Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/08/86HASTINGS PI_ANNIN~ CO!~,~ISSION Honday, September 3,1986 The regular meeting of the itastings Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 p.m. i~embers Present: C~mnissioners Ditty, Stevens, Dredge, Folch, Kaiser, and Q~airman Simacek Members Absent: Commissioners Conzemius, Anderson, Voelker. Staff Present: Planning Director Harmening. A motion was made by Commissioner Kaiser, seconded by Commissioner Stevens, to approve the August 25, 1936 Planning Commission minutes. Voice vote carried unanimously. O~nmissioners Conzemius and Anderson came at this time. The Ohairman opened the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m. Planning Director Harmening briefly reviewed the proposal. In this case Den's Super Value/ IBI/Petroleum Equipment Service were requesting approval of a front yard setback variance from the required 50 feet to 35.5 feet, site plan, and a special use permit to allow a proposed four pump automotive service station to be located be~.leen the north wall of Den's Super Valu and the So. Frontage Road. Harmening discussed specifics of the project including matters pertaining to adjacent utilities, comments on traffic impacts, and the action to be taken by the Planning Commission. Comments received from the audience during the public hearing included: Pat Ryan, Representative of Petroleum Equipment Service-Mr. Ryan provided a general overview of the project and provided pictures of gas stations done by his company in other communities. Mr. Ryan also discussed specifics of the proposal including details on the types of tanks installed, safety measures to be implemented, etc. Hr. Ryan indicated tiaat he felt the proposed gas station would compliment the mall due to the high amount of traffic in the area which would make the station very competitive. f~r. Ryan also indicated that a pedestal sign was not proposed for the station but that three 3' x 8.5' price signs were proposed for the canopy. Ryan stated that he felt the gas station would control traffic better than the current situation. Ryan also commented on the fact that when the City approved the original site plan for the !?estview ~all in 1974 the City approved in concept the extension of the Super Value building towards the South Frontage Road with a proposed setback of 35~. PUBLIC HEARING SPECIAL USE PERMIT-VARIANCE AND SITE PLAN - AUTO SERVICE STATION ADJACENT DONS SUPER VALU/ IBI/PETROLEUM EQUIPMt~Yf SERVICt Commissioner Voelker came at this point. O?her cc~nments made: Edith Kaiser-expressed concerns for problems associated with gas transport deliveries and truck deliveries to the Super Valu particularly with regard to the proximity of the Super Valu loading dock as related to the gas station. ~like Harris- stated that once the service station is installed ~he semi tractor will not be allowed to be connected to the trailer which should then resolve this problem. !~r. Harris also indicated that the applicant would be willing to s~ripe in the designated fire lane on the east side of the mall. Tom Harmening - asked what the hours would be of the proposed station. The applicants indicated that the hours at this time were anticipated to be 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Peter Folch - stated that the malt layout really was not originally intended for a gas station and that it was felt the proposad space was too cramped for the station. Sue Dredge - asked questions regarding the operation of the incinerator. he applicants indicated that the incinerator is now used as needed. Sue Dredge - asked whether locking caps would be placed on the tanks and whether automatic shut offs would be provided on the pumps. [qr. Ryan indicated that locking caps would be provided on the tanks and that automatic shut off provisions would be provided on the pumps. There being no further comments from the audience the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. Planning Director Harmening indicated that the Planning Commission should first act on the proposed variance request followed by separate action on the Special Use Permit. After considerable discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Stevens, seconded by Commissioner Ditty, to recommend that the variance be granted due to the fact that special conditions and circumstances exist with this matter pertaining to the fact that the City originally agreed in concept that the mall could place a 5,000 square foot expansion/extension to the building at a later date which, according to the original site plan, would appear to come within 35 feet of the South Frontage Road right of way which is the same as the proposed setback for the gas station. Upon vote taken, Ayes, Commissioner Ditty, Stevens, Chairman Simacek; Noyes, Commissioner Dredge, Folch, Kaiser, Conzemius, Anderson; Commissioner Voelker abstained. The motion was declared not approved. Planning Director Harmening requested from the Planning Commission members voting against the motion tho reasons for their vote. It was the consensus of the Planning Conmission members who voted ageinst the motion that although they preceived a need for a gas station in the proximity of the ',?estview '.1all it was felt that the location of the proposed station was not appropriate due to the traffic concedes, ingress and egress,and comparability with the mall and that the applicant did not demonstrate that their proposal met the criteria ~or the granting of the variance. After further discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Folch to table the requesV for a special use permit for an automotive service station. '.lr. Ryan requested that the Planning Co~mission provide action on the special use permit such that the Council could act on the special use permit at its next meeting. ~4r. Folch agreed to withdraw his moti©n. After further discussion a mol-ion ...;as made by C~mmisaioner Ditty, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to recommend denial of th3 Special Use Permit based on the fact that the r~quest for the variance was recommended for denial. Upon vote taken, Ayes, Oommis$ioner Ditty, Stevens, Simacek, Conzemius, Anderson} Nayes, Commissioner Dredge, Folch, Kaiser; Commissioner Voalker abstained. Whereupon the motion was declared approved. The Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Planning Director Harmening reviewed the application being made by Mr. ~]cGoon. In this case :.tr. "~cGoon has made application to the City for its review of several zoning requests to resolve the recent questions pertaining to the H. ac McGoon Photography Studio home occupation permit. The requests in order of preference by the applicant are as roi lows: A. A request for a rezoning of the ~.Iac McGoon property at 1100 Westview Drive fr~n the current R-3 zoning classification to a C-1 Neighborhood Commerce zoning classification. B. tf the above request is denied by the City the applicant then requests that the City consider an amendmen-i- to Section 10.13, Subdivision 2b of the City Zoning Drdinance (R-3 standards) by adding "Photographic Studios" as a permitted use. C. If the above options are not considered acceptable by the City tl~e applicant then requests that the City provide an interpretation of whether photographic studios are considered to be a professional office which are permitted in R-3 zones. D. If the above options are not considered acceptable by the City the applicant than requests a variance from the provisions of the home occupation permit standards to al low the continued use of the property, with respect to the existing photography studio, under the auspices of a home occupation permit. Planning Director Harmening provided brief comments on the memo which he had prepared for this matter, qr. Harmening indicated tl~at the discussion in item lc of his memo was inaccurate as residential uses are al lowed in the C-1 zone but only as apartments on the second floor. Mr. McGoon presented a slide presentation which provided the Planning Ccmmission with pictures of the McGoon property at 1100 ?les'~iew Dr. and the surrounding land uses. James Storkamp, representing ~r. ~cGoon, then provided comments on Hr. McGoons various land use applications with particular emphases on the C-1 rezoning request. Storkamp provided a rebuttal to the Planning Cm~ission of staffs interpretation that the proposed rezoning constituted a spot zone. Mr. Storkamp reviewed with the Planning Commission the intent of the C-1 zone. Storkamp also provided a letter to the Planning Commission which had been circulated by Mr. McGoon to his neighbors, which was also signed by various adjacent property owners, which indicated their support for HcGoons application. PUBLIC HEARING- REZONING FROM R-3 to C-1, ZONING AMENDMEN~ INTERPRETATION OF ZONING CODE~ AND 86-4 VARIANCE REQUEST MAC MCGOON, 1100 WESTVIEWDRIVE Storkamp also provided comments on the considerable investment r.lr. ,~cGoon had made in his property with respect to landscaping, construction of the home and purchase of two lots, equipment,etc. ~,lr. Storkamp also commented on the original approval made by the City in 1978 and stated that in his opinion the City led [,Ir. ~.]cGoon on to believe that his home occupation permit was in compliance with the City Code. Storkamp also commented on the variance request and the recommendation by the City staff to approve the variance request with conditions. Storkamp stated that the proposed conditions of the variance were too restrictive and would subject [.Ir. HcGoon to constant scrutiny from the City. Other comments which were received from the audience: Stephen Weber, 1285 W. 13th St. - Mr. Weber stated that he did not hav~ a problem with Mr. McGoons Photography Studio and that traffic related to the photography studio has not created problem for him. Mr. Weber also questioned what else could happen to the property if Mr. McGoon should no longer be living on the premises. Planning Director ltarmening indicated that if the property should be rezoned c~nmercial the primary uses permitted on the property would be commercial in nature and establishments could be located in the structure which are permitted in a C-1 zone. Edith Kaiser - questioned whether or not the home occupation used more space in the home presently than what was used in 1978. Kaiser also questioned whether or not more persons were involved with the home occupation presently than were in 1978. Storkamp indicated that the same amount of space is n~ used in the structure for the home occupation as was used in 1978. Mr. Storkamp indicated that in terms of persons involved with the home occupation some growth had been experienced in terms of Hr. HcGoons son in law as well as the addition of a part time secretary during busy times of the year. Peter Folch - briefly reviewed the letter from City Attorney ~loynihan dated July 2, 1986 and the comments made in that letter regarding action which could be taken by the City regarding the !lcGoon home occupation. Tom Ditty - feels that McGoons daughter, Cindy, has to much at stake in the Mac McGoon Photography Studio and that it ~ould be completely unfair to her to remove her from the business particularly through conditions which may be placed on the proposed variance. Edith Kaiser- also indicated that she felt Cindy had very much at stake in the business and that her interest should be taken into consideration when action is taken on this matter. ]~nere being no further conments from the audience the Chairman closed the Public Hearing at 9:10 p.m. Planning Director Harmening reviewed with the Planning Commission the necessary action to be taken on this matter. It was his suggestion that the Planning Commission start first with the rezoning request followed by the Zoning Amendment and, if necessary a recommendation on the Zoning Interpretation and finally the Variance. After considerable discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Dredge, seconded by Commissioner Stevens, to recommend that the request for a rezoning for the property at 1100 Westview Drive fr~n R-3 to C-1 be denied due to the following reasons: A. the proposed rezoning constitutes "spot zoning". B. the proposed rezoning would be inconsistent with the City of Hastings Comprehensive Plan. C. The proposed rezoning would open the subject property up to other commercial uses other than photographic studios which is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the R-3 zone and would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding residential area. Upon vote taken, Ayes, C~nmissioner Stevens, Dredge, Folch, Kaiser, Conzemius, Anderson; Nayes, Ditty, Sinacek, Voelker. Whereupon the motion was declared approved. After considerable discussion a motion was made by Commissioner ConzemiusI seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to approve the requested zoning amendment to allo~ photographic studios to be a permitted use in the R-3 zone with the condition that studios may only be located in a single family home. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 9; Nayes, O. Due to the fact that the applicants second zoning request was approved no further action was taken by the Planning C~mission on the zoning interpretation and the variance request. The Planning Director informed the Planning Commission that Hr. Battern is requesting site plan approval of an 18' x 39'8" addition proposed to be made to the north side of his existing building at the above stated address (current structure contains "The Barbers", "Chicos", etc.). The Planning Director indicated that according to Bat'kern, the building addition is proposed to accomodate an office for Battern and retail space for a possible drug store. The Planning Director noted that some members of the Planning Commission may recall that the City gave site plan approval to ~r. Battarn in !4ay of 19~5 for and addition proposed to be made to the south side of his structure which he did construct in part last year. ~r. Battern now proposes to construct the remaining uncompleted portion on the north side of the building rather than the south side. Therefore, many of the considerations and approvals given by the City last year with respec~ to the number of parking spaces, setbacks, etc. would again come in to play for the current proposal. Planning Director noted that the largest concern with respect to the proposal now at hand pertains to eventual traffic movement capabilities bet~veen the eventual north side of Batterns building and the Dairy Oueen property. SITE PLAN- EXPANSION TO BUILDING AT 1207 VERMILLION STREET (THE BARBERS BLDG.) RON B~I'±'mRN The Planning Director discussed with the Planning Commission various it~as of interest pertaining to par!<ing, drainage, vehicular access, utilities, etc. The Planning Director noted that upon recently reviewing the subject property and the Dairy Queen property during a peak traffic period for boti~ properties it appeared traffic movement problems already exist between the two structures. The Planning Director further noted that with the expansion of the Battern building to the north and the continued use by the Dairy Queen of the four parking spaces it would appear that a poor traffic situation would become even worse. Harmening noted that as a solution ~attern, as well as Harmening, had spoken with the o~ners of the Dairy Queen regarding the possible deletion of the four parking spaces on the north side of their building with this space, as well as the remaining space on the north side of the ~attern building, to be used for ingress and egress purposes for the Dairy ~ueen as wail as the Battern property. Harmening noted that a representative of the Dairy ~ueen did indicate that they would consider accomodating this request if proper assurances could be made to them that the City would require that Battern properly complete the parking lot located on the rear of his property. Planning Director Harmening also discussed drainage concerns which the City Engineer had expressed regarding the rear of the Battern property. After discussion a motion was made by Co~missioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Oredge, to recommend approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: A. That the applicant install a 3.5 foot hedge or fence along the rear property line. That a bumper curb be installed within five feet of the rear property line. Ce That the owners of the Dairy Quean property formally agree (written letter or other document) to delete the four parking spaces along the south side of their building and use the space in conjunction with the remaining space to the north of the Battern building for ingress and egress purposes only. That ~attern completely install (including bituminous) all parking facilities prior to occupancy of the proposed addition and also properly stripe the parking lot. E. That questions pertaining to adequacy of the utility services be investigated prior to permit issuance. That Batterns building cannot have more than 3g00 sq.ft, of net retail floor space. If this area should be exceeded Battern would be required to provide parking in addition to the proposed 25 parking stalls. That one parking stall to the rear of the property be deleted to accomodate the required five foot side setback to the parking lot. H. That Dattern discuss with the City Engineer the method for draining the rear of the property. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 8; Nayes, Commissioner Voelker. ~e Planning Director informed the Planning Commission that Clarence Linn/Amoco Gas Station and Leroy Signs were requesting two variances to the Citys sign requirements. The variance requests are as follows: A. A request for a variance to allow sign space on the subject property in excess of the permitted amount. In this case the applicant requests that they be allowed to add to the existing sign space on the property a 2'4" x 18~ Food Shop sign on the front of the building (Vermillion Street side) and a 1~9'' x 9~8'' "Car Wash" sign on the fascia or the exit to the car wash. City code permits 240 sq.ft, of sign space on the subject property. Currently there exists 236' of sign space not including a small A frame sign which is placed daily at the corner of 15th & Vermillion Street and a plastic Amoco Ultimate sign located on Vermillion Street on the south side of the property. The Planning Director noted that whatever action was taken by the Planning Commission on the variance request the applicant should be instructed to remove the signs as the proper permits had not been issued for them. The Planning Director further noted that with the addition of the proposed sign space the property would have 295 sq.ft, of sign space which would be 55 sq.ft. over the maximum allowed. The Planning Director also noted that the calculation of sign space on the subject property is somewhat unique as city code requires that the existing striping on the canopy along with the Amoco insignia must be counted as sign space. 86-5 VARIANCE REQUEST- SIGN REQUIPd~V~%~S- CLARENCE LINN/AMOCO OIL & I,EROY SIGNS- 1500 VERMILLION A request for a variance to the City Code pertaining to the height of the pedestal sign. City code states that "each motor fuel station may have one pedestal sign not in excess of 100 square feet nor more than 25' in height". In this case the existing pedestat sign, according to the applicant, is 23~ in height and is proposed to be raised to 28' which would ~hea be 3' over the maximum. The Planning Director reviewed the criteria which should be met for the granting of variances. The Planning Director also noted that in November of 1984 the City denied a request by Joe O'Brien for a sign height variance of 2'. After discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Stevens, seconded by Commissioner Kaiser, to recommend approval of the variance to the amount of sign area on the property from 240 sq.ft, to 295 sq.ft, as special conditions exist in the standard Amoco sign design, due to the striping, which artificially inflates the sign area calculation. !Jpon vote taken, Ayes, 9; Hayes, O. A motion was made by Commissioner Dredge, seconded by Conmissioner Folch, to deny the request for a variance to increase the pedestal sign height three feet higher than the maximum of 25' as permitted by code based on the fact that the criteria for the granting of variances, as stipulated by the City Code, have not been met. It is further recommended that the City require the applicant to immediately remove the illegal A frame sign and the Amoco Ultimata sign. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 9; Nayes, O. The Planning Director informed the Planning Commission that Mrs. Denn desired to withdraw her request for a home occupation] permit as she was in the process of negotiating a lease arrangement with Star Realty for the "Hutch's" space at 310 Vermillion Street. Harmening further indicated that Mrs. Denn hoped to be in her leased space by September 15, 1986. The Planning Commission took no further action on this matter. HOME OCCUPATION - MRS. GERALD DENN 1010 W. 4TH STREST The Planning Director reviewed with the Planning Commission a rough draft of a proposed mobile home park ordinance. The Planning Commission requested that they be allowed to study this draft prior to any public hearing being ordered for the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. No further action was taken. OTHER BUSINESS Planning Director reviewed with the Planning Commission the Council directive that the Planning Commission provide a recommendation to the City Council on an updated Main Pedestrian Route System Plan, a priority list of streets which should have sidewalks constructed along them, and a recommendation on financing options. Chairman Si~nacek es~ablisi~ed a com~littae con~is~ing of Nick Conzemius, Susan Dredge, Edith Kaiser, and Mike Simacek with said committee to study the questions presented by the Council and respond back to the Council with a recommendation. It was further directed by Chairman Silaacek that Hick Conzemius would act as the Ohairman of this commit~sa. The Planning Director updated the Planning C~nmission on recent City Council actions. A motion ~ias made by Commissioner Dredge, seconded by Commissioner Kaiser, ADJO~ to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 9~ Nayes,O.