HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/13/90-- HASTINGS PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING OF 8/13/90
The regular meeting of the Hastings Planning Commission was called
to order by Commissioner Kaiser at 7:30 p.m.
Members Present:
Commissioners Patzke, Dredge, Reinardy, Kaiser,
Anderson, Zender and Featherstone
Members Absent:
Ditty and Cedar
Staff Present:
city Planner Czech
Commissioner Kaiser called for additions or
corrections to the minutes of the regular meeting
of July 23, 1990. There being no additions or
corrections the minutes were approved as
presented.
Czech reviewed staff's August 7, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission regarding the proposed
Hastings Zoning Ordinance amendment which
would create a R-7 High Density Residential
District.
MINUTES
PUBLIC HEARING -
ZONING ORDINANCE
AMEND. - R-7 HIGH
RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
The public hearing was opened for comments at
7:33 p.m. There being no comments from the
audience, the public hearing was closed.
The Planning Commission briefly discussed the
proposed amendment. Commissioner Featherstone
asked that language be added such that any
development in the R-7 District be compatible
with the downtown area.
Commissioner Zender moved, Commissioner Patzke
made a second, to approve the following:
SEC. 10.147 R-7 - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Subd. 1.Intent. The intent of the R-7 zone is to encourage
the development of higher density multiple family residential
structures with gabled roofs adjacent to and compatible with the
downtown area, serve as a transitional district from commercial to
lower density residential districts, and to provide a variety of
housing types to satisfy individual preferences and financial
capabilities.
Subd. 2. Uses Permitted.
Four (4) plex, apartment buildings, condominiums and other
similar structures.
Ail
Uses
R-7
Shared or congregate living residences, nursing homes,
retirement homes, churches, day care centers.
Library, public and private schools, and similar uses of a
public service nature.
Customary accessory uses incidental to the foregoing
principle uses including, but not limited to, private garages,
identifying signs, and recreational facilities.
Subd. 3. Uses by Special Permit.
Multiple residential structures greater than 40 feet in
height as measured by the Uniform Building Code and subject
to the following conditions:
The location and design of all structures must satisfy
the requirements of city Code Chapter 2, Section 2.04,
Subd. 5B.
The location of all buildings must be compatible with
adjacent uses and structures.
Area Width Front Rear Side Yar____~d Side Heiqht
Inte_____rior Corner
500 sq.ft. -0- 5'-p 1/2 Bldg. 1/4 Bldg. 5'-p 40'-q
per unit Height up to Height but
a 15' setback not less
but not less than 5'
than 5'
p. = Garages facing the street/alley ROW shall be setback at least
20 feet.
q. = Except as allowed by Section 10.147, Subd. 3.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0.
Czech reviewed staff's August 7, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission regarding the proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendment from "Medium
Density Residence" to "High Density Residence"
and a rezone from C-3 Community Regional
Commerce to R-7 High Density Residential
District for Lots 1-4, Block 18, Original
Town of Hastings which is located on the
south side of East 3rd Street between Ramsey
and Tyler Streets.
The public hearing was opened for comments at
7:37 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING -
COMP PLAN AMEND-
"MED DENSITY RES"
TO "HIGH DENSITY
& REZONE FROM
C-3 T OR-7 -LOTS
1-4, BLK 18,
ORIGINAL TOWN OF
HASTINGS
Mike LeVasseaur indicated that he was not in
opposition to the proposed R-7 zone district,
however, wanted to state for the record that
there will be noise and truck traffic associated
with the nearby grain elevator. Mr. Levasseaur
noted that any proposed use that locates on the
subject site should expect to live with the
existing grain elevator which will be
operation in the future.
Skip Schoen indicated that he was in support of
the proposed rezone and proposed senior housing
facility that he believes is an improvement to
the area.
There being no further comments from the
audience, the public hearing was closed at
7:40 p.m.
The Planning Commission briefly discussed the
proposed Comp Plan Amendment and rezone.
Commission Dredge moved, Commissioner Zender
made a second, to approve a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment from "Medium Density Residence" to
"High Density Residence" and a rezone from C-3
to R-7 for Lots 1-4, Block 18, Original Town
of Hastings.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0.
Czech reviewed staff's August 7, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission regarding the proposed
preliminary plat/phase I and site plan review
for Pleasant Valley 5th Addition which is
located south and west of the existing Pleasant
Valley Development.
The public hearing was opened for comments at
7:45 p.m. There being no comments from the
audience, the public hearing was closed.
The Planning Commission briefly discussed the
preliminary plat/phase I and site plan. Neil
Siewert of Siewert Construction asked about
modifying staff's recommendation concerning
the ponding basin. The Planning Commission
indicated that issue should be brought up with
the city Council.
Commissioner Reinardy moved, Commissioner
Zender made a second, to approve the
preliminary plat/phase I and site plan
subject to the following conditions:
PUBLIC HEARING -
PRF? .IMINARY PLAT/
PHASE I/SITE PLAN
pT ~ASANT VA?J~Y
5TH ADDITION -
SIEWERT CONST.
1. That Phase I final plat and all subsequent final
plat phases conform to the preliminary plat.
2. That the applicant is to submit a revised utility
plan and drainage plan to be approved by the city
Engineer prior to submitting the final plat for
Phase I. The revised utility plan shall include
fire hydrants at all intersections and at the end of
all cul-de-sacs and revised sanitary sewer with a
separate manhole for westerly flow. Furthermore,
the revised utility plan shall show the westerly
townhome structure in Phase I connecting into the
sanitary sewer to be serviced by a future lift
station.
3. That the applicant agree to and resolve all issues
outlined in Tom Montgomery's memorandum dated
August 8, 1990 prior to submitting the final plat
for Phase I.
4. That curb cuts and related street restoration shall
be completed pursuant to city Code.
5. That sidewalks be installed as extended from Pleasant
Valley 4th Addition which is the south side of
Jefferson Street.
6. Resolve all park land dedication requirements including
the transferring of 3.28 acres prior to final plat
approval.
7. Except for Phase I, it is understood that the city has not
given final site plan approval for townhome structures.
Final site plan approval, including building location,
landscaping, hydrant placement, garbage dumpsters, berming
and screening and other site specific issues will be
processed as a separate matter after the plat has been
approved. The setback and site plan standards for the
townhome structures shall meet the city's R-3 PRD
requirements. The developer must make sure the structures
fit on the lots in question and meet all applicable city
requirements.
8. That landscaping for the proposed Phase I townhome units
also include three (3) red splendor flowering crab trees
at the ends of each 4-unit structure.
9. That one (1) shade tree shall be planted on each single
family lot per City code requirements.
10.That the dev'eloper adhere to all R-2 zoning district
standards in regards to the single family development
area and all R-3 planned residential development standards
in all other areas. It is also noted that the corner
side setback is 25 feet to both street right of way lines
for corner lots in this development.
ll. That the construction of the townhomes and related site
plan improvements shall be completed as per the approved
site plan. Occupancy of the townhome units shall not take
place until all site plan related improvements are
completed. In the alternative, the occupancy of the units
may be permitted if the developer provides to the city, as
per city code requirements, a cash escrow in an amount
equal to 125% of the cost of the site improvements
remaining to be completed.
12. Payment of interceptor sewer charges at such the final
plat is submitted.
13. That a development agreement be entered into to implement
the conditions and understandings mentioned above or
those that may be recognized at a later date.
14. That the name of Jackson Court or Jackson Circle be
changed to a name that is not similar to one another
to be approved by staff.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0.
Czech reviewed staff's August 4th, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission regarding a special use
permit/variance request by Haven Homes Health
Center (Lester Fair) to allow an addition to the
existing nursing home. Czech noted that Lester
Fair had submitted a letter dated August 9th,
1990, formerly requesting that his building
height variance be withdrawn. Czech also read a
letter from Lester Fair dated August 9th, 1990,
asking for an addition to the nursing home.
Czech indicated that staff took into account the
proposed nursing home addition. In addition,
Czech read letters from sister Mary Madonna
Ashton of the Minnesota Department of Health,
and Tom Cedar of the Hastings Planning Commission.
Czech reviewed some of the additions/changes
proposed by Haven Homes that were submitted after
the writing of staff's August 4th, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission. Czech indicated that the
proposed 24 unit "assisted living facility" is not
allowed as a special use in the R-1 zone district
nor is it compatible with adjacent uses. Czech briefly
discussed the proposed access which would come off
West 15th Street over city owned property.
PUBLIC HEARING -
SPECIAL USE
PERMIT FOR OLD
AGE HOME/REST
HOME& VARIkNCE-
HAVEN HOMES -
930 W. 16TH ST.
The public hearing was opened for comments at
8:02 p.m.
Lester Fair, Administrator of Haven Homes,
presented background information on Haven
Homes including previous developments dating
back to 1966 when Haven Homes was originally
built. Mr. Fair also gave a slide presentation
and explanation of what Haven Homes was
requesting and why Haven Homes needed the
proposed expansion to the existing nursing
facility.
David Tanner, attorney representing numerous
property owners adjacent to Haven Homes,
indicated that his clients were opposed to the
proposed 24 unit addition. Mr. Tanner explained
why he believed the proposed 24 unit addition
was not a special use in the R-1 zone district.
There being no further comments from the
audience, the public hearing was closed at
8:34 p.m.
The Planning Commission interacted with Mr. Fair,
Mr. Tanner and Czech on a number of issues.
Commissioner Zender moved, Commissioner Patzke
made a second, to deny the Special Use Permit
based on the following findings:
A. The proposed 24 unit assisted living facility
is not allowed as special use within the R-1
zone district. Although Section 10.11(3) (A)
allows by special permit "old age homes" and
"rest homes", the proposed "assisted living
facility" does not fit within the definition
of either of these uses but is more in nature
with ,'boarding care home" which is not allowed
in an R-1 zone district. The terms "old age
home" and "rest home" are the same as ,,nursing
home" which is defined by Minnesota Rules
1990, 4655.0090, subpart 8.
B. The proposed 24 unit ,'assisted living facility"
is not compatible with adjacent uses. The
surrounding lands are zoned primarily R-i,
low density residence. The remaining adjacent
property is R-2, medium density residence. The
proposed use calls for a 24 single bed unit
"assisted living facility" which is not compatible
with the surrounding low density residential area
since the purpose of a low density zone is to
protect the quiet living environment from potential
conflicting uses. The proposed 24 unit "assisted
living facility" would increase the density to
approximately 20.2 units and/or nursing home beds
per acre. Furthermore, the proposed use would
introduce a new access drive as well as increased
traffic to and from the facility by both the
occupants and visitors. This would cause an ~ncrea~e
in traffic levels and accompanying vehicle noise
which would detract from the quiet living environment
in a low density zone.
C. The proposed special use would not promote the public
health, safety, welfare, morals, order, comfort,
convenience, appearance, prosperity, or general welfare
throughout the zoning district/surrounding area for
those reasons stated in the previous paragraphs.
Upon vote taken, Ayes 4; Nayes 3, (Featherstone,
Dredge and Reinardy).
Commissioner Zender moved, Commissioner Patzke
made a second, to deny all of the applicant's
access proposals.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0.
Commissioner Zender left the meeting.
Czech reviewed staff's July 23, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission regarding a sign
variance request by Wal-Mart for an aggregate
sign area of 482 square feet which is in excess
of the 240 square feet allowed by City Code.
Murray Kornberg with Headway Corporation was
present and, on behalf of Wal-Mart, addressed
a number of questions from the Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Dredge moved, Commissioner Reinardy
made second, to approve the sign variance request
subject to the following conditions:
1. Wal-Mart is to have no more than 482 square
feet of sign area.
2. No other business within the County Crossroads
Shopping Center shall have more than 240 square
feet of sign space unless the City grants
approval of a variance.
3. The applicant shall submit a sign permit
application for all proposed signs.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 4; Nayes, 2 (Anderson and
Patzke).
Czech reviewed staff's August 2, 1990, memo to
the Planning Commission regarding a home
occupation request by Michelle Richmond of
1961 Louis Lane to allow her to make furniture
kits. Czech noted that this request had
changed since the Planning Commission
SIGN VARIANCE -
WAL-MART - COUNTY
CROSSROADS CENT~
HOME OCCUPATION -
FURNITURE KITS -
1961LOUISLANE-
RICHMOND
tabled the matter at its July 23, 1990, mee%~ng.
Czech read a letter from Michelle Richmond
dated August 13, 1990. Basically, Ms. Richmond
indicated in her letter that she intended to make
furniture kits with PVC pipe that people would buy
and assemble themselves.
The Planning Commission briefly discussed the
proposed home occupation.
Commissioner Dredge moved, Commissioner Reinardy
made a second, to approve the home occupation
subject to the following conditions:
The applicant shall not construct any
furniture on site as spelled out in her
letter dated August 13, 1990.
Compliance with all home occupation
standards.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0.
Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Dredge ORDER PUBLIC
made a second, to order a public hearing for HEARING - MINOR
its August 27, 1990, regular meeting in order SUBDIVISION ORD.
to review the proposed Minor Subdivision Ordinance.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0.
Commissioner Dredge moved, Commissioner Anderson
made a second, to order a public hearing for
its August 27, 1990, regular meeting in order
to review a minor subdivision request by Joseph
Meier for property located between Olive and
Frazier Streets (Lots 5, 6 & N. 20 ft. of 7,
Block 6, Addition No. 13).
ORDER PUBLIC
HEARING - MINOR
SUBDIVISION -
OLIVE/FRAZIER
STREETS - MEIER
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0.
Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Anderson
made a second, to order a public hearing for its
August 27, 1990, regular meeting in order to
review a minor subdivision request by David
Tanner, attorney for Michael Siebenaler, at
1350 and 1360 Blueberry Court.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0.
Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner
Reinardy made a second, to order a public
hearing for its August 27, 1990, regular
meeting in order to review proposed changes to
the Hastings Flood Plain Ordinance.
ORDER PUBLIC
HEARING - MINOR
SUBDIVISION -
1350 & 1360
BLUEBERRY CT. -
SIEBENALER &
GOEBEL
ORDER PUBLIC
HEARING - FLOOD
PLAIN ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0.
Czech briefed the Planning Commission on
a partial vacation of a slope easement at
Pleasant and Southview Drive the City Council
will be reviewing at the August 20, 1990,
Council meeting.
There being no further business Commissioner
Anderson moved, Commissioner Patzke made a
second, to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0.
UPDATE/OTHER
BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT