Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/08/88HASTI?IGS PLAN!II~,IG OOHHISSIO!I August 3, 193;] The regular meetin§ of the Hastings Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.!,~. [lembers Present: Chair;nan Folch, Commissioners Dredge, Kaiser, Anderson, Krook, Voelker, Zender and Ditty. l'lembers Absent: Commissioner Featherstone Staff Present: Planning Director Harmening, Planning Intern Jorgenson Commissioner Featherstone arrived at 7:32_ After a brief explanation of a text change by in the minutes of July 25, 19B8. A motion was Kaiser and seconded by Commissioner Krook to of July 25, 1g$8 with change. Intern Jorgenson APPROVAL ~F ~IN!~FES made by Commissioner approve the minutes Upon vote taken, Ayes, 9; Nayes, O. The first agenda item addressed by the Commission was the PU3LIO HEARING-1939-199] Capital Improvements Plan for the period 1989-1993. Following CAPITAL I~PROVE!~E)ITS a brief explanation of some text changes, Planning Director PLAN Harmening stated the intent and purpose of a Capital Improvements Plan, as a means of planning for capital expenditures over a four to ten year period. It was noted the plan was preliminary in nature and staff requested input on its scope by the commission and public. Chair:nan Folch opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. As no cna was present to speak on the issue the public hearing was closed at 7:39 p.m. The meeting continued ~,~ith discussion by the commission ~'nernbers. City Engineer Torn ?,{ontgomery and City Parks Director Harty ;,IcNamara were present to address pertinent questions. Issues addressed included the timing of work to be done on County Road gl, the need for improvements at Lake Rebecca Park, the establishment of goals and criteria for prioritizing projects, and the need for a community center. These questions were addressed by staff. The Commissioner voiced concern over a nunber of related items and felt they should be brought to the attention of the City Council. First, they called for the Council to recognize the need for a community center. Second, they felt further study needs to be done on the lunch room/meeting room for the public works building and thirdly, that along with the Capital Improvements Plan, goals for implementation of the plan and the establishment of prioritizing criteria be included in further plans. These questions and points are to be passed on to the City Council for further review. The next item addressed by the Commission was an application by PUBLIO 'HEARIFIG-ZONING Cornerstone Bible Church to have the property owned by the churchAHENDqENTS-CO2!~EqST©NE at the 800 31oc',~ of ~ast 1Dth rezonsd. This action is required BIBLE OHURCH-80O BLOO!( to allow for the building of a church at this location. The E. lOTH STREET City Council has requested input on which zone or zones it should consider for the parcel under consideration. Planning Director Harmening detailed the alternatives available to the go:n rn ission. Ohairman Folch opened the public hearing at S:30 p.m. Comments which were received from the audience on this ~natter included: r~illett O'Connell representing Smead r.~anufacturing: Hr. O'Connell stated that Smead ',lanufacturing felt a church would not be an appropriate entity in this area. It was his opinion that to rezone this area to accomodate the construction of a church would be detrimental to the industrial area. He further stated that industry and an entity like a church have conflicting interests and this could prove t,a be a problem in the future. Franz Altpeter, President, Intek 1~eatherseal: ~4r. Altpeter reinforced the views of tlr. O~Connell. He further stated, that this usage in the area would not be consistent with long range planning, and that it would just be a matter of tithe before conflict would occur. Pastor James Bzoskie, Cornerstone Bible Church: Pastor 3zoskie read from a letter dated Hay 9, 1984 from Smead Hanufacturing that at the time of that writing Smead !lanufacturing had no objection to the development of a church at the outlined location. He further stated that the Church has looked elsewhere for property and has been unable to locate other property they feel is suitable. The Church contends the usage would not cause conflict and an appropriate zoning designation should be made to allo~¥ the church to utilize their property. )~illett O'Connell, Smead Hanufacturing: ~r. O'Connell stated that during the four years that have passed since the time of the writing of the letter which Pastor dames ~zoskle read, Smead Hanufacturing has changed its view concerning the acceptability of a church in this area. As there were no additional persons in attendance interested in commenting, Chairman Folch closed the public hearing at S:54 p.m. A discussion ensued as to the merits of a Church locating on the subject property which is directly adjacent to industry. The Commission viewed the advantages and disadvantages of each proposed zoning chan§e. They felt that in addition to the listed disadvantages for each zoning designation, a church would be incompatible with existing usages. Furthermore the proposal is not consistent with the Comprehenisve Plan or the guides to zoning in the Plan. ~earing these things in mind the Commission felt that in light of their positions they could not conceivably make a recommendation to the Council on a zoning amendment for the subject property to allow a church to be constructed. A motion ~as made by Commissioner ~])itty and seconded by Commissioner Kaiser to inform the Oity Council that in the co~missions opinion the various zoning amendments were not appropriate due to the follol~ing reasons: A. Rezoning from I-2 to R-l, R-2, R-3, R-4 1. Spot zoning issues 2. Incompatibility of a residential zoning classification and related permitted or special uses in an industrial area. 3. Inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The location of a church in an industrial area may impose more stringent requirements on adjacent industrial uses. 3. Rezoning from I-2 to P-I 1. Spot zoning issues 2. Incompatibility of the uses permitted in the P-I zone as related to their location in an industrial area (example-Nursing Home, Hospital, etc.) 3. The location of a church in an industrial area may impose more sringent requirements on adjacent industrial uses. 4. Inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. ~ C. A~nend I-2 zone to allow churches by special use permit. 1. This option would compromise the integrity of the I-2 zone. In this case all other I-2 zoned areas would be potentially available to accomodate a church which could potentially have a negative impact, for example, on the city's industrial park. 2. By nature, the location of a church in an industrial area, and in particular a heavy industrial area such as an I-9_ zone, does not appear appropriate. 3. The location of a church in an I-2 zone may impose more stringent requirements of adjacent industrial uses. 4. Inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Upen vote taken, Ayes, 8; Nayes, Featherstone. 9:00 p.m. Chairman Folch called for a five minute recess. All were in agreement. 9:05 p.m. Folch called the Commission meeting back to order. The next item addressed was a by Karen Harrington of 1440 Truax Circle. Planning Director Harmening detailed the permit application to the Planning Commission. Ms. Harrington was present to answer pertinent questions concerning her application. ~uestions directed to ~s. Harrington were associated with amount and type of vehicle traffic, number of employees if any, and frequency of meetings to be held at the home. !Is. Harrington stated no unusual vehicle traffic is associated with the occupation, she employ's no one, and meetings would be a very rare occurrence. home occupation permit applicationHO!,~ OCCUPATION - PLAN NI~,IG CO ~SULTANT- KAREN HA~RI~GTON- 1440 TRUAX CIRCLE. A motion ~/as made by Comnissioner Kaisser and seconded by Commissioner I(rook to approve the application subject to co~plying with all home occupation standards. Harrington gpon vote taken, Ayes, 3; Nayes, O. The next item was outlined by Planning Director Itarmening. IBI, Inc. requested approval of a revised site plan and a ~A~IIDA-WF_STVI?~ variance to the City Code requirement of a 15~ planting strip. I.B.I., This revision was to the west side of the new Pamida Store at the ~estview !.tall. A condition exists that hampers semi-trucks desiring to use the loading dock at the store. Insufficient maneuvering space is causing difficulty in backing to the dock. To remedy the problem I.S.I. Inc. proposed to cut Into part of the berming and landscaping located along 12th St. and Pleasant Drive. This would bring the planting strip at the maneuvering area under the 15' requirement. Thus, the variance request. ~lr. [~rooks Swanson representing I.B.I. Inc was present to answer pertinent questions. The Commission inquired as to need for additional plantings/screening. ~r. Swanson felt none were necessary unless the Commission felt they were appropriate. REVISEF) SITE PLAH- ~IALL- A motion was made by Commissioner Kaiser and seconded by Commissioner Zender to grant the variance and approve the revised site plan without additional landscaping subject to the applicant replanting the displaced shrubs, trees, etc. and subject to the applicant planting all other landscaping as shown on the original site plan. Upon vote taken, Ayes, g; Nayes, O. The Commission then turned its attention to the next agenda item, T!TUCK PARKING PLAN a truck parking plan for the Super 8 Hotel. Planning Director SUPER S ~.IOT~L Harmening stated that this Plan was a stipulation applied to the development agreement between the city and the developer. Three major areas were addressed-access, noise and gravel surfacing. Harmening outlined each area. Surfacing requirements were discussed. It was pointed out that currently Clty code states that all areas used for parking must be hard surfaced to control dust and drainage. The applicants do not desire to blacktop the parking area due to possible development of the site in the foreseeable future. Staff suggested that consideration be given to allowing a gravel surface for a set period of time. If development does not occur on the site during the period established the city would than re-evaluate the situation and discuss the blacktopping issue again. Hr. Charles Ktinkhammer, the developer, was present to answer questions from the Commissioners. Following a brief question and answer period a motion was made by Commissioner Krook and seconded by Commissioner Zender to approve the truck parking plan subject to the followin§ conditions: Issues pertaining to the driveway radius' for the north entrance being worked out with the Oity Engineer. That the developer provide additional information of how the site will drain. That it be understood that upon future development of the site, plans will have to be submitted for city approva illustrating a new truck parking plan. D. That consideration be given to inplementing signage to direct persons to the truc!< parking location. E. That pursuant to the Fire Chiefs recommendation, transports carrying hazardous liquids are not allowed to park on the site. That the proposed truck parking area may be surfaced with Class 5 gravel, with dust control chemicals to be used as needed until August 15, 1989. After 8/15/89 the city reserves the right to re-evaluate the situation again and with respect to the development plans for the site and the need to require a blacktop surface. G. That, if necessary, the development agreement be amended to take the truck parking plan into consideration. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 9; Nay,s, O. The next item was the reconsideration of a plat for qiverwood 4th Addition. Planning Director Harmening explained the the procedural process to alter the prior approval. Then Harmening detailed the revised plat. The developer proposed a deletion of one lot from Slock one, for a new total of 11 tots in this block. He also requested that the number of lots in Block 2 remain the same eleven (11) as previously submitted. RECONSIDERATIO~ DF PLAT RIVERi.~DDD 4TN ADDITION ADVANCED HO~ES OF HASTINGS After discussion the commission felt the new plat was acceptable, contingent upon the fact that all previous conditions are still valid and will be adhered to. A motion was made by l<aiser, seconded by Krook to rescind the prior approval and to approve as submitted subject to the previous terms and conditions specified during the previous approval of the preliminary plat. Dpon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, Featherstone, Anderson and Yoelke r. Planning Director Harmening supplied the Commissioners with a map detailing possible zoning guides for the newly annexed area. Harmening called upon the commissioners to study the map and any related material in anticipation of future developments in the area. ZOHII'~G Dsal DILATIONS ANN2XED AREA ?~ARSHAN TO?~ NSHI Planning Director Harmening updated the commission on City Council actions. He called attention to a possible meeting for individuals involved in the Comprehenisve Plan updates process. End of updates. There being the meeting Kaiser. no further business a motion was made to adjourn by Commissioner Krook and seconded by Commissioner Upon vote taken, Ayes, 9; ~ay~s, O. ",]eeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m. 8 Au,lust, 1988. OTH_R BUSINESS/ ~JPDATES