HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/28/86HASTINGS PLANNING C0~ISSION
Monday, July 28, 1986
The regular meeting of the Hastings Planning Commission was called to
order at 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Co~nissioners Ditty, Stevens, Dredge, Folch, Conzemius,
Voelker, Kaiser, and Chairman Simacek.
Members Absent: Co~nissioner Anderson.
Stsff Present: Planning Director Harmening
Commissioner Stevens moved, seconded by Con,missioner Conzemius, to
approve the July 14, 1986 Planning Con~nissionminutes. Voice vote
carried unanimously.
The Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. Planning Director
Harmening indicated that the St. Paul Bank For Cooperative, as current
owner of the Grain Elevator ~nd Feed Mill in Hastings, was requesting
a minor subdivision of the property at the corner of 2nd & Tyler St.
Harmening indicated that apparently the primary purpose of the minor
subdivision was to accomodate the prospective sale of the property to
two buyers with different interests. He indicated that upon speaking
with a representative of the St. Paul Hank For Cooperatives it
appeared the propeseduse for the property was very similar in nature
to what the property is being used for now - a grain elevator on one
of the properties and a feed mill on the other. Planning Director
Harmening further indicated that the current land owner, and future
land owners should be aware of the fact that the city was considering
rezoning the site in question in the near future to a co~nercial designation
which may cause, at a minimum, the uses of the subject property to be
considered nonconforming.
Mike LaVasseur, representative of the St. Paul Bank for Cooperatives, was
present and answered questions of the Planning Conn~ssion and the public.
William Sylvander , 315 E. 3rd St., questioned what the proposed use was
for the subject property and who the intended owners were. Mr. LaVasseur
indicated that to his knowledge the uses would continue as those which
presently exist and that the intended land owners are those individuals
who currently lease the grain elevator and the feed mill. Mr. LaVasseur
also indicated that the property is proposed to be wholly sold and that
no contract for deeds were proposed..
Members of the Planning Conm~ssion questioned whether the proposed tenants
had been made aware of the potential for a zoning change of the subject
property. Mr. LaVasseur indicated that although he was aware of the
potential change, to his knowledge he was not aware of the intended property
owners being informed of a potential zoning change.
Mayor Stoffel provided various cor~nents pertaining to potential parking
problems on the subject property as well as the potential for the development
of the subject property into a housing site.
MINUTES
PUBLIC HF2tRING-
MINOR SUB-
DIVISION OF
GRAIN ELEVATOR
AND FEED MILL
SITE-2ND &
TYLER ST.-ST.
PAUL BANK FOR
COOPERATIVES
There bein9 no further cor~nents from the audience Chairman Simacek
closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
After discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Dredge, seconded
by Commissioner Kaiser, to table this matter and continue the public
hearing until the August 11, ~986 Planning Cc~nission meeting such
that additional information could be developed on this matter
pertaining to the future land use for the proposed site, the HRAs
interest in the subject property, etc. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 5;
Nayes, Co~nissioner Ditty, Stevens, Conzemius. The motion was
declared approved.
Planning Director Harmening indicated that Irene Burmeister, who
owns 80 acres of land in southeast Hastings, has made a request
that the necessary action be taken bythe city to permit her 80
acre tract, mch of it wooded, to be eligible for an agricultural
preserves designation. Harmening indicated that to accc~odate this
reqeust the following action would be required:
ZONING AMENDMENT/
COMP PLAN AMENDMEN%
AG PRESERVES
DESIGNATION-IRENE
BURMEISTER, 2200
RAVENNA TRAIL
A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create an Ag preserves zoning
district.
B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment such that the Comp plan is consistent
with the Zoning Ordinance.
C. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to rezone the Burmeister property to
the Ag preserves zone.
D. Application by Burmeister to have her land designated as Ag preserves.
Planning Director Harmening explained the general intent of the
agricultural preserves statutes and reviewed with the Planning Con~ssion
the existing zoning and cc~prehensive plan language which pertains to
the subject property.
Harmening indicated that the zoning currently was Ag and that the Comprehensive
Plan has stated that the area in question should stay rural/low density.
Harmening further indicated that staff at this point was taking a negative
position on creating an Ag preserves tool within the City of Hastings based
primarily on the fact that the city's current land use controls and
policies which relate to the Burmeister property as well as other properties
in the area should protect the area from urban development intrusions. He
luther indicated that it would appear that the extension of urban sewer and
water facilities into the area would be somewhat unlikely due to topographic
and soil conditions. He also indicated that, at this point, with the
exception of one property owner the city has not received extensive pressures
from other land owners to implement an Ag preserves tool. Hamening suggested
that Burmeister consider withdrawing her application for the various proposed
amendments and having the $150.00 fee returned.
The Planning Commission discussed various matters pertaining to Ag preserves
with Burmeister. Burmeister indicated that a primary concern pertains to
the potential for special assessments to be levied against her property. She
felt that by using an Ag preserves tool she would be adequately protected
from the potential for special assessments which she felt could have a very
negative impact on her land.
The Planning Commission discussed with Bumeister a possible alternative
of using the "Green Acres" law in place of the Ag preserves law.
Burmeister indicated that she was unfamiliar with this law and w~uld
like more time to investigate the matter. The Planning Commission
also requested that Harmening provide the Planning Cor~ssion with more
information on the"Green Acres"statute as well.
After discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Kaiser, seconded by
Cc~missioner Voelker, to table the matter until the next meeting unless
Burmeister would opt to withdraw her application such that Burmeister
and staff could further investigate the potential for using
the "Green Acres" statutes. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 8; Nayes, 0.
The Planning Director informed the Planning Cc~ission that Mr. McGoon
has requested that the Planning Cc~nission consider tabling the
variance request until the next meeting of the Planning Commission.
Motion was made by Commissioner Folch, seconded by Cc~missioner
Conzemius, to table the McGoon variance request until the next meeting
of the Planning Conm~ssion. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 8; Nayes, 0.
TABLE VARIA/qCE
REQUEST-MAC MCGOON
1100 WESTVIEW DR.
A motion was made by Co~nissioner Conze~ius, seconded by Cc~uissioner
Kaiser, to order a public hearing as requested by Nettie Bakken,
regarding a minor subdivision of lot 16, block 21 of A~dition No. 13.
The Public Hearing is to be held August 11, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. Upon
vote taken, Ayes, 8; Nayes, 0.
ORDER PUBLIC
HEARING-MINOR
SUBDIVISION OF
LOT 16, BLOCK 21
OF ADDITION NO.13-
NES~IE BAKKEN,
1402 W. 4th ST.
Planning Director Harmening indicated that in 1978 the city approved
a plat named the Dakota Hills 5th Addition which was located along
14th Street just west of Pleasant Drive. As a part of this plat
drainage and utility easements were platted and dedicated to the
public along all lot lines. In 1980, due in part to a Rosemary
Ponding Basin project, lots 1 & 2, block 2 and lots 1-5, block 3
of the Dakota Hills 5th B~dition were replatted as lots 1-8,
block 1 Dakota Hills 6th Addition. During the replatting process
the originally dedicated drainage and utility easements should have
been formally vacated but in actuality were not. Recently, during
an apparent financing or refinancing of a home in what is called
the Dakota Hills 6th Addition plat, a title company raised an
objection to the location of a previously dedicated and unvacated
drainage and utility easement which passed through a home located
on a presently existing lot. Due to the current situation Hastings
Construction, the original developer, and the current property
owners of the affected lots have formally requested that the necessary
steps be taken to vacate the utility and drainage easements. Harmening
indicated that the City Council had ordered that the required public
hearing be held at its next meeting on August 4, 1986. After discussion
a motion was made by Co~ssioner Stevens, seconded by Conlnissioner
Ditty, to recou~end that the City Council consider vacating the utility
and drainage easements as this matter appears more procedural in
nature than anything else and due to the fact that the previous easements
would appear to serve no real purpose. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 8; Nayes,0.
VACATION OF UTILIT~
AND DRAINAGE
EASEMENTS-LOTS 1 &
2, BLOCK 2 AND
LOTS 1-5, BLOCK 3
OF DAKOTA HILLS
5TH ADDITION
PRESENTLY PLATTED
AS LOTS 1-8, BLK 1
OF DAKOTA HILLS
6TH ADDITION -
HASTINGS CONST. /
AFFECTED PROPERTY
OWNERS
Planning Director Harmening indicated that the City was in receipt
of the April ~, ~986 Metropolitan Council Population and household
estimates for the City of Hastings. The Metropolitan Council has
estimated that the citys population has increased in the last year
by 407 persons or from 13,430. to ~3,837. No further action was
taken on this matter.
Plar~ning Director Harmening updated the Planning Cc~mission on
recent City Council Actions.
A motion was made by Concessioner Kaiser, seconded by Co~nissioner
Folch, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Upon vote taken, Ayes,8;
Nayes, 0.
REVIEW 1986 MET
COUNCIL POPULATION
ESTIMATES
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOUR~NT