HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/12/89June 12, 1~9
The regular meeting of the Has~ings Planning Oommission was cai led ~o order at
7:30 p.m.
!~l,ambers Present: Ohairman l(aiser, O~missioners 1(rook, Folch, Featherstone, Anderson
and Voel kef.
Hembers Absent: Oommlssioners Ditty, Dredge and Zender.
Staff Present: Planning Director Harmening.
Chairman Kaiser called for additions or corrections to the
minutes of !',~ay 22, 1989 and hearing none declared the minutes
approved as presented.
AP~OVAL ,OF HIHUTES
Planning Oirector Harmening detailed to the Commissioners an
application made by Duane Groth and Nail Siewert for
approval of the rezoning of property at the southwest
corner of Hwy 55 & Pine St. fr~n R-1 and R-~ to C-2
Highway-Auto-Specialized O~merce.The application also
included a request for an amendment to
'the City's Oomprehensive Plan to redesignate the subject property
frown residential to comi~rcial. Harmening indicated that the
rezoning application indicated that a far:hers market/flea
market is proposed to be located on the property. Harmening
noted that the Planning Oommission should kee~ in mind that the
applicant is only requesting the rezoning and Comp Plan amendment
for the property and, as a result, the C~nmission should review
~his matter fr~ the perspective of whether or not a ~neral
commercial type land use is appropriate for the property in
question. Harn~ning reviewed with the Planning Oommission
matters pertaining to the history of the property and
adjacent property, existing property conditions, proposed
conditions, comprehensive plan issues, spot zoning issues,
site access, etc.
PUBL I C HE AR 1 ~G-REZO~,IE/
,OOHP PLAN A~Eh'Di~ENT-
H!'IY 55 ~ PINE
~70TH/S I F~t~ERT
Following the detailing of the proposal by Harmening,
Chairman Kaiser opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m.
C~nments received from the audience were as follows:
Nell Sie~ert, 30~ Vermillion St. - ~r. Siewert indicated
that he did not feel that the proposed rezoning constituted
spot zoning due to the adjacent land uses.
Duane Groth, 308 Vermillion St. - Groth indicated that the
applicants had owned the property for 20 years and due to
the zoning have not been able to do anything with the property.
;Ir. Groth indicated that the applicants are currently in
the process of raising vegetables and sweet corn and would
like to sell these products on the subject property. Groth
indicated that he cannot find available commercial property
in the city to undertake his farmers market. Hr. Groth also
indicated that he felt the subject property was an ideal spot
for a com,~rcial use and the selling of ve~tables. Groth
also commented on matters pertaining to !InDots plans to eliminate
access from Hwy 55 to the subject property as a part of the
H~y 55 improvement project.
Groth also questioned the process citys undergo for zoning
and guidln9 property.
!~s. Sorenson, i312 Pine St. - ~s. Sorenson indicated that she
did not necessarily nave objections to certain types of commercial uses
on the subject property but does not want a zoning designation
on the property which would allow all types of comr~rcial uses.
Us. Sorenson indicated that she was concerned about traffic.
[~s. Sorenson also indicated that she would be ?~illin§ to have
a zoning designation on the property which would tightly
control the types of commercial uses permitted.
Ouane Groth, 308 Vermillion St. - !,Ir. Sroth indicated that
ha would be willing to work out some type of purchase arrangement
with Sorenson if something were proposed for the property other than a farmers
market. Groth indicated that he understood why she wouldn't
want a gas or filling station on the property or a fast food
store.
Planning Director Harmening requested permission to read
into the record a letter he had received from Alice Taffe and
Richard Taffe, 639 W. 7th St. The letter was written as follows:
"We are unable to attend the June 12, 1989 public hearing regarding
the reques~ to rezone the property at the southwest intersection
of Hwy 55 & Pine Street from residential to commercial. Therefore,
we hereby want it to be known that we are definitely opposed to
the reques~ made by Duane Groth and Nell Siewert. ~e prefer to
have the area remain residential".
There being no further comr~nts Chairman Kaiser closed the
public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
After the public hearing was closed the Commissioner discussed
the merits of the application and possible uses for the subject
property. This discussion included comments pertaining to the
property possibly being used for office purposes or possibly
multi-family. At this point Hr. Groth questioned how the site
could be a multi-family property due to its proximity to
Trunk Highway 55. Fir. Groth also questioned why the South
Frontage Road was not planned to be extended to the western
limits of the subject property. After further discussion a motion
was made by Commissioner Featherstone, seconded by Commissioner
Krook, to recommend to the City Council that the rezoning and
comprehensive plan application be denied due to the following
1. The proposal is not consistent with the goals, policies,
objectives and intentions of the comprehensive plan with
respect to the location of commercial districts.
2. The proposal represents the start of a strip or linear
commercial development along Trunk Higt~way 55 which is
deemed to be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan
and sound planning principles.
intrusion and have a negative effect on the existing
residential develo~aent ~hich is located adjacent to the
subject property.
4. The site will not have appropriate access, after completion
of the Trunk Highway 55 improvement project, to adequately
serve a general commercial land use on the property.
5. The proposal represents spot zoning ~vhich is inconsistent
with sound planning and zoning principles.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 5; Nayes, O.
Planning Director Harmening indicated that, as requested
by the Planning Commission, the City Council had scheduled
a public hearing on the request by Commercial Asphalt for
a special use permit for a temporary asphalt plant in their
pit located along East loth Street. The City Council
scheduled the public hearing for their June 19, 1989 ~setlng.
SPECI.~ USE PEfT'IIT-
TEItPORARY ASPHALT OLA;4T
COHNERCI AL ASPHALT CO.
CSAH 54 ~, CO. R~. 31
The City Council also requested that the Planning Commission
review the application during this ,meeting and provide comments
and recommendations for the Councils public hearing on June 19th.
Harmening reviewed various matters pertaining to the application
from Commercial Asphalt. These matters included a discussion
on performance bonds, operating hours, vehicle trips, spill
containment systems, flood plain issues, screening, etc.
After discussion a motion was made by Caamissioner Featherstone,
seconded by Commissioner Krook to recommend that the City
Council approve a special use permit for Commercial Asphalt
to allow the operation of a temporary asphalt plant on the
subject property subject to the following conditions:
1. Expiration of the permit shall be 12/31/89.
All PCA requirements shall be met and all permits received
prior to the operation of the plant.
3. The site must be watered as necessary to control dust.
4. Prior to commencing operation of the plant, the applicant
shall provide the city with the necessary insurance
certificates and a performance bond in the amount of $25,000.
5. The site of the temporary asphalt plan~ shall be at an
elevation of not leas than 694. This requirement includes
that the bottom of the spill basin shall also be at an elevation
of not less than 594.
6. The aggregate stcci<pile shall be maintained as shown on the
site plan for screening purposes. Also, it is strongly
encouraged that the stockpile be wrapped around the front of
the site as much as possible in order to provide effective
screening.
7. That all requiremenl's of city code pertaining to tem?orary
asphalt plants be attachea as conalt~ons for perm}t approval
and be adhered to by the applicant.
The applicant shall file with the local fire authority a
material safety da~fa sheet and shall pay a $20.00 permit
fee for a flammable combustible liquid storage permit.
9. That the conditions for approval be strictly enforced.
Ayes 5; Nayes, Voelker.
Harmening indicated that Brian Heissner was requesting
two variances in order to allow him to construct a
157 x 20' addition to an existing detached garage at
315 E. 4th St. The variances were as follows:
VARI AqCE RE.SUEST-REA'7
SETSACK/NONOONFO~q I'~G LOT
LOT-315 E. 4T',-I ST.-
HE ISSNER
A variance is requested to Section 10.06, Subdivision 2
regarding nonconforming lots. In this case code states
that structures should not be placed on lots if the
area of the lot is less than 7,000 sq. ft. ;~r. ~4eissners
lot is 43' x 140~ in size or 6,020 sq. ft.
B. A variance is requested to allow the proposed garage
addition to extend to within nine feet of the rear or
alley lot line rather than 20 feet as required.
Harmening reviewed various matters pertaining to the request
including the current zoning, setback requirer~nts, existing
and proposed conditions and other related matters.
Mr. Heissner was in attendance and provided additional
information to the data provided in his application form.
After discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Krook,
seconded by Voelker to recommend that the City Council not
approve the variances due to the fact that the variances
do not meet the criteria for the granting of variances.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 3; Nayes, Folch, Featherstone and Anderson.
The vote was declared to be a tie.
Harmening indicated that ~ark Raway was requesting approval
of a site plan for a small building addition proposed to be
made to an existing structure at 1516 Vermillion St.
Har.~ning indicated this property previously contained the
Hutch;s Video !4ovie outlet. The applicant is in the process
of removing the rear portion of the building and proposes to
r~nodel the remaining structure and make an addition in order
to convert the structure into office space. Harmening discussed
a variety of matters pertaining to the proposal including
zoning, existing and proposed conditions, parking issues and
other general items.
SITE PLAN-BUILDING
Ar)DITION-1516 VEP~q ILL I 0!~
ST.:TE ET-RA'.!IAY
After discussion a motion was made by Commissionsr !(rook,
seconded by Commissioner Anderson recom~.~,nd approval of the
stie plan subject to the icl lowing conditions:
~ ta~. property to varify
A survey sn~ll be complected of '~
lot lin~ locations·
Continuous curbing snail be providad on tile north and south
sides of The property to prevent drainage from flowing on
adjacent property. Furthermore, the applicant shall provide,
at a minimum, bumper curbs for the parking spaces located along
the west side of the parking lot.
The applicant shall provide signage on the property such
That the north access point shall be designated as the
entrance To the property with the south access point to be
designated as the exit to the property. This require~nt is
suggested due to the narrow width of tho access points.
Approval of the site plan is subject to the addition and
structural modifications meeting building and fire codes.
That the construction of the addition and related site plan
improvements shall be completed as per the approved site plan
and the conditions contained as a part of site plan approval.
Occupancy of the structure shall not take place until all site
plan related matters have ~aen completed. In the alternative,
Ex:cupancy of the structure may be permitted if the applicant
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.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, ~.
o, Hayes, O.
A motion was made by C~nmissioner Krook, seconded by
Commissioner Voelker to order a public hearing for the
Planning C~missions June 2~, 1989 meeting regarding a
hearing on the proposed rezoning fr~m C-4 to R-4 of part
of Lot 2, Block 1, iVestvie~ 2nd Addition· The application
was made by IBI, Inc. []pon vote taken, Ayes, 6~ Nayes,O.
Harmening discussed with the Planning Commission various
city matters including recent actions taken by the City
Council. Harmening also discussed with the Commission
matters pertaining to an interpretation of a provision
in the ~-5 zone regarding auto repair. The Planning C~amission
requested further information fr~m Harm~ntng on this matter.
There being no further business a motion !vas made by
C~nmissioner Voelker, seconded by Commissioner !(rook to
adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Upon vote taken, Ayes,6;
Nayes, O.
ORDER PUBLIC HEARING
REZOtlING REQIJEST-C-4 TO
R-4-PART OF LOT 2,BLK 1
'.'IESTVI E','; 2~1~
IBI, INC.
OT~ER BUSI NESS/UPDATES
AD J 0 U R N'!E NT