Loading...
06-18-1985 PCM ci MINUTES HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 1. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Hutchinson Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Roland Ebent at 7:30 p.m., with the following members present: Marlin Torgerson, Shu -Mei Hwang (7:45 p.m.),Don Erickson, Tom Lyke and Chairman Ebent. Members absent: Larry Homo and Elsa Young. Also present: City Administrator Gary Plotz, Director of Engineering Marlow Priebe and City Attorney James Schaefer. 2. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting, dated Tueday, May 21, 1985, were approved as presented upon a motion by Mr. Erickson. Seconded by Mr. Torgerson, the motion carried unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS (a) CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY BRICE WAGNER Chairman Ebent opened the hearing at 7:38 p.m. with the reading of publication #3420 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 6, 1985. The request is for a 316" variance to allow the construction of a 20' by 241 garage on the property located at 667 Hassan Street South 216" from the sideyard property line. Mr. Wagner was present to state that he would like to change the request to a 241 by 241 attached garage which would require a 216" variance. Discussion followed. It was determined that a 20' wide garage would meet the setback requirement but would not allow the existing door into the house from the garage to be opened when the vehicles were in the garage. Mr. Wagner also stated that 24' would allow him to put a door in the front of the garage so he wouldn't have to open the garage door to get into the garage. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that 22' would allow room for the door into the house to be opened, provide Mr. Wagner a double garage, and room for a small front door into the garage or a side door could be built. There was no one present who objected to the request. Mr. Wagner stated that he had spoken to his neighbor and he had no objections to the request. After discussion, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to close the hear- ing at 7:50 p.m. Seconded by Dr. Lyke, the motion carried unanimously. Dr. Lyke made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of a 6" variance to make it possible to enter the garage from the house due to placement of existing house door. Seconded by Mr. Torgerson, the motion carried unanimously. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES/JUNE 18, 1985 (b) CONSIDERATION OF REZONING REQUEST SUBMITTED BY JEFF HAAG Chairman Ebent opened the hearing at 7:55 pm. with the reading of publication #3421 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 6, 1985. The request is to rezone property located at 876 Dale Street South from R-2 to R-3 (Multiple Family Residence District) for the purpose of allowing an existing building, previously granted a conditional use permit to be built as a condominium, to be used as rental property. Mr. Jeff Haag, previous owner of the property, explained that selling the units as condominiums as planned had not proved feasible, so the units had been rented out. He later sold the building as rental property, unaware that he the property was not zoned properly. Now he was requesting that the property be rezoned so that the building could continue to be rented out. Staff had recommended that the rezoning be approved, as R-3 is an extension of existing zoning (across the street), and the site has been used as rental property with no objection from the neighborhood. There was no one present who objected to the request. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to close the hearing at 8:00 pm. Seconded by Mr. Erickson, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of the rezoning as requested. Seconded by Mr. Hwang, the motion carried unanimously. (c) CONSIDERATION OF REZONING REQUEST AS SUBMITTED BY RETIREMENT LIVING COMMUNITIES Chairman Ebent opened the hearing at 8:01 p m. with the reading of publication #3423 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 6, 1985. The request is by the prospective owner to rezone property located east of the Hutchinson Community Hospital between Century Ave. and an extension of Freemont Ave. from R-2 and C-4 to R-3 (Multiple Family Residence District.) Mr. Newell Weed of Retirement Living Communities was present to explain that they have received approval of an option to purchase the 4.5 acres of property described above for the purpose of constructing a 38 -unit (approximate) condominium. The units are to be sold to persons who are 55 and older. Before they can proceed with the project, they would like to rezone the property to allow the multiple family dwelling. It is contiguous to R-3 on the northwest corner, R-2 to the east and C-4 to the south. Mr. Weed presented aerial photographs of the area to be rezoned as well as a photograph of a similar project done at Alexandria. He noted there were also similar projects done at Northfield, Albert Lea and Austin. He stated that they felt there was a need in Hutchinson for this type of project. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES/JUNE 18, 1985 He described the type of structure proposed as well as the plans for landscaping the area. He stated they (R.L.C.) had spoken to various neighbors living on Bradford Street and stated their intention to work closely with them to come up with a berm/landscaping plan that would be suitable to them. Mr. Lawrence Olson of 1076 Bradford stated that the neighborhood had had several meetings with Mr. Newell and that they were in favor of the project as proposed. Their concern was what would happen to the rezoned area in the event that the project failed. Mr. Weed stated that their option to purchase was contingent upon their proceeding with this project as proposed and he would recommend that the rezoning have a similar condition. Entrance to the development would be from Freemont Avenue for visitors. Entrance to garages owned by the residents would be from Century Ave. There was discussion of what might be done with Freemont Ave. This proposals calls for a cul de sac to be put on the end of it; however, Director Priebe stated that there are other options that should be studied. In response to questions, Mr. Weed stated that upon approval of the rezoning, their firm would market the project and hope to have enough units sold to secure financing (50% or less of the units sold) to begin construction in September. Discussion of whether or not it was necessary to rezone the property followed. Director Priebe stated that a conditional use permit to allow a Planned Unit Development might be required for a development of this type which would make rezoning unnecessary. City Attorney Schaefer was asked to check into this possibility before the next City Council meeting. Mr. Erickson made a motion to close the hearing at 8:55 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Torgerson, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to recommend approval of "conditional" rezoning to R-3, upon the firm excercising their option to buy the property, with a six month limitation. Seconded by Mr. Hwang, the motion carried unanimously. If the option is not exercised, the property would go back to its former zoning. (d) CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE 464 SECTION 6.06 REGARDING SITE PLAN REQUIREMENT FOR REZONING Chairman Ebent opened the hearing at 8:58 p.m. with the reading of publication #3422 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 6, 1985. The proposed amendment is as follows: SECTION 6:06 AMENDMENTS B. INITIATION. Proposed changes or amendments may be initiated by the City Council, by the Zoning Board of Appeals, by the Planning Commission or by any one or more owners of real estate in the 91ty- area to be affected by the changes or amendments or by the owner of an enforceable option to purchase property in the area affected by the changes or amenaments. E PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES/JUNE 18, 1985 SECTION 6:06 AMENDMENTS C. PROCEDURE 2,(C)(5) A map, drawn to scale, clearly showing the property to be reclassified, and , its present zoning classification, and existing uses., its initial use under the proposed reclassification and a preliminary building and site development plan. There was no one present who objected to the amendment as proposed. Mr. Erickson made a motion to close the hearing at 9:00 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Torgerson, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of the amendment as proposed. Seconded by Mr. Hwang, the motion carried unanimously. 4. OLD BUSINESS (a) CONTINUE REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Postponed until July 16 meeting. Add Section 4 for review at that time. 5. NEW BUSINESS (a) REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GRANTED TO HAVTI APRIL 24, 1984 Chairman Ebent stated that the conditional use permit granted to HAVTI for the purpose of using portable training units at the school site was to be reveiwed. City Administrator Plotz explained that staff's question was what the school's future plans were for changing from the "temporary" units to a permanent building. Mr. Warren Macemon, Director of the Hutchinson A.V.T.I responded that they hope to use the portable training units for some time. They have had a request into the state to expand their facilities with a permanent structure for these programs since 1978, but their position on the State priority list changes from year to year. Mr. Macemon further stated that there have not been any negative comment regarding the units directed to them. After discussion, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to renew the conditional use permit for another year. Seconded by Mr. Erickson, the motion carried unanimously. (b) CONSIDERATION OF RENEWING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HUTCH AGRI- TECH Mr. Mark Mortenson was present to state that Hutch Agri -Tech had been granted a conditional use permit to expand their building located at 15 Monroe St., which is located in an IC -1. They were unable to go ahead with the expansion at that time and would like to renew the permit. He presented to the Planning Commission a revised plan in which the size of the building was reduced to 48' by 70' with three loading docks on the west end of the new addition. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTESIJUNE 18, 1985 After reviewing the proposed revisions, Director Priebe noted that a variance would be necessary for the loading docks as proposed because the ordinance requires 651. It was suggested that the addition be moved as close as possible to the property line on the east to reduce the amount of variance required. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that Mr. Mortenson apply for a variance and that they would consider renewal of the conditional use permit at that time. (c) CONSIDERATION OF GEORGE HERBERT SKETCH PLAN (WITHIN TWO MILE RADIUS) Mr. George Herbert was present to ask the Planning Commission to consider the sketch plan that he was proposing to the County. The City had not received any comment from the township regarding the sketch plan as required until the 17th of June which did not allow enough time for staff review and it being included in the packet materials. The Planning Commission reviewed the map of the sketch plan. There was discussion of the width of a proposed road not meeting city requirements. There was also discussion about it being possibly commercial or residential. It was the consensus of the Commission that it should be reviewed at the next meeting when there had been more time to study the plan. Mr. Herbert responded that he did not want any more delays. Mr. Erickson made a motion to recommend that the Sketch Plan be denied. Seconded by Mr. Hwang, the motion carried unanimously. (d) PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED LOT SPLIT - MR. RICHARD MARTIN Mr. Richard Martin of 1235 McDonald Drive was present to ask about procedures and the Planning Commission's reaction to split- ting a lot in the Shady Ridge area. After discussion, Mr. Martin was directed to meet with staff to discuss his options and then bring his proposal to the next Planning Commission meeting. (e) PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION BY GAIL PLAISANCE Mr. Gail Plaisance, presented a plan for an attached 25' by 24' garage 4' from the rear property line on property located at 509 Linden Avenue. This proposal would require a 21' variance. Mr. Plaisance explained that as the house was built on a corner lot, it was actually facing the sideyard. He felt he had no other option for placement of the garage and that it would be more attractive and functional if attached. Discussion followed. It was noted that a detached single car garage could be built without a variance. Mr. Plaisance further proposed moving an existing deck to the rear of the house, which .PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES/JUNE 18, 1985 also would require a variance. Mr. Hwang stated that under usual circumstances, the west property line would be a sideyard line and only 6' would be required. Treating both lines as sideyards might be a way to consider this request. Mr. Plaisance was directed to talk to staff about various options. If a variance was still required, he should then make application for the July 16 meeting. 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Hwang, the motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.