HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCMinutes_2012_03_12C:\Documents and Settings\lcarruthers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\5ZLTOVMI\03.doc 1
Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
March 12, 2012
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Chairperson Wayne Avery called the regular meeting of the City Planning
Commission to order on Monday March 12, 2012, at 7:00 PM in the Council
Chamber at City Hall. Members present were Greg Fargen, Alan Gregg, Al
Heuton, Donna DeKraai, John Sydow, Hal Bailey, Mike Cameron, and Avery.
John Gustafson was absent. Also present were Brian Gatzke, John Mills, Al
Rogers, Jason Stevenson, Todd Meierhenry, Community Development Director
Mike Struck, Planning and Zoning Administrator Dan Hanson and others.
Item #1 – (Heuton/Cameron) Motion to approve the minutes from the February
7, 2012, meeting. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
Item #2 – Avery announced that item 3 would be deferred to the April 3, 2012
meeting.
(Gregg/Fargen) Motion to approve the amended agenda. All present
voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
Item #3 – Deferred to April 3, 2012.
Item #4 – Gatzke Family Enterprises, LLC has submitted a petition for major and
minor amendments to an IDP within a PDD on Lot G,Beale Addition.
The major amendment proposes an increase of 20% or more in the total
density of the development. The minor amendments propose a change in the
number of access drives and the dimensions of a building.
(Gregg/Heuton) Motion to approve the revised IDP as presented subject
to the prohibition of a “drinking establishment” use. All present voted aye.
MOTION CARRIED.
Item #5 – Prairie Hills, LLC has submitted a revised preliminary plat of a portion of
Prairie Hills Addition in the NE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 2-T109N-R50W. The
revision requires a variance from the minimum street width for a private street.
(Bailey/Heuton) Motion to approve a 26 foot wide private street as
proposed on the plat. All present voted aye except Sydow
C:\Documents and Settings\lcarruthers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\5ZLTOVMI\03.doc 2
abstained. MOTION CARRIED
Item #6 – Richard Halstead has submitted a petition to rezone Lot 1, Block 1,
Husen’s Addition and Husen’s Addition excluding the north 272.8 feet of the east
815 feet thereof from a Residence R-1A and R-3A District to an Industrial I-1
District.
(Gregg/Cameron) Motion to approve the rezoning. All present voted aye.
MOTION CARRIED.
Item #7 – Agricultures, Inc has submitted an application for a Conditional Use to
establish a Kennel on Lot 2, Block 5, Bidco Addition.
(Bailey/Fargen) Motion to approve the Conditional Use.
(Cameron/Heuton) Amendment to the motion to add “provided the
kennel is used in conjunction with an animal hospital.” All present voted
aye. AMENDMENT CARRIED.
The motion, as amended, was voted on. All present voted aye. MOTION
CARRIED.
Item #8 – The City of Brookings has submitted a Project Plan for TID #6.
(Cameron/Bailey) Motion to approve the Project Plan. All present voted
aye. MOTION CARRIED.
Item #9 – The City of Brookings has submitted an amendment to the Vision 2020
Comprehensive Plan pertaining to the major street plan for 25th Avenue.
(DeKraai/Sydow) Motion to approve the amendment. All present voted
aye. MOTION CARRIED.
Item #10 – The City of Brookings has submitted an amendment to Chapter 94,
Zoning, pertaining to a church as a Conditional Use in the Business B-1 District.
(Bailey/Fargen) Motion to approve the amendment. All present voted
aye. MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting was adjourned.
______________________ __________________________
C:\Documents and Settings\lcarruthers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\5ZLTOVMI\03.doc 3
Dan Hanson, Secretary Wayne Avery, Chairperson
Planning & Zoning Administrator
Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
March 12, 2012
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Chairperson Wayne Avery called the regular meeting of the City Planning
Commission to order on March 12, 2012, at 7:00 PM in the Council Chamber at
City Hall. Members present were Hal Bailey, Alan Gregg, Mike Cameron, Donna
DeKraai, Greg Fargen, Al Heuton, John Sydow, and Avery. John Gustafson was
absent. Also present were Brian Gatzke, John Mills, Al Rogers, Jason Stevenson,
Todd Meierhenry, Community Development Director Mike Struck, Planning and
Zoning Administrator Dan Hanson and others.
Item #4 – Brian Gatzke, owner of the property, stated there were several
revisions to the approved Initial Development Plan. The commercial building
was smaller, there was a separate apartment building on the site, additional
landscaping was added and the access design met the SDDOT guidelines for
Highway 14.
Cameron asked about parking for the apartment. Gatzke replied that
one tuck-under garage was attached to each unit. Cameron asked if the
parking shown on the plan was sufficient for the proposed uses. Hanson
responded that the Final Development Plan would have that information.
Heuton asked if the sideyard setback for the apartment was ok. Hanson
replied yes. DeKraai asked if a traffic impact study was done. Hanson
answered that the project’s size and proximity to 6th Street did not warrant a
study.
Item #5 – John Mills, owner of Prairie Hills, LLC, noted that the original plan was to
have public streets throughout the development. However, his request for a
narrower roadway within the right of way was denied by the city so he opted to
establish private streets. He pointed out that the Summer Hill Townhome streets
were 22 feet wide and the Meadow Green Townhome streets were 24 feet
wide. “The Landing” neighborhood would likely not have drive-thru traffic. Mills
stated that he asked residents of Meadow Green if they felt their streets were
adequate and the response was that they were. He added that wider streets
cost more to build and maintain.
Fargen asked what parking restrictions were in place at “The Landing.”
Mills did not know, but noted that very little on street parking occurred at
C:\Documents and Settings\lcarruthers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\5ZLTOVMI\03.doc 4
Meadow Green. Struck asked if off-street parking pads would be scattered
throughout “The Landing” as they were in Meadow Green? Mills responded
that there was not a plan to do so at this time but the design was still being
finalized.
Hanson inquired about the public to private street transition on the north
end. Mills replied that a community building associated with “The Landing”
would be built west of the Chokecherry Lane intersection so the transition point
was not determined.
Cameron noted that if parking was restricted on the private street, the
lane widths would be wider than a local street roadway with parking on one
side.
Heuton referred to requirements that must be met in order to grant a
variance. Hanson felt that the commission can view these standards as a quasi-
judicial function and use discretion based on information regarding the
subdivision.
Item #6 – Hanson summarized the previous application history of the property
and the location of property within the Special Flood Hazard Area.
Heuton was concerned how driveways would access the acreage and if
they would be through a residential area. Hanson noted the access would be
restricted to Highway 14 Diagonal. Additional access to the diagonal would be
up to the SDDOT.
Fargen was concerned about compatibility with adjoining uses. Hanson
remarked that a fifty foot landscape buffer would be required between an I-1
District and any residential district.
Heuton noted that there was a variety of land uses in the area and an
Industrial I -1 District was located nearby.
Item #7 – Al Rogers, representing Agri-Cultures, Inc, stated that the Gentle
Doctor Veterinary Clinic was looking to build in a new location. He pointed out
that the building’s design would shield the dog runs from adjacent property
along 3 sides. The north side would have a fence. Rogers added that grooming
and boarding of animals was planned.
Jason Stevenson, from Gentle Doctor Veterinary Clinic, stated that the
outdoor runs were not attached to the kennels so only staff could bring an
animal in and out of the facility. Cameron asked how many kennels were
planned. Rogers replied it would be close to the rooms shown on the plan
depending upon demand. Stevenson did not anticipate more than what was
shown. Heuton asked how many animals would be outside at any one time.
Stevenson answered likely one or maybe two depending on whether the
animals got along. Cameron felt the association with an animal hospital was an
important element in approving the request.
C:\Documents and Settings\lcarruthers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\5ZLTOVMI\03.doc 5
Item #8 – Struck stated that the boundaries of TID #6 were created on January
17, 2012. The project plan involves land in the Foster Industrial Park and pertains
to Bel Brands, Inc. He noted that Attorney Todd Meierhenry developed the
plan.
Meierhenry stated all 11 state statutory requirements were met in the plan.
Project plan costs are estimated and usually there are more project costs
planned than are actually completed. He stated the plan covered only Phase I
of the plan. The city would cover the costs of the funds so the plan was feasible.
Meierhenry noted that the average length of a project plan is 12-15 years
due to inflation which increases the amount of tax increment over time. In South
Dakota, as soon as project costs are paid off, the TID is dissolved.
Item #9 – The Major Street Plan currently involved 25th Avenue from Highway 14
north to 9th Street. The planned extension of 25th Avenue up to 10th Street
warranted a change in the plan. Heuton asked if the status of 25th Avenue
could change depending upon the SDDOT’s future 6th Street project. Hanson
felt the street would still remain a minor collector.
Item #10 – Hanson explained that a church use would be somewhat similar to a
community center use where people would congregate for an event. Because
of this, the standards were modified to require some on-premise parking or
convenient access to nearby public parking. This could prevent one use in the
Central Business District from occupying an excessive amount of on-street
parking and thereby impacting adjacent businesses.
Bailey recommended eliminating the work “and” in the fourth line of the
Sec 94-264. The commission generally agreed with this modification.
Item #11 – The Board of Adjustment requested a review of the restrictions
regarding accessory buildings. Hanson pointed out that the primary focus was
to insure an accessory building remained “accessory” to the principal building.
The changes would generally allow larger accessory buildings on lots in the
range of 1 to 3 acres in size. Larger accessory buildings would be permitted on
these lots but they would not be able to be larger, floor area wise, than the
principal building.
Heuton asked how regulations for accessory buildings in the Ag District
were written. Hanson responded that a farmstead in the Ag District was allowed
accessory buildings up to 1500 square feet in size. He added that the Ag District
regulations and the proposed changes would be reviewed and brought back
to the commission at a future meeting.
The meeting was adjourned.
C:\Documents and Settings\lcarruthers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\5ZLTOVMI\03.doc 6
______________________ __________________________
Dan Hanson, Secretary Wayne Avery, Chairperson
Planning & Zoning Administrator