HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-05-H02 Landing at Shadow Creek Rezoning_PH AGENDA ITEM:
CITY OF WAUKEE, IOWA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING COMMUNICATION
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing on an Ordinance to amend Chapter 301, Zoning Ordinance,
City of Waukee, Iowa, by rezoning certain property from R-3/PD-1 to R-
3/PD-1, a property known as Landing at Shadow Creek Plat 2, Outlot Z.
FORMAT: Public Hearing
SYNOPSIS INCLUDING PRO & CON: The applicant, Landing at Shadow Creek, LLC and the
developer, Haverkamp Properties, are requesting approval of an amendment
to the existing Planned Development Overlay for an approximately 16.57 acre
parcel of ground that is located east of NE Wilden Drive and between NE
Dellwood Drive and NE Boston Parkway. The property has been zoned for
multi-family residential since 2007 and was rezoned to include a Planned
Development Overlay in 2016.
The 2016 Planned Development Overlay was to allow for a mixed residential
type senior housing project that was to be called Yarco. The purpose of the
Planned Development was to allow for townhomes on the property in addition
to multi-family residential which would not have been allowed under the
standard R-3 zoning district. The Yarco project never materialized and the
owner has been working with Haverkamp Properties on a new project for the
site.
The main premise for the modification to the Planned Development Overlay is
to allow for a greater density than what would be allowed under the standard
R-3 zoning (proposed as 20 units per acre versus 17.42 units per acre allowed
in the R-3 district) and to allow for a four story flat roof building. The R-3
standards would only allow a three story building.
In exchange for the density and height considerations, the Developer has
proposed greater building setbacks, larger and more substantial buffering
requirements, a higher level of amenities for the residents within the
development, greater open space and increased architectural design/building
materials.
units per acre Harvester Land Holdings, LC, requests approval of a site plan
to allow for the construction of two apartment buildings and a clubhouse on
property that is located on the south side of SE Laurel Street between SE
Dartmoor Drive and SE Westgate Drive. Building #1 is proposed to have 48
units and Building #2 is proposed to have 60 units, for a total of 108 units. In
total, 98 units will be one bedroom and the remaining 10 units will be two
bedroom units. All units will be for lease at market rate. The clubhouse will be
for the use of the residents and will also feature a pool among other amenities.
Six garage buildings are also proposed on the south side of the site. The
remaining parking will be provided as surface parking. Three access points are
provided to this site, all off of SE Laurel Street.
The applicant has provided elevations for proposed buildings on the site
which meets the intent of the architectural guidelines within the Site
Development and Building Standards Ordinance as well as the adopted
Planned Development approved by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT INCLUDING COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS:
COMMISSION/BOARD/COMMITTEE COMMENT: The Planning and Zoning
Commission reviewed this project at the May 9, 2017 Commission Meeting and recommended
approval subject to remaining staff comments:
Approval of a rezoning related to an amendment to the Planned Development document for
property zoned PD-1 (Planned Development Overlay) and R-3 (Multi-Family Residential
District) [Insite Senior Living]
Director of Development services Brad Deets introduced the request for a rezoning related to an
amendment to the Planned Development Document for a property zoning PD-1 and R-3 made by
applicant Landing at Shadow Creek LLC, and the developer Haverkamp Properties, LLC. The
Property is located east of NE Wilden Drive, South of NE Dellwood Drive, and north of NE Boston
Parkway and is approximately 16.57 acres. The property was zoned to R-3 in 2007 and in 2016 was
amended to include a planned development overlay that was specific to a proposed senior living
development. The new proposed development would continue to be a senior living community,
however the number of units, and configuration of the site is different than what was originally
considered. At this time the Applicant has provided the necessary consent of 57.42% of surrounding
property owners. Notification of the rezoning request to the proposed property was sent on May 16,
2017 and signs were also placed on the property.
Mr. Deets advised that as part of the concept plan prepared for the purpose of this rezoning, the
applicant is proposing a facility that could include up to a total of 330 one and two bedroom units. The
building would be sited to incorporate a central enclosed courtyard that would provide substantial for
the residents of the development. The proposed density is a maximum of 20 units per acre, which is
not inconsistent with other projects that have been approved and developed around the City. The
proposed planned development would also allow for a building up to four stories in height or a
maximum of 50 feet in height. This is a change from the underlying R-3 which allows a maximum of 3
stories and height of 40 feet. The height has been requested in order to shrink the overall footprint and
provide additional open space and separation for the surrounding existing and planned developments.
Access to the project is identified off of NE Dellwood Drive and NE Boston Parkway, and the
proposed developments parking, open space, Parkland dedication, and landscaping all meet and exceed
zoning ordinance requirements.
At this time staff has reviewed the proposed development concept in great detail and based upon the
provisions and promises as identified within the Planned Development, Staff would recommend
Approval as the project is both unique and needed within the Waukee community.
Commissioner Hoifeldt questioned if the apartments to the east allow for a three story and a pitched
roof. Mr. Deets advised that was correct so the forty foot measurement would be taken from the
centerline of the gable, so the actual peak could measure an actual 42-45 feet in height.
Commissioner Hoifeldt questioned if they had thought of a 3 story layout. A representative of the
developer, Brent Haverkamp, advised that tenants that are in the 55+/ retirement category came to us
asking for senior dedication. He advised that his firm did market research for the metro area and found
that there was a lack of this type of housing. He explained that he had toured other projects and found
that most retirement specific housing is one structure, they wished to go above that and provide the
courtyard as a gathering space. The 4 story building is required to make the site work for the
developer and provide the most amenities to future tenants.
Commissioner Hoifeldt questioned if the main level was single loaded. Mr. Haverkamp advised the
whole building is double loaded. If someone parks in the garages, they enter into the corridor then
head to the elevator in order to reach their apartment.
Commissioner Hoifeldt questioned about the landscaping provided. Mr. Haverkamp stated that, in
order to address concerns of the Staff, the building has been pushed to the east side of the site and a
majority of the landscaping is to the west where the site borders the residential developments. A 3 foot
berm is being requested and the distance is a little greater than 40 feet from the back of the garages to
the west property line.
Commissioner Hoifeldt questioned if the developer had done a project like this before. Mr. Haverkamp
advised that his team had mostly done student and conventional housing. \
Commissioner Shanks questioned about the grade as it pertained to the properties to the west. Mr.
Haverkamp advised that the lot is very flat with drainage located in the south east corner with a wet
pond feature, fencing, and a dog park. But also north and south draining for the site. Commissioner
Stonebrook questioned if the site would be graded below the residential. Mr. Haverkamp explained
that the subject property is lower in grade than the western residential but higher than the east
development.
Commissioner Schmidt reached out to staff to clarify if the planned development was to townhomes
on the western side of the parcel. Mr. Deets advised that the planned development had been placed on
the parcel to allow for townhome development as an option, as they are not allowed by zoning
ordinance in the R-3 district. Mr. Deets advised that the planned development document did not
specify where the townhomes were allowed to be. The west side was just what was proposed in the
conceptualization of the last requested project.
Chris Shall of 565 NE Wilden Drive addressed the commission. He advised that his main concern was
with the height of the building. At 4 stories or 50 feet it would be equivalent to a water tower, grain
elevators or possibly communications antenna, and nowhere in town were those locations directly next
to residential homes. It didn’t make sense to grow taller as the development moved towards the single
family zoning, and with it being a senior living center, he had concerns about events of emergency. At
4 stories, some seniors would not be able to escape a four story building.
Commissioner Hoifeldt addressed the last concern stating that typically buildings would be equipped
with a place of refuge which is a location say in the corridor that is rated for fire safety and easily
accessible by emergency crews for safe extraction of persons unable to use traditional means. Mr.
Shall questioned if the City Emergency Departments had the capacity to assist a 4 story building, and
Commissioner Schmidt advised that the City was equipped to handle a 4 story building.
Commissioner Hoifeldt advised that the original intent of the lot since 2007 was to be apartments so
the eastern view would have been interrupted at some point anyways.
Commissioner Stonebrook questioned if the planned development change would allow for 50 foot
buildings instead of 45. Mr. Deets explained that the middle of a pitched roof is the measurement used
not the highest peak. Commissioner Stonebrook continued that it would be better to have something a
little taller, but more interesting.
Commissioner Streit and Shanks both advised that if it were their home backing up to the project, they
would be here voicing concerns as well. Commissioner Shanks advised that the only person who
would really benefit from the change would be the developer.
Commissioner Broderick questioned if there would be any sort of standard set for planned
development if this rezoning was approved. Mr. Deets advised that all projects and requests are viewed
based on individual merit. Commissioner Schmidt advised that the only difference is that if it passed
Planning and Zoning Commission it would only need majority to pass the City Council, instead of a
Super Majority.
Commissioner Hoifeldt brought up the point that with the original and current zoning, it could be
Multi-Family with a 25 foot landscape buffer if this amendment to planned development isn’t made.
Commissioner Stonebrook questioned if the residential is completed in the area. Mr. Deets advised
that it is finishing quickly but is not 100 percent completely built out.
Commissioner Hoifeldt questioned the developer what would be the outcome of recommending a 3
story unit? Mr. Haverkamp advised that the 330 units is required to maintain the amenities, so the
development would be required to extend the footprint of the building to the furthest available by staff,
or drop the project. Currently the height is 42 feet to the top of the parapet, in comparison Jerry’s
homes to the east are sitting at 42-43 feet tall at the highest point depending on the pitch.
Commissioner Schmidt clarified if the planned development was required to obtain the unit per acre
count. Mr. Deets advised that it would be needed to maintain the density.
Commissioner Stonebrook made a comment that the real difference is that with this approval it is
requiring a larger amount of green space. He then asked what would be preferred from a homeowner
stand point. Mr. Schall advised that he would rather have the larger landscape buffer over a slightly
shorter building.
Commissioner Hoifeldt moved to approve the rezoning, Commissioner Broderick seconded the
motion.
Commissioner Stonebrook questioned if it would be possible to amend the motion to include that
limited the height to the 42 feet, and insured the landscape buffer remained at least 40 feet. Senior
Planner Andy Kass advised that the Commission would want any amendments to be stated so that they
were included in the development documents to hold the developer accountable. Currently the planned
development is a minimum of a 40 foot buffer which exceeds the normal buffer by 15 feet.
Commissioner Shanks questioned if this project does not work, and the planned development is
approved, someone else could come in and build a 4 story with a pitched roof. Mr. Kass advised that in
theory that would be correct.
Mr. Haverkamp advised that the current heights are conceptual, he would hate to limit his architects
and the ability to add relief to the sightline of the building.
Commissioners Hoifeldt resends his previous motion, Commissioner Broderick follows suit and
resends his second of the motion.
Commissioner Hoifeldt moves to approve the rezoning with the recommendation of a 45 foot max
height for flat roofs and the typical r-3 standards and to recommend that the 40 foot minimum
landscape buffer remain. Commissioner Broderick seconds the motion with all additional
recommendations. Ayes: Stonebrook, Streit, Broderick, Hoifeldt, Shanks, and Schmidt. Nays: None.
Motion Carries.
STAFF REVIEW AND COMMENT: The majority of the discussion at the Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting focused around the height of the structure being four
stories. The applicant has indicated that in order to make the rest of the
project work in terms of providing a quality development with immense
amenities for the residents, that the fourth story is necessary. A three story
would be a possibility but it would require the building to expand out which
would create a smaller building setback and less surrounding open space.
As noted in the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, the motion
included restricting the height within the Planned Development Overlay at 45
feet in lieu of 50 as had been proposed within the Planned Development
Overlay. Part of the reasoning behind that was based upon some of the
comments made by the developer at the meeting. Following the meeting, the
developer indicated that he had misspoke in terms of the height of the building
that had been presented at the meeting and he would request that the height
restriction of 50 feet remain in place as originally indicated in the Planned
Development Overlay.
RECOMMENDATION: Hold the Public Hearing
ATTACHMENTS: I. Rezoning Sketch
II. Concept Plan
III. Proposed Elevations
IV. Correspondence from Developer dated 5/31/17
V. Correspondence from Neighboring Property Owners
PREPARED BY: Brad Deets
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC NOTICE INFORMATION –
NAME OF PUBLICATION: Dallas County News
DATE OF PUBLICATION: May 25, 2017
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission PREPARED BY: Brad Deets
RE: Insite Senior Living Development
DATE: May 23, 2017
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: Landing at Shadow Creek, LLC, Applicant
Haverkamp Properties, LLC, Developer
Requested Action Modification of Planned Development Overlay
Location and Size: Property is generally located east of NE Westgate
Drive, south of NE Dellwood Drive, and north of
NE Boston Parkway containing approximately
17.56 acres more or less.
LAND USES AND ZONING:
Location Existing Land Use Comprehensive Plan Current Zoning
Property in Question Agricultural Neighborhood Residential R-3/PD-1
North The Landing at
Shadow Creek Plat 4 Neighborhood Residential R-2
South Prairie Crossing Neighborhood Residential R-2 / C-4
East Alice Patricia Homes Neighborhood Residential R-3
West The Landing at
Shadow Creek Plat 2
and 3
Neighborhood Residential R-2
BACKGROUND:
The subject property involved in the proposed rezoning is located north of NE Boston Parkway, south of NE
Dellwood Drive, and east of NE Westgate Drive. The property consists of 17.56 acres. The property was
zoned to R-3 (Multi-Family Residential) back in 2007. The R-3 Zoning District includes both apartments and
condominiums as principal permitted uses. In 2016, the zoning of the subject property was amended to
include a Planned Development Overlay that was specific to a proposed senior living development. Planned
Development Overlays are a tool utilized in zoning that allows for a creation of a specific plan when a standard
zoning district may not fit a specific project as presented. The Planned Development previously identified a
combination of multi-story buildings and townhomes, however, development of the project never occurred.
The applicant, Haverkamp Properties, LLC in coordination with the owner, Landing at Shadow Creek, LLC
have requested an amendment to the Planned Development Overlay currently located on the property for a
modification to the specific plan. The proposed development would continue to be a senior living community,
however, the number of units and configuration of the site as proposed are different than what was originally
considered.
May 19, 2017
2 of 4
Landing at Shadow Creek, LLC, requests that the property be rezoned from R-3 (Multi-Family Residential) to
PD-1 (Planned Development Overlay District) and R-3 (Multi-Family Residential) for the development of a
market rate retirement community that will feature apartment units and townhomes.
The Waukee Zoning Ordinance requires an applicant to prepare an application which consists of a rezoning
map that identifies surrounding property within 250 feet of the property proposed to be modified. In addition
to the rezoning map, the applicant is required to provide consent from 50.1% of the surrounding property
within the 250 foot boundary as calculated by land area. Once this process has been completed, the City
Council can proceed with setting a date for public hearing for consideration. The Planning and Zoning
Commission must review such application and provide a recommendation prior to consideration of the City
Council at a public hearing. Following consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council
will consider this request at a public hearing scheduled for June 5, 2017 at 5:30 PM.
The applicant has provided the necessary consent of 57.42% of surrounding property owners. Notification of
the rezoning request to the proposed property was sent on May 16, 2017. Notification signs of the proposed
rezoning were also placed on the property on May 16, 2017.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject property as Neighborhood Residential which provides for a
variety of housing types including townhomes and apartments.
ABOVE: Aerial of Concept Plan identifying the proposed development.
May 19, 2017
3 of 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
As a part of the concept plan prepared for the modification of the Planned Development Overlay, the
applicant has proposed a facility that could include up to a total of 330 one and two bedroom units. The
building would be sited to incorporate a central enclosed courtyard that would provide substantial amenities
for the residents of the development.
The proposed density is a maximum of 20 units per acre. The proposed density is higher than what would be
permitted within the standard R-3 underlying zoning district which allows for a total of 17 units per acre.
Some of the reasons behind a higher density relates to the overall design of the development. Specifically, in a
standard multi-family development, there are a number of buildings and the units are spread throughout the
development. In the case of the proposed project, with the development of one larger building, it allows for
more efficiencies in building layout. The proposed density is not inconsistent with other projects that have
previously been approved and developed within the City of Waukee. Specifically, the Legacy Pointe Senior
Living Development consists of a density of 20 units per acre related to its facility that includes independent
living, assisting living and skilled care units.
The proposed Planned Development would allow for a building up to four stories in height or a maximum of
50 feet in height. The underlying R-3 zoning district allows for a maximum of three stories with a maximum
height of 40 feet. The applicant has requested the additional height as a part of the Planned Development
Overlay as a means of shrinking the overall footprint and providing additional open space and separation from
surrounding existing and planned development. This allows for greater front and rear yard setbacks as well as
a greater building setback from the existing homes and homes currently under construction to the west of the
project.
The proposed building has been designed to incorporate a flat rough partially in order to keep the overall
height of the building down. Staff did request and the applicant did provide a site section to show the
elevation of the proposed project compared to the apartment development currently under c onstruction to
the east of the subject property as well as a typical two-story building elevation of a single family home to the
west of the subject property. The site section generally identifies that the proposed building would be roughly
the same height as the adjoining three story apartment buildings to the east that include a pitched roof.
Access to the proposed project would be provided off of both NE Dellwood Drive (north) and NE Boston
Parkway (south). The concept plan identifies a looped driveway that would be constructed around the facility
to provide adequate access and flow through the development. Parking has been proposed at a ratio of 1.5
parking stalls per unit. Of the proposed 495 total stalls, 185 would be provided within garages both internal
to the building as well as in accessory garages on both the east and west sides of the site. The remaining
parking would be provided within surface parking lots.
The proposed development concept has been designed to maximize open space. The concept identifies the
development of two storm water detention ponds that would be located on either side of the front entrance
to the project. The east pond is proposed as a wet-bottom pond with a walking path surrounding it.
Detention is also proposed to be located on the north end of the site adjacent to NE Dellwood Drive.
The overall footprint of the building has allowed for greater landscape buffers than what would traditionally be
required within an R-3 zoned development. The Planned Development identifies a requirement of a thirty
foot landscape buffer adjacent to both NE Boston Parkway and NE Dellwood Drive. A forty foot landscape
buffer is proposed along the east property line adjacent to the single family homes/lots located along NE
May 19, 2017
4 of 4
Wilden Drive. The Planned Development identifies the minimum number of trees required within the buffer
areas. The buffers would include a combination of overstory trees, ornamental trees, evergreens and shrubs.
Parkland dedication was satisfied with the dedication that was provided with the Landing at Shadow Creek Plat
1. The Planned Development however, does reference a number of additional amenities that would be
provided on the site of the proposed development specifically within the proposed interior courtyard.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Planned Development Overlays are generally intended for projects that have a sense of uniqueness or that or
so designed such that they could not be developed under a standard zoning district. In the case of the
proposed development, the developer would be allowed to increase the overall density of the development
from 17 units an acre to 20 units an acre. The developer would also be allowed to develop a four story
building with a flat roof instead of a three story building with a pitched roof. In exchange for the modifications
to density and height, the developer would be required to provide significant more open space than what
would be required under a traditional zoning district, larger and more substantial landscape buffers, e levated
architectural guidelines and requirements and additional amenities to be utilized by the residents of the
development.
Staff has reviewed the proposed development concept in great detail and based upon the provisions and
promises as identified within the Planned Development, staff would recommend approval of the proposed
Planned Development Amendment. The proposed project is consistent with the underlying land use as
identified within the Comprehensive Plan and provides for a housing development that is both unique and
needed within the Waukee community.
CITY OF WAUKEE
Brad Deets
Development Services Director
1ST FLOOR0' - 0"HORIZONTAL SIDINGARCHITECTURAL PANELDARK BRICKLIGHT BRICKMETAL ROOFINGDARK BRICKPARAPET49' - 6"P.O. Box 159 HUXLEY, IA 50124p: 515.597.5457f: 515.597.5461WWW.JCORP.BIZCorp, incJ2017 - 05 - 19Waukee Senior LivingElevationsSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"1Side ElevationSCALE:33D ViewSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"2Front/Back ElevationSCALE:43D View 2
FFE=1021FFE=1021FFE=1021FFE=1021PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEP.O. Box 159 HUXLEY, IA 50124p: 515.597.5457f: 515.597.5461WWW.JCORP.BIZCorp, incJ2017 - 05 - 19Waukee Senior LivingSite SectionSCALE: 1" = 30'-0"1Site Section
2222221+2+2+221112nd FLOORPhase 1 2nd Floor14 - 1 Bed 690sf 6 - 1 Bed 807sf 4 - 1 Bed 871sf16 - 2 Bed 922sf16 - 2 Bed 998sf56 Total Units1+2+2+1+1+1+1+221+1+Phase 2 2nd Floor 6 - 1 Bed 690sf 2 - 1 Bed 807sf 2 - 1 Bed 871sf16 - 2 Bed 922sf 8 - 2 Bed 998sf34 Total Units12+ 2+1111+2+ 2+12+2+1112+2+12+ 2+1111+2+ 2+11122222222221+2+211Phase 1 1st Floor 8 - 1 Bed 690sf 2 - 1 Bed 807sf 4 - 1 Bed 871sf14 - 2 Bed 922sf 8 - 2 Bed 998sf36 Total Units2+1+1+1+21+1+Phase 2 1st Floor 4 - 1 Bed 690sf 0 - 1 Bed 807sf 2 - 1 Bed 871sf 6 - 2 Bed 922sf 4 - 2 Bed 998sf16 Total Units12+112+12+112+12+112+12222Phase 1 UnitTotals50 - 1 Bed 690sf20 - 1 Bed 807sf16 - 1 Bed 871sf70 - 2 Bed 922sf56 - 2 Bed 998sf212 Total UnitsPhase 2 UnitTotals22 - 1 Bed 690sf 6 - 1 Bed 807sf 8 - 1 Bed 871sf54 - 2 Bed 922sf28 - 2 Bed 998sf118 Total Units1stFLOOR2222221+ 1+2222222222112+2+1+2+2+112+ 2+2+ 2+111+2221+ 1+2222+2+12+2+1112222261'-6"127'-11"261'-6"127'-11"173'-6"420'-0"173'-6"420'-0"P.O. Box 159 HUXLEY, IA 50124p: 515.597.5457f: 515.597.5461WWW.JCORP.BIZCorp, incJ2017 - 05 - 19Waukee Senior LivingFloor Plans
2222221+2+2+22111Phase 1 3rd Floor14 - 1 Bed 690sf 6 - 1 Bed 807sf 4 - 1 Bed 871sf20 - 2 Bed 922sf16 - 2 Bed 998sf60 Total Units1+2+2+1+1+1+1+221+1+Phase 2 3rd Floor 6 - 1 Bed 690sf 2 - 1 Bed 807sf 2 - 1 Bed 871sf16 - 2 Bed 922sf 8 - 2 Bed 998sf34 Total Units12+ 2+1111+2+ 2+12+2+1112+2+12+ 2+1111+2+ 2+1112222223rd FLOOR2222221+2+2+22111Phase 1 4th Floor14 - 1 Bed 690sf 6 - 1 Bed 807sf 4 - 1 Bed 871sf20 - 2 Bed 922sf16 - 2 Bed 998sf60 Total Units1+2+2+1+1+1+1+221+1+Phase 2 4th Floor 6 - 1 Bed 690sf 2 - 1 Bed 807sf 2 - 1 Bed 871sf16 - 2 Bed 922sf 8 - 2 Bed 998sf34 Total Units12+ 2+1111+2+ 2+12+2+1112+2+12+ 2+1111+2+ 2+1112222224thFLOOR222222222222221+ 1+2222222222112+2+1+2+2+112+ 2+2+ 2+111+2222221+ 1+2222222222112+2+1+2+2+112+ 2+2+ 2+111+173'-6"261'-6"127'-11"420'-0"173'-6"261'-6"127'-11"420'-0"P.O. Box 159 HUXLEY, IA 50124p: 515.597.5457f: 515.597.5461WWW.JCORP.BIZCorp, incJ2017 - 05 - 19Waukee Senior LivingFloor Plans
To: Mayor Bill Peard, City of Waukee
City Council, City of Waukee
Cc: Brad Deets, Development Services Director, City of Waukee
From: Brent Haverkamp, Present of Haverkamp Properties, Inc.
Date: May 31, 2017
Re: Request to Increase Building Height Restriction on Proposed Project
At the Planning and Zoning Meeting on May 16, 2017, we were granted approval for
our Waukee Senior Living project after considerable discussion. The board expressed
concerns about its effect on the adjoining property owners to the west of the
proposed site. We too have had concerns regarding our impact on the community
and have worked to ensure our proposed building will enhance this area of Waukee.
The main concern expressed during the meeting was regarding the height. When
questioned about how tall the four-story building would be, I guessed “low 40’s”.
Because of this statement, the site plan was approved with the height limit of 45 feet.
Unfortunately, I was mistaken, as our engineer later explained. The point I intended to
communicate in this discussion was that our 4-story flat roof building is no higher than a
3-story pitched roof building, guessing both were in the “low 40’s”. Upon review, both
building types actually have an overall height of around 49 feet.
To correct my previous claim, the proposed building is 46 feet tall. The design includes
a parapet wall to add dimension and visual appeal which adds a few feet to the
overall height at various points around the perimeter of the building. Without this
parapet wall, the building would look monolithic and unappealing to the surrounding
homeowners. See attached 3-D rending of decorative exterior with parapet wall.
Another area of concern was the line of sight disturbance a 4-story building would
create for the adjoin property owners to the west of the proposed building. To bring
clarity to the debate, we asked our engineers to draw a comparison of what we’re
proposing versus what is allowed by code. As you’ll see, the line of sight is significantly
improved by constructing a 4 story, flat roof building, that is set back further.
Realistically, a height restriction of 45 feet will not work for us. If this request to increase
the building height restriction is not approved, we’ll be forced to either abandon the
project or alter the site plan. Modifying the building height would result in a 3-story
pitched roof building, substantial spread out on the site, and bringing the building
closer to the neighboring single-family homes. We believe this would feel more intrusive
than a 4-story, 50-foot building.
To make our efforts apparent in creating an attractive neighboring property for our
homeowners to our west, please review the table below. This table compares the R-3
zoning requirements and the generous distances we’ve proposed. These
measurements can also be seen on the attached drawings.
R-3 Requirements Proposed
Landscape Buffer 25 feet min 43 feet
Building Set Back 25 feet min 102 feet
Building Height 40 feet at midpoint * 46-50 feet
*Typical building height at peak approximately 49 feet – see attached drawing
Thank you for your time and consideration of my request. I look forward to answering
any questions at the upcoming City Council meeting on Monday, June 5.
Sincerely,
Brent Haverkamp
FFE=1021 FFE=1021FFE=1021 FFE=1021PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE3 STORY LINE OF SIGHT4 STORY LINE OF SIGHT25'-0"102'-0"9'-1 1/8"9'-1 1/8"9'-1 1/8"49'-1 1/2"70'-0"40'-0" MIDPOINT10'-1 1/8"9'-1 1/8"70'-0"9'-1 1/8"9'-1 1/8"46'-0"VARIES PER ELEVATION126P.O. Box 159 HUXLEY, IA 50124p: 515.597.5457f: 515.597.5461WWW.JCORP.BIZCorp, incJ2017 - 05 - 31Waukee Senior LivingSite SectionSCALE: 1" = 50'-0"1Site SectionSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"2Building SectionPROPOSED 4 STORY BUILDING3 STORY BUILDING