Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCMinutes-20070611City of Hastings Planning Commission Minutes – June 11, 2007 Page 1 of 5 Hastings Planning Commission June 11, 2007 Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. Chair Truax called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1.Roll Call Commissioners Present: McInnis, Peine, Stevens, Truax, Hiedeman Commissioners Absent: Schmitt, Zeyen Staff Present: Associate Planner Kari Barker Associate Planner Justin Fortney 2.Approval of Minutes – May 14, 2007 Motion by McInnis to approve the May 14, 2007, meeting minutes. Seconded by Stevens. Upon vote taken, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearings 3.Heselton, Gary and Rene - Minor Subdivision #2007-24 – Subdivide property to create building lot – 3605 Red Wing Blvd. Associate Planner Justin Fortney presented the staff report. Chair Truax opened the Public Hearing at 7:05. Derrick Jager, resident of 600 Maher, spoke to the issue. He stated that one reason he moved to Hastings from South St. Paul was to get away from the “monster homes” being built on lots after smaller homes were torn down. He chose the neighborhood he is in because it was mature, had bigger lots, and character. Jager also questioned the ordinance as it stated that a proposed house and utilities plan should be submitted with an application. This application did not have these things. Jager questioned why the minor subdivision should be pushed through without all the details. Kari Jager, resident of 600 Maher, spoke to the issue. She stated that the home would be tight on the property. In addition, she had concerns that if the minor subdivision occurred, it would start a trend in the neighborhood. K. Jager also stated that she would like to keep the area single family homes. In addition, K. Jager mentioned that new homes on small lots draw away from the area. She also expressed concern that the homes City of Hastings Planning Commission Minutes – June 11, 2007 Page 2 of 5 would be rental units with tenants who do not care about the area. Leo Reinardy, resident of 3625 Red Wing Boulevard, stated that the property was originally zoned for only single family lots. Reinardy stated he believes that the lots should have stayed that way. He has lived there since 1962 and likes the big lots as they keep distance from neighbors. Dave Rother, 3665 Redwing Boulevard, stated the lot would be smaller compared to other lots in the area. Further, there is not much for a yard. He expressed concern that the home would lower the property value of adjoining lots. Finally, Rother stated that the garage on the lot was in a poor location and the entire lot was already poorly laid out. Donald Swanson, resident of 3580 Maher Avenue, stated he has lived in the area for forty years and likes the size of the lots and that there is space. He expressed concern that allowing a minor subdivision could escalate into a bigger situation. Swanson stated that it appeared splitting lots was a quick way to make a fast buck. In addition, he stated there was no need or room for the type of density, particularly due to the homes north of Maher st on 31 Street. Greg Kokkeler, resident of 610 Douglas Drive, stated his concerns with the traffic. He stated that there is already enough traffic on the street and there is not enough parking. Kokkeler expressed his opinion that the lots are the right size presently. He stated concern that his neighborhood may start looking like Cary Park. Chair Truax closed the public hearing at 7:19. Commissioner McInnis asked the Jagers if they had been informed prior to purchasing the home that they lived in an R-2 district and the lots could be subdivided. The Jagers confirmed they had not. Rather, D. Jager stated the realtor pushed the big, open lots. Commissioner McInnis stated traffic on 316 is a concern. He stated his main concern was how the city was going to safeguard green spaces. Commissioner McInnis stated it was time for the City to take a look at preserving the homes built between 1940 and 1990. Chair Truax stated that homeowners in established neighborhoods should not be concerned about minor subdivisions or their neighborhoods changing character. Commissioner Stevens stated he understood the right of the property owner. However, he stated that the minor subdivision would not be a good fit for the area or other established areas. Chair Truax stated that public safety also needed to be accounted for. He stated that Douglas to Maher is a freeway and not the safest place. Chair Truax also stated he though that when a garage is within a certain distance to the home, it is considered an attached structure. This affects the setbacks on the property. City of Hastings Planning Commission Minutes – June 11, 2007 Page 3 of 5 Commissioner Heideman stated that the aerial view shows the lot as awkward and small. She voiced her concern that the home does not fit. Commissioner Peine stated that rental housing would not be benefited with a small lot. Gary Heselton, applicant, stated that the house would match existing homes in the area. He also stated that the home would not necessarily be rental. Commissioner Peine asked if the project would be possible elsewhere. Heselton stated he was not sure. He stated that he is putting a lot of work into the home including black topping the driveway and residing the home. Commissioner Peine stated his concern was not the appearance, but the increased density and the affect on property values. Action by Planning Commission: Motion by McInnis to deny the Minor Subdivision for Gary and Rene Heselton based on the lot size, safety, setbacks, and location. He also stated his desire for City Council to review the R-2 district requirements. Seconded by Peine. Upon vote taken, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion passed unanimously. 4.City of Hastings – Ordinance Amendment #2007-26 – Temporary Auto Sales in C-4 Zoning District. Associate Planner Kari Barker presented the staff report. Commissioner McInnis expressed concerns that the sales would impede parking at the site of the sale. The shortage of parking stalls may affect businesses near where the sale was being held. Chair Truax disagreed with Commissioner McInnis, stating that he believed and had received comments that the auto sales actually helped local businesses with increased traffic and sales. Commissioner McInnis stated he was concerned that if the ordinance became permanent, there could be problems if the Old Country Market building was occupied. He stated his desire would be that the dealership having the auto sale receive yearly approval. Chair Truax clarified that the auto dealerships would still need to come before the Planning Commission and City Council on a yearly basis to apply for a Special Use Permit. Associate Planner Barker confirmed Chair Truax’s explanation. City of Hastings Planning Commission Minutes – June 11, 2007 Page 4 of 5 Commissioner Peine inquired if property owners were notified of the sale. Associate Planner Barker confirmed notices would be sent to property owners within 350 feet of the sale when an application for a Special Use Permit was applied for. McInnis stated he was comfortable with the ordinance amendment as the dealerships still need to apply for a Special Use Permit each month. Chair Truax opened and closed the Public Hearing at 7:44. No members of the public spoke. Action by Planning Commission: Motion by Stevens to approve the Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Auto Sales in C-4 Zoning District. Seconded by Peine. Upon vote taken, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion passed unanimously. OTHER ACTIONS 5.Deitner, William – Original Hastings Design Standards Review #2007-28 – Replace nd Retaining Wall – 637 2 Street W. Associate Planner Kari Barker presented the staff report. Commissioner Stevens states he visited the site and agreed with the homeowner’s block selection. His reasoning was that the staff’s suggested block may not be the best choice for structural reasons. Commissioner Heideman expressed confusion why the application was coming before the Planning Commission. Associate Planner Barker explained the appeal process that is a part of the Ordinance. Chair Truax stated his belief that the applicant’s choice was better due to the locking System as the old wall had tuck and mortar gone. He stated his desire would be for the entire wall to be rebricked. Associate Planner Barker stated that the application was in fact for the entire wall, to the left and right sides of the crumbling section. Action by Planning Commission: Motion by McInnis to allow applicant to use proposed material for the retaining wall, thus denying staff’s recommendation. Seconded by Stevens; motion passed unanimously. City of Hastings Planning Commission Minutes – June 11, 2007 Page 5 of 5 Upon vote taken, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion passed unanimously. 6.Other business Associate Planner Barker updated the Commission on previous Council activities and upcoming agenda items. 7.Adjournment Stevens motioned, seconded by Peine. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, _____________________________ Kari Barker Associate Planner