HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCMinutes_2016_09_06Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
September 6, 2016
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Chairperson James Drew called the regular meeting of the City Planning Commission to order on Tuesday,
September 6, 2016, at 5:30 PM in the Chambers Room #310 on the third floor of the City & County
Government Center. Members present were Tanner Aiken, Greg Fargen, Alan Gregg, Al Heuton, Alan
Johnson, Lee Ann Pierce, Kristi Tomquist and Drew. Also present were Sarah Woodard and JR Malisch
representing Den -Wil Investments, Brian Darnall, Community Development Director Mike Struck, City Planner
Staci Bungard, and others.
Item #1— Roll Call
Item #2 — (Johnson/Tornquist) Motion to approve the agenda. All present voted aye. MOTION
CARRIED
Item #3 — (Johnson/Fargen) Motion to approve the August 2, 2016 minutes. All present voted aye.
MOTION CARRIED.
Item #4a — Bluegill Inc has submitted a final plat of 23rd Street South; Cascade Circle; Lucerne
Avenue; and Ace Avenue Rights of Way in the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4; and in the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of
Section 1-T109N-R50W.
(Gregg/Heuton) Motion to approve the final plat contingent upon Brookings Municipal Utilities'
easement approvals. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
Item #5a — Den -Wil Investments Inc has submitted a petition to rezone Wilbert Square Addition in the
SWI/4 of Section 19-TI10N-R49W (as referenced on approved Wilbert Square Addition Preliminary
Plat dated November 24, 2015 as Lots 1-3, Block 1, Wilbert Square Addition), from a Highway
Business B-4 District to a Planned Development District.
(Heuton/Gregg) Motion to approve the rezone request. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED
(Heuton/Tornquist) Amendment to the motion to remove "Automobile Sales, Telecommunication
towers, and Repair garages" from the list of permitted uses and conditional uses allowed in a B-2
Zone. All present voted aye. AMENDMENT CARRIED.
The motion as amended was voted on. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
Item #6a — Brian & Lynn Darnall have submitted a petition for changes to the Final Development Plan
within a Planned Development District on Block 5, Meadowwood Addition also known as 1100 gch
Street South. A minor amendment proposes to change the number and location of parking spaces and
an access drive.
(Gregg/Pierce) Motion to approve the minor amendments to a Planned Development District. All present voted
aye. MOTION CARRIED.
(Heuton/Gregg) Amendment to the motion to retain the trees adjacent to 8`h Street S. And that two
options be considered for the parking lot A. Retain the angled parking contingent upon obtaining an
access easement from the church. B. If an access easement is not obtained then straight on parking
would be required all on the Medary Acres parking lot. All present voted aye. AMENDMENT
CARRIED.
The meeting was adjourned.
N Lt' Sf"
Mike Struck James Drew, Chairperson
Community Development Director
Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
September 6, 2016
OFFICIAL SUMMARY
Chairperson James Drew called the regular meeting of the City Planning Commission to order on Tuesday,
September 6, 2016, at 5:30 PM in the Chambers Room #310 on the third floor of the City & County
Government Center. Members present were Tanner Aiken, Greg Fargen, Alan Gregg, Al Heuton, Alan
Johnson, Lee Ann Pierce, Kristi Tornquist and Drew. Also present were Sarah Woodard and JR Malisch
representing Den -Wil Investments, Brian Darnall, Community Development Director Mike Struck, City Planner
Staci Bungard, and others.
Item #4a — Struck explained that the developer is proposing to plat some right-of-ways for future development
to the east and south. The preliminary plat was approved contingent upon the right of way being platted to the
north. The applicant is also proposing some sanitary sewer easements extending south to connect to the
interceptor line that connects with the bike trail. BMU will require hard surfacing over the top of the utility
easement which will lock the developer in. Tornquist wondered if the original design was for the street to run
straight north and south and are the sanitary easements forcing the street to be curved slightly. Struck explained
that the alignment of Lucerne Avenue going south did have a curve to it. Tornquist inquired if this is acceptable
with our major street plan? Struck stated yes.
Item #5a — Struck explained that the developer is looking into a mixed use concept on the lots being proposed
for a rezone. Struck stated that a traditional B4 zoning district doesn't allow for mixed uses and the PDD would
allow for flexibility in the area. The intial concept is to have commercial use on the first floor and residential
uses above. Struck explained that Wilbert Court which is indicated on the drawings has not been platted yet.
He also indicated that to the north of the proposed area is the Research Park and to the west is Innovation
Village. Heuton inquired about the separation of tenant parking from customer parking. JR explained that
currently they are thinking that the parking towards the front of the development will be for the commercial
parking and the parking around the outside will be for residential, however they haven't ruled out underground
parking yet. Struck asked if the Wilbert Court will be a private street or a public right-of-way? JR stated that
currently the intention is to make it a public right-of-way. Pierce asked about the size of the detention pond and
what it will be used for due to its larger size? JR stated that it is just shy of a half acre and it will have a slope
on it to allow them to mow it. They are also planning to landscape around it and have a fountain in the middle.
JR explained that all the units in Phase 1 that face the north will have decks looking out towards the pond.
Heuton asked if this pond would service just this development? JR stated that it will service about 60% of
Wilbert Square. Pierce asked if the City had seen this drainage plan and approved it? Lanning explained that
the drainage plan will be submitted at the time of the Initial Development Plan, so she hasn't seen any plans yet.
Tornquist inquired if this is a Planned Development District then this zoning doesn't have to comply with the B-
4 or the Residential guidelines or regulations? Struck stated that the applicant is proposing a PDD with an
underlying B-2 zone, but this hasn't been finalized yet. He stated that the plan could be approved with a B-2
zoning because they do meet the setback requirements and the parking so they aren't looking for any particular
concessions at this time. But one advantage to the rezone is the commission does have the ability to limit some
of the uses within the District. Struck explained the slight differences between the B-2 and B-4 zoning. Pierce
asked "if the Planning Commission does have restrictions they would like applied, should this be indicated
now?" Struck stated that the Planning Commission will have an opportunity to restrict uses during the IDP and
FDP process, but it may be a good idea to indicate to the developer, now, some thoughts of the Planning
Commission.
Item #6a— This is an amendment to the original Planned Development District. The applicant is proposing to
remove a portion of the current greenhouse to allow for 19 additional parking spaces for their business. He is
also working with the neighbor to the west (a church) to allow an egress out of the parking lot to the west
through the church parking lot. Drew is in favor of the additional parking and working with the church for an
egress, but he would like some of the trees abutting 8'h Street S to be left there. He wonders if replacing with
some additional evergreens would be possible? Brian Darnall explained that he is will to lose a couple parking
spots to leave the one large evergreen abutting 8' Street S. However the trees along the west property line
really need to be removed, but he is willing to work with the church to replace these trees.
Struck explained that the City would like to receive a cross access easement between the applicant and the
church. Gregg doesn't feel that the Planning Commission should be concerned about a verbal agreement that
the applicant has with the church. Gregg stated that if the church didn't agree with the traffic through their lot,
or if they sometime down the road didn't agree with it, then the church could put up a rope to stop traffic.
The meeting was adjourned.
Mike Struck James Drew, Chairperson
Community Development Director