HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/14/03HASTLN S PL A NNLNfi COMMISSION
July 14, 2003
Regular Meeting
7:00 pm
Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:04 pm.
1. Roll Call
Commissioners Present: Anderson, Greil, Hollenbeck, Schmitt, and Truax. Commissioner
Twedt arrived at 7:16 pm.
Commissioners Absent: Alongi.
Staff Present: Planning Director John Hinzman, Associate Planner Kris Jenson.
2. Approve June 23, 2003 Planning Commission Minutes
Motion by Commissioner Truax, second by Hollenbeck to approve the minutes of the
June 23, 2003 Planning Commission as presented by staff. Motion passed
unanimously.
Jon Wesley Investments - Site Plan #2003-44 - 30 unit condominium building -
Lot 1, Block 1, Williams Addition (Whispering Lane).
Director Hinzman presented background information on the request.
Chairman Anderson opened the public hearing at 7:14 pm.
John Siebenaler, 256 Summit Point Drive, asked for clarification on the zoning and how site
could have 15 units per acre.
Cheryl Crosby, 235 Summit Point Drive, asked about the marketing of the units and whether
the Planning Commission has the right to determine rental versus owner.
John Whitcomb, owner of Jon Wesley Investments and applicant, stated that he prefers to
keep his options open at this time, but anticipates that the project will end up as condo units.
Commissioner Twedt asked what the custom practices were for bylaws on multi-owner sites.
Director Hinzman stated that association/covenant documents are generally private
agreements. The City reviews the documents when maintenance of private roads, land,
and/or utilities will be occurring, to ensure proper maintenance.
Rose Tapella, 120 1st Place, inquired when the traffic study was done, as she feels the
findings would differ greatly between the school year and summer months.
Director Hinzman stated that he believed the study was done after school was out for the
summer, but traffic numbers collected by the City when school was in session were also
used.
Larry Christianson, 275 Whispering Lane, stated that this was a bad idea for a small
neighborhood, and that things have really changed since 1986. Homeowners in the area are
settled and transitory housing is inappropriate. Mr. Christianson's concerns with the site are
that the building will tower over the neighborhood, that the parking lot should be reduced,
and that the landscape plan should include more trees and shrubs. He asked that lighting on
the site be directed downward. Mr. Christianson also asked if the lot to the north could be
rezoned.
Director Hinzman stated that in order to rezone the property there would need to be a joint
agreement between the property owner and the City Council.
Val Jarchow, 247 Summit Point Drive, asked the Commissioners if they have visited the site.
Commissioner Truax responded that he visited the site at 9:30 that morning.
Jim Weber, 315 Summit Point Court, asked what guarantees there would be that the units in
the building wouldn't be rental.
Director Hinzman stated that the City cannot dictate ownership status.
Rod Risch, 305 Whispering Lane, questioned the potential height of the structures illustrated
in Plan 'B'.
Mr. Wesley stated that townhomes shown on the alternate plan would most likely be three
stories, with a garage/storage area on the main floor, living room/kitchen on second floor,
and bedrooms on the third floor. He feels the plan creates and excessive amount of
impervious surface and places tall units much closer to Summit Point units.
Mr. Risch stated that some departures from the 1986 agreement have happened - the lots
across the street from the proposed condo building were originally slated as twinhomes and
built as single family. Also, in 1986, the Summit Point development wasn't conceived of, and
that this set up is the first time in the City of Hastings that a large scale development is
located directly across the street from single family homes and exiting to the same roadway.
He also inquired about the requirement of an association and bylaws.
Director Hinzman stated that in similar circumstances the City has not required an
association.
Mike Balk, 325 Whispering Lane, questioned where pedestrian traffic would go.
Director Hinzman stated that sidewalks/trails are generally added during initial development
or street reconstruction projects.
Mr. Balk asked who then would be responsible for the cost of installing the sidewalk/trail.
Director Hinzman stated the cost is assessed back to the property owners. The Public
Works Dept. holds neighborhood meetings to discuss the proposed projects and review
proposed costs.
Claudia Balk, 325 Whispering Lane, questioned the steepness of the property and the ability
of emergency vehicles to enter the site.
Director Hinzman stated that the Fire Marshall had reviewed the plans and had not
commented on issues of grade at the site.
Mr. Siebenaler stated that the Planning Commission and City Council go along with the
agreement of 1986, and that the only way to change that agreement is by mutual agreement
of both parties.
John Swanson, 1350 Featherstone Road, asked how the agreement could be modified and
what the process would be.
Director Hinzman stated that there was no formal process, If both parties agree to amend
the agreement, it can be done.
Mr. Swanson asked if the Planning Commission would consider this, as so much has
changed in the area since 1986.
Director Hinzman stated that the Planning Commission could choose to recommend that,
and ultimately the City Council would decide.
Jan Weber, 315 Summit Point Court, expressed concern that no traffic counts have been
done on Featherstone Road, and she stated that with General Sieben Drive opening to
County Road 46 within the year, she is afraid that Featherstone Road will become a
thoroughfare for people wishing to bypass Hwy 55 and 61.
Mary DeBoe, 1458 Featherstone Road, stated that she looked at the land where her home
sits in 1990, designed the house, and then all this development happened - High School,
Wal-Mart, etc. In the early morning hours school kids and school busses are whizzing past
her home, and she feels that this development will only add to the traffic issues in the area.
She stated that the Police Dept has been very good about using speed awareness
measures in the area, but that she didn't count on the heavy traffic on Featherstone Road.
Mr. Christianson stated that he prefers the townhomes to the condo building. He felt that the
site could be reduced to 16 units, that townhomes are less likely to be rental, and that the
site would still meet the spirit of the agreement.
Jeff Kelly, 3025 Highview Knoll, agreed with previous speakers that the traffic on
Featherstone Road is bad. He asked if the development agreement included an expiration
date.
Director Hinzman stated it did not.
Mr. Kelly then asked if the original owners are involved.
Director Hinzman stated he did not believe they were, but that the agreement runs with the
land, not the owners.
Mr. Kelly asked for an explanation of why so many units are allowed at the site.
Director Hinzman explained the PRD concept and the overall density of the site.
Mr. Kelly stated that it didn't seem like the neighboring property owners wanted the
development, and felt the Planning Commission and City Council should back out of the
agreement.
Director Hinzman stated that it is a contract and is binding.
Hearing no further comment, Chairman Anderson closed the public hearing at 8:08.
Commissioner Greil if there was any mention of owner occupied versus rental housing in the
original agreement.
Director Hinzman stated that he would have to double check for any specific language.
Commissioner Greil stated that this area does not have any sidewalk connections to the
park, but that he would like to see one on the west side of the street to accommodate
pedestrian traffic.
Director Hinzman stated that while the sidewalk could be added, it wouldn't connect to
anything at this time. Some areas have taken park dedication fees for and applied them
towards trail/sidewalk connections.
Commissioner Truax stated that a copy of the plan states apartments in the area. He also
assumed that Mr. Whitcomb purchased the property because of the development potential.
He understands the issues that the neighborhood is raising, but is unsure whether the
Planning Commission can say no.
Chairman Anderson stated that he feels the landscaping plan is thin, especially along
Whispering Lane. He doesn't feel that the townhome plan is any better, as the site would still
have 3 story buildings, but spread out over the site. Would agree that the parking area could
be smaller, but would like to see a condition that additional space be added should a need
be determined. He asked Mr. Whitcomb to describe the detention areas.
Mr. Whitcomb stated that the grading plan had been reviewed extensively, and that there
are two pond areas, one in the southwest corner and another in the southeast corner, with
any overflow going to Whispering Lane. All water from the site is held on the site, as well as
water from other areas that drain to this area. He also added that the ponds are designed to
hold water and allow it to percolate into the soil in the short term.
Chairman Anderson added that he still wants to see the landscape plan beefed up,
especially to block any headlights as vehicles exit the underground parking structure.
Commissioner Twedt expressed his agreement, and asked if a berm in that location would
be helpful as well.
Mr. Whitcomb stated that berms will affect the rate of flow of stormwater on the site, and that
he would prefer to use plantings to block the lights.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Twedt moved and Commissioner Truax seconded a motion to
recommend Approval of the site plan for a 30 unit building at Lot 1, Block 1, Williams
Addition to the City Council, based on the following:
Approval of the Site Plan is recommended subject to the following:
1) Adherence to the attached Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations.
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
The applicant shall reimburse the city for all costs associated with the Benshoof and
Associates Traffic Study prior to issuance of a building permit.
Adherence to the provisions of the 1986 Williams 1st Addition Environmental
Assessment Worksheet.
All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover
to eliminate erosion problems.
The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City's
property maintenance ordinance.
Final approval of the development grading and utility plans by the City of Hastings.
The applicant shall be liable for any costs involved in consultant review of the plans.
All rooftop equipment shall be screened by a parapet wall.
Any waste enclosure areas shall be constructed with materials matching the primary
building.
All parking and drive aisle areas shall be constructed to city standards including
concrete curb and bituminous surfacing.
Siding material must be identified.
Rock face block must be used along the lower elevations instead of poured concrete
walls.
Colored elevations and complete list of building materials must be included with
drawings prior to City Council Review.
Shrub plantings must be incorporated between the parking lot drive aisle and the
north property line. Shrubs should be located adjacent to the proposed trees.
Boulevard Trees must be planted every 50 feet within the Whispering Lane right-of-
way. Trees must be deciduous and 2.0 caliper inches in size at planting.
Coniferous plantings must be at least 6 feet high at planting, further coniferous
plantings must be established at the west end of the parking lot.
Additional plantings must be added to shield headlights from the driveway to the
garage.
All landscaped areas must be irrigated.
All parking lot lighting must be downcast and shielded towards the parking lot to
reduce impact on surrounding properties.
Any monument signs shall be architecturally consistent with the buildings on site and
incorporate similar materials into their construction.
Any uncompleted site work (including landscaping) must be escrowed at 125 percent
of the estimated value prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
21)
Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to
issuance of certificate of occupancy.
22)
Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made
towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the
approval is null and void
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
Greg Jablonske - South Oaks 2nd Addition - Century Drive and 31st Street.
a) Preliminary & Final Plat #2003-41 to subdivide single and multiple-family
units.
b) Special Use Permit #2003-49 - Floodplain Use Permit to place fill on lots
along Bohlken Drive.
Director Hinzman provided background information on both items.
Chairman Anderson opened the public hearing at 8:28 pm.
Jeff Kelly, 3025 Highview Knoll asked if the street improvements were planned for this year,
whether this are was within a watershed area, what FEMA's requirements were, how deep
the boulevard is along 31st Street, If the sidewalk is in the easement, and whether the
applicant will be filling in a pond.
Director Hinzman stated that no traffic studies have been done, but that both 31st Street and
36th Street are identified as necessary connections in the road system. He added that the
existing flood area is identified on FEMA maps, and that certification to FEMA of the change
in flood area may be necessary prior to home construction on those lots. He added that the
proposed sidewalk is 5' wide, a trail would be 8'-10' wide, and that the applicant is creating
storage space to make up for the filling.
Joe Bocce, 3558 Greten Lane, stated that he was concerned about the land trade and felt
that the City could be getting a greater value for the land. He also feels the City is grossly
underestimating the traffic on 31st Street. He suggested that the City develop the street as a
parkway to reduce speeds, as it will become a shortcut for casino traffic. He added that the
park in Century South is inadequate, with children waiting to get on the play equipment, and
that there is a problem with poor behavior of unsupervised children from the lower priced
homes. He also asked if the Planning Commission can regulate aesthetic issues.
Chairman Anderson responded that to a point the City can review and comment on
aesthetic issues.
Mr. Bocce asked what the units along Olson Drive would look like and what their price point
would be.
Greg Jablonske, applicant, stated that the units along Olson Drive would be in the $165,000
price range, and that it was a new product, and not like the units currently being constructed
by MW Johnson along 35th Street.
Matt Schuster, future Olson Drive resident, expressed concern that the lots were being split,
and questioned why there were no parks in the South Oaks area.
Mr. Jablonske stated that the units would probably be a split level style, and that the City
chose to accept cash in lieu of land for the South Oaks Development.
Mr. Kelly questioned what 36th Street would be connected to, and where the money from the
South Oaks park fees would go.
Director Hinzman explained road connections in the area, and stated that the NRRC
determines where the money goes, and tries to keep it within the same ward.
Paul Mocher, 18910 Plan Avenue, Ravenna Township, stated that he had recently
purchased Lot 1, Block 1, Bohlken's 6th Addition, which is the last lot on the north side of
Bohlken Drive and will be adjacent to the South Oaks development. He expressed concern
because of a portion of the South Oaks Development will protrude behind his lot.
Jeff McCauley, 788 South Park Drive, expressed concern with the existing wooded area
through which Bohlken Drive will continue, and asked what the costs of the lots would be in
that area. He also asked how it is decided which trees will be removed.
Mr. Jablonske stated that he anticipated the costs would run about $100,000 each. He
stated that some of the trees would be removed for grading purposes, but that there would
be a 20' easement at the rear of each property to conserve the trees and prohibit clear
cutting.
Dan Mattimiro, 114 25th Street West, questioned the reasons no traffic studies had been
done, was interested in the amounts of run-off to the Vermillion River, and how does the this
development impact the school district and the potential need for a new school. He felt the
City should reject the land trade, as filling in land wrecks trees in the area. The trade may be
equal space-wise, but not value-wise.
Chairman Anderson closed the public hearing at 9:05 pm.
Commissioner Truax asked why this development was being allowed to plat cul-de-sacs.
Director Hinzman stated that cul-de-sacs are allowed is it can be demonstrated that there
are physical and/or geographical limitations. In this case, requiring both cul-de-sacs to
connect to neighboring streets would mean a number of lots with double or possibly even
triple frontage on streets.
Commissioner Twedt asked if the portion of the South Oaks Development that currently is
located behind the home in the Bohlken Addition could be sold to the owners of that lot or
removed from the land trade.
Director Hinzman stated that the rules regarding LAWCON properties are very strict and that
that would probably not be allowed.
Chairman Anderson asked about the status of the wooded area along Bohlken Drive.
Director Hinzman stated that a tree inventory is required to be done and must be approved
by the City Forester prior to any work being done in the area.
Mr. Jablonske stated that the issue with the two lots at the meeting point of Bohlken's
Addition and the South Oaks development had been tried to resolved earlier, as the City
indicated it wanted right angles to the lots.
Planning Commission Action (Plat):
Commissioner Greil moved and Commissioner Hollenbeck seconded a motion to
approve the Preliminary and Final Plat for South Oaks 2nd Addition to the City
Council, with the following conditions:
Preliminary Plat conditions:
1) Cash in lieu of land for park dedication shall be paid at the time and amount
established upon final platting
2)
Sewer interceptor fees shall be paid at the time and amount established upon final
platting.
3)
A tree preservation plan including the identification of significant trees and proposed
measures for preservation must be submitted and approved.
4) All lots are subject to a 20 foot minimum front and rear yard setback
5) Outlot D must be combined with Lot 1, Block 3.
6) All lots abutting 31st Street are subject to a 35 foot setback.
7)
Block 3, Lots 1-6 would contain twin homes on a single lot of record. It is strongly
recommended that construction of the units incorporate provision for future
subdivision including separate utilities and adequate fire separation.
8) A ten foot corner setback for the R-2 and R-3 Districts must be identified on the plan.
9)
10)
Easements must be delineated on Block 3, Lots 7-10, and Blocks 7-10.
35th Street must be labeled on the plat.
11)
Street names for A & B, and Outlot C will need to be submitted and approved, prior
to City Council approval.
12)
The street width for Outlot C must be identified. It appears the street width may limit
the ability for on-street parking, and must be labeled no parking.
13)
All cul-de-sacs must include landscaped islands. A homeowners association or
covenants must be established to ensure maintenance of plantings.
14) One front yard tree is required to be planted within 10-15' of the right-of-way line.
15) Boulevard trees must be setback at least 30 feet from all intersections.
16)
Approval of the Final Plat shall be contingent upon approval of the floodplain fill
permit by the City Council.
17)
Future construction of homes along Bohlken Drive may also require additional FEMA
review and approvals including a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior
to building construction.
18)
Final approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans by the Public Works Director.
The applicant shall pay for all costs associated with consultant review of the plans
and assumes all risks associated with the grading and utility placement prior to
formal approvals.
19)
All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover
to eliminate erosion problems.
20)
The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City's
property maintenance ordinance.
21)
Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to
issuance of certificate of occupancy.
22)
Approval is subject to a one year sunset clause. Approval is null and void if
significant work has not commenced within one year of City Council Approval.
23)
The applicant shall work with the Bohlken Addition developers in an effort to resolve
the lot layout issue at the end of the current Bohlken Drive.
Final Plat conditions:
1) Adherence to the Conditions of the South Oaks 2® Addition Preliminary Plat
2)
Final approval of the lawcon trade must be secured prior to filing of a final plat for the
affected property.
3)
A 20 foot rear yard conservation easement must be approved by the City, and
established over the following properties prior to release of Final Plat mylars for
recording: Block 1, Lots 11-16; and Block2, Lots 1-8.
4) Development of the platted outlots shall be prohibited until replatted as lots of record.
5)
A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions or the equivalent document
shall be submitted for review and approval by the City before release of the final plat
mylars to ensure maintenance of open space, common drives, and common utilities.
The declaration shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) A statement requiring the deeds, leases or documents of conveyance
affecting buildings, units, parcels, tracts, townhouses, or apartments be
subject to the terms of the declaration.
(b)
A provision for the formation of a property owners association or corporation
and that all owners must be members of said association or corporation
which may maintain all properties and common areas in good repair and
which may assess individual property owners proportionate shares of joint or
common costs. The association or corporation must remain in effect and may
not be terminated or disbanded.
(c)
Membership in the association shall be mandatory for each owner and any
successive buyer.
(d)
Any open space restrictions must be permanent and may not be changed or
modified without city approval.
]0
6)
(e)
(f)
The association is responsible for liability insurance, local taxes and the
maintenance of the open space facilities deeded to it.
Property owners are responsible for their pro-rata share of the cost of the
association by means of an assessment to be levied by the association which
meet the requirements for becoming a lien on the property in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes.
(g) The association may adjust the assessment to meet changing needs.
The following changes shall be made on the final plat mylars prior to signature by the
City:
(a)
A trail easement must be established to encompass the existing trail over
Block 2, Lot 1.
(b)
Rear dimension for Block 4, Lot 3 must be correctly identified. Preliminary
Plat shows dimension as 32 feet, and Final Plat identifies dimension as
23.74 feet.
(c) Front lot widths for Block 4, Lots 6 and 7 must clearly be identified.
(d)
Rear easements for Block 4, Lots 1-4; and Block 5, Lots 1-5 must be 20 feet
in width.
7)
Execution of a development agreement to memorialize the conditions of the plat and
to establish any applicable escrow amounts to guarantee the completion of site plan
activities.
8)
Payment of cash in lieu of land for park dedication in the amount of $80,750 ($850
per unit x 95 units) prior to release of final plat mylars.
9)
Payment of sewer interceptor fees in the amount of $30,875 ($325 per unit x 95
units) prior to release of final plat mylars.
10)
Any uncompleted site work (including landscaping) must be escrowed for prior to
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
11)
The Final Plat shall be recorded with Dakota County within 90 days of approval by
the City Council, or the approval is null and void.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
Planning Commission Action (Special Use Permit):
Commissioner Hollenbeck moved and Commissioner Greil seconded a motion to
approve the special use permit, subject to the following conditions:
1)
Construction of the additional flood plain storage capacity to compensate for the area
to be filled as indicated on the approved grading plan for South Oaks 2® Addition.
]]
2)
Adherence to Chapter 13 - Floodplain Regulations of the City Code, including, but
not limited to the conditions included below.
3)
Fill shall be property compacted and the slopes shall be properly protected by the
use of riprap, vegetative cover or other acceptable method.
4)
Floodplain development shall not adversely affect the hydraulic capacity of the
channel and adjoining flood plain of any tributary watercourse or drainage system
where a floodway or other encroachment limit has not been specified on the Zoning
Map.
5)
The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any additional. State and Federal
permits relating to the floodplain fill.
6)
Approval is subject to a one year sunset clause. Approval is null and void if
significant work has not commenced within one year of City Council Approval.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 5, Nays: 1, Truax dissenting. Motion passed.
Tom Ryan - Preliminary Plat/Concept Plan #2003-48 - Glendale Heights - Spiral
Boulevard and 31st Street East, east of Enterprise Avenue.
Director Hinzman presented background information on the project.
Dan Tilsen, project engineer, stated that the proposed alternate alignment of 31st Street
would require the removal of a large number of trees, and would not be cost effective to
construct. He stated that the 31st Street cul-de-sac is only 650' in length, and the current
placement of 31st Street has a lesser impact on slopes in the area. Parkland areas were
offered to the City, but the NRRC asked for cash in lieu of land. He stated that he applicant
had planned to plat one lot, only because there were no plans to further subdivide that
parcel of land. As for the second access to the north part of the development where the City
is asking for a second access for emergency purposes, he would propose a trail built to
standards to support large fire equipment, or a divided entrance point from Spiral Boulevard
to minimize the need to close the entire roadway in case of an emergency.
Chairman Anderson opened the public hearing at 9:32 pm.
David Legler, 2100 Glendale Road, expressed concern that the proposed road extension
would go right through the former City dump and by turning up that area for construction,
cold cause environmental issues for the groundwater in the area. He presented some
photos of erosion in the area, and that he would like to see a buffer from the views in the
valley.
Director Hinzman stated that all stormwater run-off must be contained on site.
Mr. Tilsen stated that the design of the stormwater system is to drain the water to the interior
of the site for treatment and then slowly release the water. He added that it has been a bad
year for erosion along the Mississippi River. He also stated that the Spiral Road extension
would be built on fill brought into the area and the dump site would not be disturbed. That
issue and others relating to the dump were examined carefully during the EAW process.
]2
Director Hinzman added that this was also a concept plan review, and that any comments
regarding the area would be taken into account as part of the platting process.
Chairman Anderson closed the public hearing at 9:42 pm.
Commissioner Greil asked what the timeframe was for construction of the Spiral Boulevard
Extension.
Director Hinzman stated that they hoped to get the project done yet this year, but he isn't
sure that will happen. He added that the cost sharing plan was already in place.
Commissioner Greil asked the developer what his overall timeframe for development was.
Tom Ryan, applicant, stated that they hoped to start construction in 2004. The apartment
market in Hastings is fairly weak, so that portion of the plan would be held off on, and a mix
of the other units would be done each year for several years.
Commissioner Twedt stated that he supports the reconfiguration of one of the apartment
buildings, but not of 31st Street - would prefer it stay as shown.
Commissioner Schmitt asked if the Fire Marshall had reviewed/commented on the length of
the cul-de-sac.
Director Hinzman stated that the Fire Marshall had reviewed the plans, but had not provided
any specific comments to him, but he would check with the Marshall on that issue to be
sure. He also added that while a future connection is shown to the property to the south,
development in that area is not to be expected anytime soon, as the land is owned by the
State of Minnesota and used as a wildlife area.
Chairman Anderson stated that he also does not like the 31st Street realignment and would
prefer to see a wider street in the proposed manner to allow for better access.
Commissioner Truax questioned what the emergency trail access would be connected to.
Director Hinzman stated that the alignment of that possible connection has not been
determined, but that it may be possible for the park dedication fees to help pay for that
connection to the Vet's Park.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Greil moved and Commissioner Truax seconded a motion to recommend
approval of the preliminary plat of GLENDALE HEIGHTS to the City Council, subject to the
following conditions:
1) Lot 1, Block 1, must be platted as an outlot.
2) All outlots must be replatted as lots of record prior to construction.
3) All property owners shall be indicated on the Preliminary Plat.
4) All street names must be identified on the Preliminary Plat.
5) Grading on any outlot shall be prohibited until approval of a Tree Preservation Plan,
]3
and Grading Plan.
6)
Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to
issuance of certificate of occupancy.
7)
All Final Plats shall be submitted for approval within one year of Preliminary Plat
approval, Any Preliminary Plat not finalized in accordance with this provision must be
resubmitted for recertification by the Planning Commission and City Council.
8)
The plat shall be liable for development exactions in the future, including but not
limited to Park Dedication, and Sewer Interceptor Fees. All fees shall be paid at the
amount established at the time of Final Plat approval.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
Dan Miller - Variance #2003-51 - Addition to a non-conforming structure - 1986
Oak Street.
Planner Jenson presented background information.
Commissioner Twedt asked what the size of the existing garage and the addition was.
Mr. Miller stated that the existing garage is 22 x 24, and the addition is 16 x 24.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Twedt moved and Commissioner Hollenbeck seconded a motion to
recommend approval of a variance for 1986 Oak Street to add an addition to a non-
conforming garage, based on the following findings of fact:
1. That literal interpretation of the code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly
enjoyed by others.
2. The proposed addition would not further encroach into the required setbacks.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
Regina Medical Center- Site Plan #2003-47 - Parking Lot Expansion - 1175
Nininger Road.
Planner Jenson presented background information in the item.
Rose Tapella, 120 1st Place, asked if there was any communication with the residents of the
President's Addition, seeing as how the access road would be creating a full intersection
with Jackson Drive. Ms. Tapella also mentioned the high number of accidents in that area in
the past 21 months.
Director Hinzman stated that there had not been any notification of the residents in that
area.
Planning Commission Action:
]4
Commissioner Hollenbeck moved and Commissioner Twedt seconded a motion to
recommend approval the site plan request of Regina Medical Center to construct a
parking lot addition and access road to Pleasant Drive, subject to the following
conditions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Adherence to the attached Site Plan.
All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover
to eliminate erosion problems, and shall be maintained to the requirements of the
City's property maintenance ordinance.
Final approval of the development grading and utility plans by the City of Hastings.
The applicant shall be liable for any costs involved in consultant review of the plans.
Any future plans to illuminate the parking lot/access road will require a photometric
lighting plan to be submitted showing foot candle illumination of the property.
Illumination levels are limited to 0.5 foot candles at the property line as required in
the Zoning Code.
Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Forester
and Planning Director.
That the original development agreement between the City of Hastings, Regina
Medical Complex, and Sisters of Charity of our Lady, Mother of Mercy, dated
November 20th, 1987, be amended and agreed upon by all parties to allow for the
road connection to Pleasant Drive to be a paved width of 28', versus the 36' width
originally stated in the agreement, prior to work commencing on the project.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
Chad Petterson - Site Plan #2003-50 - Chiropractic Office - SE Corner of Bahls
Drive and South Frontage Road.
Planner Jenson presented background information on the request.
Commissioner Truax asked for clarification as to the location of the garage on the building.
Planner Jenson stated that it was a tuck under garage in the same area as the loading area.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Truax moved and Commissioner Schmitt seconded a motion to
recommend approval the site plan request for Dr. Chad Petterson's chiropractic clinic
located at the southeast corner of South Frontage Road and Bahls Drive, subject to
the following conditions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Adherence to the attached Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations.
All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover
to eliminate erosion problems.
The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City's
property maintenance ordinance.
Final approval of the development grading and utility plans by the City of Hastings.
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
The applicant shall be liable for any costs involved in consultant review of the plans.
Landscape Plan to be modified to remove the two boulevard trees closest to the
corner of Bahls Drive and South Frontage Road so as to not interfere with visibility at
the intersection.
Future development of the lot may require construction of a fire hydrant.
Any future plans to illuminate the parking lot will require a photometric lighting plan to
be submitted showing foot candle illumination of the property. Illumination levels are
limited to 0.5 foot candles at the property line as required in the Zoning Code
Approval of the site plan does not include any area of signage. A separate permit is
required from the Planning Department prior to its placement on the building.
Modification of parking lot to add curb to separate parking areas south of the trash
enclosure.
A concrete curb must be installed at the edge of pavement for phase 1 of the project.
Any wells on site must be properly abandoned and sealed before construction of the
office building can commence.
Future development of 'Phase Two' will require site plan review and approval.
Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed.
9. Camegaran, LLC - Schoolhouse Square - Revised Concept Plan.
Director Hinzman presented background information on the item.
Pat Regan, applicant, presented the revised concept plan in greater detail.
Commissioner Greil asked if the decorative street lights were planned for the length of
Sibley Street.
Mr. Regan stated that if the project received Livable Communities Grant funding, that it
would include decorative street lights along Sibley between Schoolhouse Square and the
downtown area.
Commissioner Greil asked if there was an issue with the fact that the 9th Street accesses off
of Vermillion Street were offset.
Director Hinzman stated that the median on Highway 61 would be closed, so it would not be
an issue.
Commissioner Schmitt asked if any loading docks are planned for the businesses.
Mr. Regan stated that there is no loading dock space planned for any of the businesses in
this area.
Chairman Anderson stated that he liked this plan much better that previous designs.
Commissioner Hollenbeck stated that she liked the proposed building elevations as
distributed by Mr. Regan, and that they did a good job of mirroring the old Central School.
Director Hinzman asked the Commission if they had any thoughts on the parking issue.
Chairman Anderson stated that he was not opposed to allowing a reduction in parking by
taking out spaces such as hallways and the like.
Commissioner Greil agreed, but felt that the regulations should be added to the code, so
that it can be consistently applied to all businesses.
10. Other Business
Due to the late hour, Director Hinzman elected not to provide an update of ongoing projects.
Adjournment
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Jenson
Recording Secretary