HomeMy Public PortalAbout20101209minutesJEFFERSON CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
December O.2O1O
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
Ralph RobineU.Chairman
JuokDaekon
Bob George
Chris Jordan, Vice Chairman
J. Rick Mihu|evkch
David Nunn
Scott Stacey
Chris Yarnell
BunnieTrickey Cotten, Alternate
Dale Vaughan, Alternate*
*Arrived late
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT
Dean Dutoi
Michael Lester, Alternate
EX -OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT
Eric Struemph, City Council Liaison
STAFF PRESENT
Janice McMillan, Deputy Director nfPlanning & Transportation Services
Eric Barron, Senior Planner
Matt Mon*ooh, Director ofPublic Works
Shane Wade, Civil Engineer ||
Drew Hi|porLAssociate City Counselor
Anne Stratman, Administrative Assistant
ATTENDANCE RECORD
5of5
5 of
3 of
4 of
5of5
3 of
3 of
4 of
4of4
4of4
3of5
1. Call toOrder and Introduction ofMembers, Ex -off icinMembers and Staff
The Chairman, seven regular members and two alternates were present. Aquorum was present.
2. Procedural Matters and Procedures Explained
Mr. Barron explained the procedures for the meeting. The following documents were entered as
exhibits. Mr. Barron advised that copies of the exhibits are available through the City Clerk or the
Department ofCommunity Development:
The City Code ofthe City ofJefferson, auamended
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map
Copies ofapplications under consideration
A list of property owners to whom notices were sent
Affidavit ofpublication ofthe public notice inthe newspaper
Rules ofProcedure, Planning & Zoning Commission
Mr. Barron submitted the following items for the record:
Staff reports
Minutes of proceedings
Copies ofdrawings, plans, and/or renderings under consideration
Letters ormemoranda from staff
Materials submitted by the public or applicants pertaining to the cases under consideration
Designation ofVoting Alternates
The Chairman announced that all regular members and alternate Ma. Cotten were designated to
3. Adoption ofAgenda
Mr. George moved and Mr, Stacey seconded toadopt the agenda ao printed. The motion passed
8-0 with the following vobya�
Minutes/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
December Q.2O10
Page
4. Approval ofMinutes from the Regular Meeting ofNovember iD.201O
yWc Jordan moved and Ms. Cotten seconded to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of
November 18.2O10aowritten, The motion passed 8-Owith the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken.George, Jordan, Miha|evioh.Nunn, Stacey, Yarnell
G. Communications Received
Correspondence was received for Case No. P10022.
Mr. Vaughan arrived ot5:25p.m.
Old Business — Public Hearings
Case No. P10022— 1600 Block ofHaysehonDrive; Rezoning' Preliminary PUD Phan' and
Preliminary Plat. (continued from November 18, 2010) Applications filed by Dick Otko.
authorized representative for River Bluff Condominiums LLC, property owner, and Royma Chinn,
property owner, for the following:
1 A Rezoning of 4.38 oorao from RS -3 Single Family Residential to PUD Planned Unit
Development.
2. A Preliminary PUD Plan for a 15 lot single family residential development.
3. A Preliminary Plat for o 15 lot single family residential subdivision consisting of 10,86
oon*s.
The property iaaccessed from HaysoUon Drive approximately 20Ofeet east ofBeverly S|naeL
The property is described on port of the southwest port of the northeast quor|er, the northwest
part of the southeast quarter, the east ha|f, and the northwest quarter of section one. township 44
North. range 12 VVost, Jefferson Ci(y, Cole County, Missouri. (Central Missouri Professional
Services, Consultant).
Mr. Barron described the proposal and explained that the applicant proposes to rezone the
subject property from RS -3 to PUD for single family subdivision with 15 lots on 10.86 acres. He
stated that the eastern portion of the property was rezoned from RS -3 to PUO in 2005 to
accommodate 50 -unit condominium development that was not constructed. Mr. Barron explained
that the PUD Plan also shows a new sanitary sewer pump station on the property which will replace
an obsolete facility. He stated that the Preliminary Plat calls for a cul-de-sac named River Bluff
Court, which is 1.080 feet in length. Mr. Barron explained o variance was requested from the
maximum cul-de-sac length of 800 feet.
Mr. Dick 0tko, Dick 0tkoConstruction Company, 2421 W. Ed0ewoodDrivo spoke regarding this
request, representing River Bluff Condominiums, LLC and Roymo and Paul Chinn. Mr. O1k*
explained that he was approached by [W/. Chinn in 2003 to develop this property, excluding (ho
existing home. He stated that a topographical survey performed indicated this is u very rough piece
of ground that drops almost 120 feet from West Main Street. Mr. 01ke explained that development
of the property on the south aide of the onaok would be very difficult without destroying the
environment. He stated that the original development plan for this property was to concentrate on
the river bluffs and build a rood from VVoat Main Street. Mr, Dtke explained that the original
proposal was to build a 40 to 50 unit townhouse davo|mpmont, howevar, the market took o
downtown in 2007 and the development was neve/ constructed. He stated they recently
determined the best possible use of the property is a single family residential development.
Mr. Mike Bates, Central Missouri Professional Semicea, 2500 E McCarty Street, distributed the
following Exhibits: (A) the Preliminary Plat for River Bluff Estates Subdivision-, (B) on aerial view of
the subdivision; (C) an aerial view of the entire neighborhood-, (D) the revised design for the West
Main Street Access-, (E) the original condominium plan; and (F) the original grading plan for the
condominium development. He explained the neighbors expressed a strong interest in access off of
West Main Street for the original condominium development. Mr. Bates utohad that the preliminary
cost estimate for uconnector road from River Bluff Estates toWest Main Street ie $438,594.75. Fie
estimated that approximately 35 to 40 percent of the traffic from this development will use East
Circle and 60 to 85 percent of the traffic will use Huyso|ton Drive. Mr. Bates explained that there
may beamisunderstanding about the purpose ofthe PUD Plan. Hestated that aaamatter of
Minutes/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
December &.2O1O
Page
accountability the underlying zoning district of RS -2 prohibits the developer or a future owner from
re -subdividing lots to an RS -3 standard. Mr. Bates explained that in aneffort toaddress concerns
regarding subdivision restrictions the following notes were added to the Preliminary Plat and PUO
Plan: (1 ) building exterior finishes shall be a minimum of 60% brick or rock veneer. No natural stone
is allowed; (2) Building Lots 1 and 15 shall have 100% brick or rock veneer on the west side-, (3) No
exposed concrete foundations are allowed; (4) No vinyl siding will be allowed; and (5) On Lot 1 the
primary structure could not he setback more than 85 feet from the front property line. He
emphasized that the number of houses shown on the plat will not be exceeded, Mr, Bates
explained that the neighborhood meeting on December 3. 2010 uffonjod the developer on
opportunity to meet with the neighborhood and learn their concerns and make sure that there was a
clear representation of the scope of the project. He aio(ed that the developers went through the
permitting process with the Department ofNatural Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers, -
and completed a Cultural resource survey to ensure that no sites are being disturbed
n0ineera�andconop|ateducu|tuna|rmsourcaaurveytoenaurethatnmsitmaarobeingdiaturbed
Mr. Barron added the RS -2 zoning district has a maximum height of 35 fee(, and that on
underlying zoning district of RS -2 will be held to the maximum height of that district.
Correspondence in opposition to this request was received from tile following persons:
Edward & Jeanne SnhwaUer, 1926 HayaeKun Drive,- Chris Jordan Law Office, 1614 Hayxm|1on
Drive; Mark Pau|ey, 1608 HuyoeUun Drive; Mott Connor, 1531 Hoyae|ton Drive-, Barbara Nell
Funnin, 128 Lavinia Street; David Patton, 1511 Huyoehon Drive,- Sharon Williams, 1703 Hmyae|ton
Drive; Donald Rourk, 1813 Huyae|ton Drive� Angie Robyn, 1815Hayee|tun Oriw+� TerryLyskowaki.
1722 HayoaKon Drive� Gloria & Sam (}vede|L 2009 Green Meadow� Diane Heffnar, 1940 Allen
Drive; Patricia Schlechte, 115 E. Circle Drive; Troy & Cheri Chockley, 1602 Beverly Street
The following individuals spoke inopposition tothis request:
Joe Bednar, 1602 Hayse|ton Drive; Berta Hep|er, 1605 Paddlewheel Circle; Mark Pau|ey, 1608
Hayoe|ton Drive; Matt Connor, 1531 Huyse|bonDhvn; Kevin Thompson, 138E. Circle-, Chris Jordan
Law Offioe, 1614 Hoyaa|ton Drive-, Gloria Eubep, 1610 Hayaa|ton Drive-, Rob Johnaon, 1702
Haysabnn Drive; Melinda Fnonnh, 1537 Hoyoe|ton Drive; Charlie Christians*n, 1912 Hayse|bon
Drive; Mary Browning, 1716Hayse8on Drive; Theresa Davis, 1825 Hayo*Mon Drive; Tim Schwarz,
1506 Hoyse|hon Drive; Fred Szabados, 1810 Hayae|hon Drive; Carolyn Benin0, 1708 Hayee|hzn
Drive; C. C. MoCbure, 1515Hayse|tonDrive; Kevin McHugh, 1924Huyee|tonDrive� Fn*dSch|uMer.
1Q34Hayae|tonDrive; Jim Penfo|d, 1901 N. Circle Drive-, Carl Michael, 126 E. Circle; Peggy Davis,
1y25Hoysa|tonDrive
The following comments and concerns were expressed:
i. Mc Bednar expressed concern that part of his property will betaken when the proposed
street is put in. He would like to see a plan that promotes the heaUh, safety and welfare of
the entire neighborhood as opposed to the economic interest of the developer. He is
opposed tothe variance from the maximum uu|'de-oaolength.
2. Additional traffic on Hayao|(on Drive and East Circle will pose safety risk for residents and
children.
3. The steep grade ofHeyse|tun Drive is u safety risk during inclement winter weather.
4. The 25foot required setback is not sufficient to muffle the train noise especially for Lots 1-7.
S. Mr. Pau|oyaxpraosod concern about the required minimum setback to his property. If the
new street comes through he will be considered a corner lot and will have frontage on
Haysehon Drive and the proposed street. He will not be allowed the required setback of 25
feet whereas the Chinn property will have a setback in axcoao of 31 foot.
6. The proposed development will be detrimental to the neighborhood in that it breaks tho
continuity ofthe fully established trees.
7. The proposed development will adversely affect property values.
8. The proposed development would have an impact on the historic nature of Hayselton Drive.
0. The proposed location of the new street is a safety hazard because it is on a blind curve.
10. The proposed development will have a negative impact on wildlife and eagle habitats.
11. The proposed pump station iaovepaized. |twas suggested to relocate the Pump station off
Minutes/Jefferson City Planning &ZoningCommission
December A.2010
12. The proposed street would beacceptable iflocated off ufWest Main Street.
11 Converting a driveway into a street is inconsistent with the use of the neighborhood as a fully
developed residential area.
14, Hayam|(on Drive is narrow when cars aro parked on both sides causing an impediment for
emergency vehicles.
15. Many cars are parked on the street reducing the site distance.
16. Eliminate parking onone side ofE Circle Drive arid HaysehonDrive.
17, Mr. McHugh commented that the developers have been listening to the neighbors.
18, Hayae|1onDrive ianarrow making i|difficult for cars (opass each other.
19� Concern and objection hothe single point ufaccess via HaymakunDrive.
20, Delays and bottlenecks atthe intersection nfEast Circle Drive and West Main St/eai, and at
the Boonville Drive, West Main Street and Dix Road intersection.
Mr. Rob Johnson submitted correspondence from Mr. Eric Soamon, Deputy Director for
Wastewater Utility Services regarding the relocation of the Hayselton Pump Station.
In response to Mr. Pouleysoonoenno' Mr. Barron clarified that the distance between the closest
corner ofMr. Pau|ey'u house and the proposed right-of-way line of the new street is 22 feet. He
explained that the distance for Mr. Pou|ey's outbuilding is identified as 10.5 fee(. Mr. Barron n(o|od
that in Mr. Bodnor'a case the setback is 15.4 feet.
Mr. HUpad clarified that the nrnxtnuoUnn of the proposed street does not violate city code. He
explained that the setbacks for Mr. Pau|ay and Mr. Bednar would be grandfathered in since the
construction of their buildings occurred before the construction of the proposed street.
Mr. Jim Penfnld commented that these negative effects would be mitigated or eliminated by their
being a different point of aooaay to the proposed subdivision. He explained that a logical alternate
access would be through the property owned by the developer and connecting to West Main Street.
Mr. Ponfo|d encouraged the developer towithdraw the proposed PUD Plan and resubmit with a
different point of access to the development. AddidonaUy, he recommended that the Planning and
Zoning Commission deny the current proposed PUD Plan with their single point of access being to
Huyse|ton Drive. Mr. Penfo|d commented that the land at some point will be developed. He believes
that development of the land as single family residential is consistent with the existing
neighborhood on Hayne|tun Drive and East Circle Drive. He stated that the aooeen point off of West
Main Street would present significantly fewer problems than unaccess point off ofHoyaeKunDrive,
Ma. Peggy Davis submitted excerpts from the Department of Motor Vehicle book depicting
warning signs relating tocurves.
Mr. Otke explained that there was a miscommunication with Mr. Pauley and Mr. Bednar regarding
the trees to be planted along the new street. He said the communication should have been for 2.5
inch diameter trees which should equate to 8 to 10 foot tall pine treas. Mr. 0tke explained that in
the VVoo( Main Streat, East Circle Drive and Hayae|ton Drive vicinity (here are approximately 140
homes not including Allen Drive. He stated that they would be adding 14 homes which would add
10 percent tothe traffic in the neighborhood. Mr. ()tkeexplained that construction trucks will not be
backing into the street or blocking roadways. He said all of the new homes will be 200 to 250 feet
from Hoyae|ton Drive. Mr. Otka commented that Mrs. French convinced him at the neighborhood
meeting that the hairpin curve was not dangerous, as she has good visibility in both directions to
pull out safely from her driveway which happens to be directly uoroac the street from the entrance
to his proposed development. Mr. 0tke stated that the Parka and Recreation Commission has
shown interest in the balance ofthe ground as a neighborhood pork. He explained that it will cost
an additional $438.000 to build a street from VV*nt Main Street to the cu|-de-aeo, and in the
process the new street would disturb uppnoximadey1.5acres less ground. Mr. Otkestated that they
checked for eagles' nests and Indian burial grounds prior tocompleting u cultural resources survey,
Minutes/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
December 9, 2010
Page 5
Mr. Bates explained that the developers would be receptive to a 20 mph speed limit. He said the
sight distance measurements exiting and entering the proposed development off of Hayselton Drive
exceed the requirements, and that the average speed ranges from 22 to 23 mph at the locations
where traffic counters were placed. He stated the development was designed to minimize
environmental impact and stay out of the creek.
Mr. Otke commented that the original condominium development would have required blasting
large quantities of rock. He explained that they will not have to blast any rock for the proposed
single family development. Mr. Otke said that when we talk about good planning, this development
creates an infill development of 14 lots rather than urban sprawl.
The following persons offered rebuttal comments:
Mr. Matt Connor, 1531 Hayselton Drive, commented that the only positive thing about this
proposal is the new sewer system in the area. He stated that adding a park adjacent to the property
on the far side will not make this development any more acceptable. Mr. Connor encouraged Mr.
Otke to explore the possibility of renovating the older houses in the city instead.
Mr. Joe Bednar, 1602 Hayselton Drive, commented that the hairpin turn is dangerous, and that
the residents have not understated the danger that ingress/egress has on the neighborhood.
Ms. Peggy Davis, 1925 Hayselton Drive, encouraged the developer to take into account that
Hayselton Drive is a high density neighborhood.
Mr. Charlie Christiansen, 1912 Hayselton Drive, commented that the neighborhood does not
need another park since Memorial Park is in the vicinity. He questioned the impact to the caves
during construction. Mr. Christiansen suggested building a street that only serves the proposed
development, such as off of West Main Street.
Mr. Chris Jordan, 1614 Hayselton Drive, submitted photos for the record, showing Mr. Bednar's
house (Photo #1), the sharp curve across from Mr. Penfold's house (Photo #2); and Mr. Pauley's
house (Photo #3).
Chairman Robinett closed testimony at 8:00 p.m., and called for a recess. The meeting
reconvened 8:07 p.m.
Mr. Barron gave the Planning Division staff report and Mr. Wade gave the Engineering Division
staff report.
Mr. Morasch, Deputy Director of Public Works, explained that a specific Traffic Impact Analysis is
not required for this proposed subdivision, as fewer than 75 single family lots are being proposed.
He stated that due to the location of the development in relation to the existing neighborhood,
existing conditions and impacts are being examined. Mr. Morasch explained that the width of the
street is 30 feet curb to curb which according to current standards falls short of allowing parking on
both sides of the street. He stated that he does not recommend changing that in the existing
neighborhood unless the residents come forward and request it. Mr. Morasch explained that cars
parked on both sides of the street tend to slow people down. He stated that when people ask to
remove parking on one side of the street we tell them that the speed tends to increase. Mr.
Morasch explained that the speed limit is 30 mph which is the standard speed limit throughout the
city except in school zones. He stated that the only accident within the past five years in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed development was a sideswipe of a parked vehicle on Hayselton
Drive near Beverly Street. He stated that traffic counters were placed near 1622 Hayselton Drive,
northwest of the proposed development, and approximately 100 feet southwest of Beverly Street,
southwest of the proposed development. Mr. Morasch explained that the 85`h percentile speed
ranged from 28 to 29 mph during the periods at the specific locations these counters were placed
whereas the average speed ranged from 22 to 23 mph at the specific locations these counters were
placed. He stated that the curve near the proposed street has a radius of 80 feet and a design
Minutes/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
December 0.2O10
speed of 15 mph. Mr. Morasoh explained that the site distance in all three directions was analyzed
and there is more than sufficient site distance available aithat location. He stated that the placed
traffic counters on East Circle Drive and Huyoe|tonDrive where it intersects with Boonville Road,
Mr. Moraach explained that on East Circle Drive we had an average daily traffic volume of 222
vehicles. He stated that unfortunately the counter on Haysw|ton Drive and Boonville Road was
possibly vandalized so they were unable to get o complete count at that intersection at this time,
Mr. K4nraaoh explained that it is not uncommon in old neighborhoods to have hairpin curves,
especially when design standards were less than they are today.
Mc Barron explained that staff recommends approval ofthe requests. He stated that in order to
ensure that the prior approved PUD Plan does not conflict with the current proposal, a vote to
rescind the prior PUD Plan is recommended. Mr. Barron suggested an additional condition to be
added ioMotion #3: Incorporation of the building design notes and building lines for proposed Lot 1
as shown on the Preliminary PUD Plan and Preliminary P|o1 distributed by the Applicants'
consultant as Exhibit Awith the words ''no natural stone will be allowed" removed from Note 1.
Mr. Nunn commented that he has been on the Commission for over 20 years, explaining the
Commissioners take both sides very seriously and just because they may make certain statements
does not mean that they have not considered the other side. Mr. Nunn stated that in his 20 years on
the Commission numbers can sometimes be wrong but in this case the information about site
distance and traffic patterns is pretty accurate. He explained that the Commission usually hears the
same concerns and itieusually worse inyour mind than dturns out iobe.
Mr. George commented that he went through o similar situation in Sohulridge Subdivision where
he was bitterly opposed to u townhouse development there. He stated that after it was all said and
done hewas the first tosay that hewas wrong.
Mr. Nunn moved and Mr. George seconded torecommend approval torezone the RS -3 zoned
portion of the property (excluding Reserve Tract B as identified on the Proposed Preliminary Plat)
consisting of 4.28 acres from RS -3 to PUD to the City Council. The motion passed 6-2 with the
following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken.George, Jordan, Nunn, Stacey
Nay: Mihalevich, Yarnell
Mr. Nunn moved and Mr. Jordon seconded to recommend approval to rescind approval of the
prior PUO Plans for the property owned by River Bluff Condominiums LLC, identified as case Nos.
P05013 and P05039, to the City Council. The motion passed 7-1 with the following votes:
Cotten, Daekon.George, Jordan, Nunn, Stacey, Yarnell
Nay.- Milialevich
Mr. Nunn moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to recommend approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan
for the property, consisting of 10.79 acres, subject to the following conditions, to the City Council:
a. The 25' rear setback shall apply only to Lu(o 3, 4, 5. 6. and 7. All other lots shall adhere
(oo3O'rear setback specified inthe RS'2underlying zoning district;
b. Incorporation of the building design notes and building lines for proposed Lot 1 as shown
onthe Preliminary PUD Plan and Preliminary Plat distributed bythe Applicants consultant
as Exhibit A with the words "no natural stone will be allowed" removed from Note 1.
The motion passed 8-0with the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, George, Jordan, Milialevich, Nunn, Stacey, Yarnell
Mr. Nunn moved and Mr. George seconded to recommend approval for the requested variance
from the maximum cul-de-sac length in order to allow for a 1000 foot long cul-de-sac. The rncdiun
passed 8-0 with the following votes:
Aye: Cotton, Doeken, George, Jordan, Miha|avich, Nunn, Stacey, Yarnell
Minutes/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
December 0.201U
Mr. Nunn moved and [Nc Yarnell seconded toapprove the Preliminary Subdivision Plat for River
Bluff Estates Subdivision, consisting of 10.86 acres, subject to the following conditions:
a. That the curb radii at the intersection of River Bluff Court with Heyae| on Drive be
increased to the minimum 20feet for street intersections. (as outlined in the ~ Engineering
Division staff report)
b. That mtmrmwebsr drainage inlets be added to River Bluff Court near the intersection of
Mayoe|ton Drive. (as outlined in the Engineering Division staff report)
The motion passed 7'1 with the following votes:
K8
Doehen.George, Jordan, iho|ev'h. Nunn. Stacey, Yarnell
Nay: Cotten
7. Other New Buslnesa-
8. Miscellaneous Repo rts
Other Business
10. Adjourn. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Eric Barron, Assistant Secretary