that's that's a question. The second one that's on the screen currently shows uh some portions up there at the north end for Birdie um to allow them to go. We have two options there. Oh yeah. Yeah. So there's a there's a second one there. And again, you can Matt Shindle, my my design engineer I know has looked at this for a number of folks over the years. There's we've come up with about a dozen different options, but these are kind of the two that we've settled [snorts] on to at least take to the public to have them give us their thoughts on it. Um,

there's a bunch of different ways you can lay this out. Um, is there a perfect one? No. Um, this is the one that's internally we thought gave us the most, at least right now, the most lots that we could fit in there and still meet the zoning requirements. So is did you guys with the easement off a fairway um did you have to do anything with that or when it goes to a public road then you guys because there was that easement if the building got knocked down. Yeah.

Yep. Yeah. We currently there's a 60oot easement where Fairway Lane is and that was an access easement for the old nursing home. Um it's all still privately owned by the neighbors along there. So again hopefully we can get that 60oot easement turned into property for the city. he will turn it into right ofway and then reconstruct the road through there. Yeah, this is Shredder with staff. So, that's assuming that the property owners um on the east side of Fairway want that, which I know there's at least one in the audience that can kind of comment on that. I remember reading the easement on this and

I'm assuming they'll want that from the standpoint of it will then become a public road and they don't have to worry about the maintenance moving forward, right? But it is, you know, it would go from their private property that has a private road on it to publicly owned property. So, so at what point do we require private road owners like to maintain the road? Like at what I'm just genuinely curious because if it's in rupt shape, like what at what point if it didn't go if they didn't let it go public, at what point do we So, currently any road that is public or is private, the city doesn't maintain. It's it's obviously it's no different than your driveway. We don't come in and tell you to fix your driveway if it's got potholes. We leave it up to the property owners, the adjacent property owners to determine that. So,

this is straighter with staff. The only thing I would add to that is with a a private road that uh is used for um various um public purposes such as uh emergency access, garbage, um mail. So there's the potential that if it degrades to a point where those entities feel like it's no longer a viable road to use, then there would no longer be able to get service down that private road unless they fixed it up. So obviously all of that goes away if it becomes a reconstructed public road. Commissionerico, was there any any discussion of maybe looking at like a culdesac of any kind or was it just really inefficient?

Very inefficient. All right, this is Shrader Sta with staff. Yes, there was uh as um Mr. Kenson noted there's been several variations of hypothetical developments um that have been drawn up and that is probably most likely a potential option if Fairway Lane were not touched and weren't going to become a public road. Um then it would um be more likely that there'd potentially be a culde-sac. they they are a little um difficult and and inefficient especially in this odd triangular shaped parcel. So even then might be more likely that we would do a a loop street still just to

avoid the inefficiency of the culde-sac. But we did have one that showed it and it essentially kind of ended at the highway 63. It's not very efficient to put a large circle of concrete that you don't even have lots all the way around it. No, I I get that. I I wonder I do wonder about some of those viability of lots along Highway 63. Would there be a need down the road if we develop those for a sound barrier at that on those lots similar to what what we have on Green Hill Road along the highway.

Jamie Kudson, city engineer, typically per DOT standards. If the homes are there when a road comes, you know, I'll use Highway 20 for example, none of the houses on the south side of Highway 20 were there when when Highway 20 was built. So, they did not put in a at least in Waterl did not put in a soundwall compared to Green Hill where there were houses there and they put the soundwall in. So, in this case, I wouldn't expect us or the city to come in and put a soundwall in there because the road's there and those folks will be buying homes or building homes next to the highway knowing it's there. Okay. And unfortunately, this trader was staff and unfortunately sound walls are

pretty expensive to build and expensive to maintain.

Well, I didn't want that to be a surprise. [laughter] Um, all right. Any other questions from commissioners? All right. I think we have uh we got people in the council chambers that would like to speak on the agenda item. Maybe if so, come on up. State your name and address. Keith Smith. I live at 2130 Casper. I'm one of the property owners that would be on the east side of Fairway Lane. And I just had some questions. I think they've been I was just wondering if there was any prop or what it would look like across the street if there was any uh layouts as to what it was going to look like. It looks like there's a couple. Um then our our question was what would h what what is going to happen to the property we own on the west side of Fairway Lane? And I think I've talked to Mr. Kenson enough that kind of know what's going to happen there. And we'd be more than willing to donate that land or give that land up if that street's going to be redeveloped into a public street. I mean, we own about 17 to 19 ft on the other side of the street. There there's nothing we we would do with it. So, um making that a public street would definitely be in our interest. And then another thing was um I know Birdie Cottage um is unable to attend and I I've talked I can't talk for everybody in the neighborhood but the few that I have talked to um they've been good neighbors and we'd like to see that corner um that they want remain our three so they can expand.

That's valuable input. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this agenda item? Anybody on Zoom? Uh, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing then.

M Shraider with staff. I'll just kind of expand upon that um discussion of the potential for Birdie um to expand and city staff have been uh having conversations with Birdie uh Cottage uh about that potential as well. And I just wanted to note the initial, you know, proposal to reszone to R1 RP. Um, we weren't trying to exclude them, but it in hindsight it would cause issues since, uh, what Birdie Cottage is is essentially a multifamily use. It's a little bit different of a multifamily use than a lot of other multifamily uses, but it is a multifamily use. So it would not be permitted in the R1RP which is why we changed our recommendation to table and figure out a plan but we wanted to generate um this input and discussion from the neighborhood. That's good to hear. I I this is at least the second indication that the neighborhood um supports Birdie Cod Cottage and supports their expansion because a lot of the initial discussion before the city even purchased this property in preparation for demolition and redevelopment as housing. there was a lot of input that it should be redeveloped as one and two family and not multifamily and so we will look to do that for at least a majority of the site but yeah I think it it would be you know a viable option to keep a corner up there that would have the potential for Birdie Cottage to expand. So, um, as the staff report notes, one option would be to leave it as R3. Um, when the city does redevelopment

sites like this, typically we do reszone them to a plan district. So, it would be our preference to go with one of the two options noted in the staff report, which would be to either uh reszone that area in the corner to an R3 RP, which would specifically be for a Birdie Cottage type development and the rest to uh R1 RP for one and two family homes. Or alternatively, we could reszone the entire site to R3RP, but then as part of that site plan approval, note that that one lot at the northeast corner uh would be allowed to be a multifamily use such as a birdie cottage type development and the rest be limited to one or two family homes. We're anticipating single family homes. Um, but generally we u we would allow one or two family in any of our zoning districts.

Thank you. Motion to close the public hearing. Anyone want one want to do that one? So moved. All right. Second, PO. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing signify by saying I. I. I. Thank you. At this time, um, when someone's comfortable, I'll entertain a motion on the agenda item.

This is Poe. Uh, I recommend that we table this request by the city of Waterlue to reszone approximately 4.86 acres from R3 multiple residence district to R1RP planned residence district until the next meeting, January 13, 2026. Second. Okay. Do not

All right. Thank you. There is a motion in a second. Um I do have discussion. Probably not the only I I want to applaud the staff for uh really getting this going. I also want to point out that probably construction won't start anytime soon as the ground is quickly turning to perafrost. Um I I think it's right to maybe wait a little bit here and get things right. uh work with Birdie Cottage because we don't know exactly what size of lot they might want to expand to and if the lots aren't the right size that could turn into a replat and it could lead into water retention issues. So, we have to get get the platting right above all. Um and I think it would be wrong to go with R3 across the entire area as that could lead into hassle of people saying, "Well, we should be able to put multifamily dwellings in there." And I think that's definitely going against the grain of what the community and that neighborhood wants. So, um I I think tableabling would be the best idea at this point. Is there any other discussion? Any fun haters? All right. All those in favor of tableabling the agenda items signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed? Uh that that item has been um tabled. This is Shrader with staff. I would just note um the Smiths if if there are any other neighbors that want to provide input, we will use that to make adjustments to the site plan that we would look to bring back hopefully next month.

All right. Um are there any other discussion items? Um, we have on the agenda here, we have the election of the chairperson and vice chairperson for the period ending December 31st, 2026. This is fun. Um, [laughter] we reelect you. Okay. There's a nomination for myself as chair. Correct. Correct. Yes. Okay. Are there any other

any other nominations for chair? Going once. Going twice. Third and final time. [laughter] You're doing great. Okay. Nominations for chair closed. Um I will accept that nomination. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Still get a a second to the motion. Oh, Rucker will second them. Yep. Okay. Um all those in favor of [laughter] being chair for another year signify by saying I. I. I any oppos?

Motion carries. Uh next up, uh I'll accept nominations for vice chair. Uh Mr. Chair. Yes, I would like to continue as vice chair if that's if that's okay. So, I'm nominating myself.

I will second that nomination, [laughter] sir. Uh, are there any other nominations? Going once. Going twice. Third and final time. Okay, nominations are closed. Uh, there's a motion on or there's a motion on second for Eric Dun to be vice chair. All those in favor of Eric Dun being vice chair signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? I. Motion carries. Congratulations. Let's get lots of good work done in the next year. Um, last up adjournment. So, second sherk. All those in favor of journing, I

I thank you. Stay warm.