Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/26/95HASTiNGS PLANNiNG COMMISSION Minutes of June 26, 1995 The regular meeting of the Hastings Planning Commission was called to order by Commissioner Reinardy at 7:00 p.m. Commissioners Present: Schommer, Flom, Bolesworth, Harrington, Onnen and Reinardy Commissioners Absent: Bateman Staff Present: City Planner Czech MINUTES Commissioner Reinardy called for additions or corrections to the meeting minutes of June 12, 1995. There being no additions or corrections the minutes were approved. VARIANCE (SIGN SIZE)- 1450 W.4TH STREET Czech reviewed staffs June 9, 1995 memorandum to the Planning Commission concerning a request by Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran Church for a 10.16 square foot sign size variance at 1450 West 4th Street. The Planning Commission discussed issues relating to the request including, but not limited to, sign size and location. Greg Collins with Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran Chumh was present at the meeting and discussed with staff and the Planning Commission issues relating to the sign. Upon further review of the sign proposal, there was discussion as to whether the sign may meet the minimum 24 square foot requirement. The sign application had no scale and the size could not be determined at the meeting. The applicant indicated that they would recalculate the size of the sign and report to staff. Commissioner Flom moved, Commissioner Harrington made a second, to recommend denial of a 10.16 square foot sign size variance for property at 1450 West 4th Street based on findings that the applicant did not satisfy the following variance criteria: That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10. VARIANCE (SETBACK)- 1470 BRITTANY ROAD That the special conditions and cimumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by Chapter 10 to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. No non-conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permitted or non-conforming use of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nays, 0. Czech reviewed staffs June 13, 1995 memorandum to the Planning Commission concerning a request by C.A. Schumacher for a two foot rear and side-yard setback variance for an accessory structure at 1470 Brittany Road. Commissioner Harrington moved, Commissioner Flom made a second, to recommend denial ora two foot rear yard setback variance for an accessory structure at 1470 Brittany Road based on findings that the applicant did not satisfy the following variance criteria: That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by Chapter 10 to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. No non-conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permitted or non-conforming use of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nays, 0. Commissioner Bolesworth moved, Commissioner Onnen made a second, to recommend denial of a two foot side-yard setback variance for an accessory structure at 1470 Brittany Road based on findings that the applicant did not satisfy the following variance criteria: PUBLIC HEARING- PRELIMINAR Y/FINAL PLAT-CARI PARK 5TH ADDITION- WEST 36TH STREET That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by Chapter 10 to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. No non-conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permitted or non-conforming use of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nays, 0. Czech reviewed staffs June 21, 1995 memorandum to the Planning Commission concerning a request by Builders Development, Incorporated for approval of a preliminary/final plat called Carl Park 5th Addition. Czech introduced the following exhibits to be included with the Planning Commission packet: Exhibit "A": A letter dated June 26, 1995 from Lynn Allen of 474 Tiffany Drive. Exhibit "B": A letter dated June 26, 1995 from Fritz Van Nest of Builders Development, Incorporated. Exhibit "C": A revised lot layout for Lots 1-20, Block 1, Cari Park 5th Addition Preliminary Plat. Exhibit "D": A petition dated June 22, 1995 from several property owners in Cari Park. Commissioner Onnen declared a conflict of interest and excused herself from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Reinardy opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Patty Gjelhaug of 3650 Sirett Court provided the Planning Commission with a copy ora petition dated June 22, 1995 that was entered into the record as exhibit "D". Miss Gjelhaug indicated that she was concerned with the proposed development and asked why some people in Carl Park did not receive notice. Jenny Hemlem of 370 Tiffany Drive said she was overwhelmed by all the twinhomes and was concerned about resale values. Kim Dylla of 3690 Sirett Court said she agreed with the others opposed to the development of more twinhomes because it is hard to sell single family homes. Sandy Caturia of 3670 Sirett Court indicated that she had spoken with Councilmember Kent Warner and she said that Mr. Warner shared their concerns about more twinhome development in Cari Park. John C onzemius identified himself as a farmer south of the subject property (the property owner of the northwest 1/4 of southwest 1/4 of Section 3, Township 114, Range 17) and asked that trees and fences stay back fi.om his property so that he can control weeds. Char King of 424 Tiffany Drive said she was concerned that there were more twinhomes than single family homes and asked about maintenance of the pond in Cari Park. Paul Greten identified himself as a property owner west of Highway 61 (the south V2 of northeast 1/4 of Section 4, Township 114, Range 17) and said he is concerned about cars parked and kids playing in the street and asked why ponds are necessary. Pam Onnen of 3644 James Court said she is against more twinhome development and is concerned about property values and population. Mark Holm of 413 Tiffany Drive said that he is concerned about traffic on 36th Street and Tiffany Drive. Jim Schmitz of 365 Tiffany Drive said he was concerned about the number of cars on 36th Street. Ronald Chapin of 345 Tiffany Drive expressed concerns about the proposed development. Sue Eggert of 360 Tiffany Drive said that she has concerns that there was no new park and that there are too many kids. Gary Becker of 409 Tiffany Drive asked about the proposed pond and said he was concerned about the number oftwinhomes. Debbie Otto of 290 Tiffany Drive said that she was concerned about the upkeep of property and the number of units. Char King of 424 Tiffany Drive said that her builder did not tell her about the future development. Darren Hemlem of 370 Tiffany Drive said that he was never notified about the last development. Mike Wemer of 2025 Highland Drive asked the developer if there was a homeowners association and that he would like to see one along with maintenance free siding. Rick Sather of Sather and Bergquist, the consulting planner and engineer for the project, indicated that there would be no homeowners association but rather each unit would be platted on its own individual lot with restrictive covenants. Jeri Orres said she would like to see more single family homes. There being no further comments from the audience the public hearing was closed at 7:52 p.m. The Planning Commission discussed with staff and Rick Sather a variety of issues including, but not limited to, city code requirements, park area, traffic issues, other housing developments that have units that look the same and how much government interference is appropriate in a private development. Commissioner Bolesworth moved, Commissioner Harrington made a second, to recommend approval of the preliminary/final plat for Cari Park 5th Addition subject to the following conditions: That the final plat hardshells conform with the preliminary plat called Carl Park 5th Addition. That the developer shall pay $49,300 for cash instead of parkland before the City signing any fmal plat. The developer shall pay $15,660 in interceptor sewer charges before the City signing any fmal plat. Before issuing any building permits, the developer shall provide a certified survey that the entire site has been graded pursuant to the approved grading plan. UPDATES/ OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURN- MENT in Tom Montgomery's June 21, 1995 memorandum concerning the Carl Park 5th Addition Preliminary Plat. That the developer shall use maintenance free siding on all twinhorne units. The developer shall reduce the right of way and street width as determined by City Council or as deemed appropriate by staff. That the developer shall plant two trees per unit (58 units total) with 1 tree in the front yard and 1 "boulevard" tree planted between the curb and front property line. The species type and size as determined by City Council or City Staff. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 4; Nays, 1 (Flom). Commissioner Onnen rejoined the Planning Commission. Czech reviewed City Council actions pertaining to planning matters. There being no further business Commissioner Schommer moved, Commissioner Flom made a second, to adjourn the meeting at 8:36 p.m.