MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON TUESDAY,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
1. Roll
Call
PRESENT: Eyre,
Jocks, Mead, Rapanos, and Senesac
ABSENT: Kozakiewicz, Gaynor and Svenson
OTHERS PRESENT: Jon Lynch, Assistant City
2. Approval of Minutes
Regular Meeting of
It was moved by Mead and supported by Jocks to approve the minutes of May
9th. The minutes were unanimously approved.
3.
Public
Hearing
a. Site Plan No. 253 – Consideration
of a petition initiated by Three Rivers Corporation, on behalf of Members First
Credit Union, for approval of a site plan including a 21,215 square foot
building addition on 3.11 acres located at
The City
Planner showed Site Plan No. 253. The
site is currently occupied by Members’ First Credit Union, across from the 555
Medical Office facility. The property is zoned RC. Across the street is a fair amount of office
service. South of the office service is
various residential from RB to RA-1.
This site plan is for the 21,215 sq. ft. office building. The current building is located to the west
of the proposed addition. They are going
to add the building to the east along with a lot of parking and some storm
water detention. They will move the
eastern most curb cut further to the east.
Directly adjacent to that is a doctor’s medical office. The front yard setback requirement is 25
feet. This building will be set back 90
feet from the front property line. They
will save approximately four existing trees.
They will be landscaping heavily.
There is no sidewalk on the W. Wackerly frontage. It is all on the south side of
Randy
Sherman, Three Rivers Corporation,
No one
spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this request.
b. Zoning Text Amendment No. 143A – Consideration
of a petition initiated by City staff to a zoning text amendment to allow for
conditional rezoning of property.
This topic
arose out of the April 2006 training session for the
What is
the relationship to the master plan? Is
reversion automatic if approved development does not proceed? Can a site plan be required in conjunction
with a conditional rezoning application?
Can the conditions ever be changed after they are approved?
Over the
last year or so, planning commissions have struggled with these open
issues. They have attempted to find
resolution to these open issues. They
have decided to allow specific ordinance language that is used for the planning
tool. Staff has provided a draft of an
ordinance amendment that would modify the provisions of Article 30 of our
zoning language. Article
30 – Section E.
When a
petitioner presents a rezoning request, he usually has something specific in
mind. It is not uncommon for a
petitioner to stand before you and tell you how they desire to use the property
once the zoning is changed. They may
even present a site plan for the new use.
However, staff continues to tell the
1.
Intent
2.
Application and Offer of Conditions
3.
4.
City Council Review
5.
Approval
6.
Compliance with Conditions
7.
Time period to Establish Use
8.
Reversion of Zoning
9.
Subsequent Rezoning of Land
10.
Amendment of Conditions
11.
City Right to Rezone
12.
Failure of Offer Conditions
No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this
zoning text amendment.
4. Public
Comments (not related to agenda items)
None
5.
Old
Business
a. Site Plan No. 252 – Consideration of a petition
initiated by Helger Construction Company, on behalf
of Feeny Chrysler, for approval of a site plan
including a 13,000 square foot body and paint shop on 7.13 acres located at
Mr. Poprave provided a summary of
the information from the public hearing.
The site is located at
The site plan is a 1300 sq. ft. body
shop and wash bay. This site was
previously constructed in 1999. All of
the site features were constructed at that time. There is not a lot of new additional site
work for review.
Mr. Eyre asked about the signage on
the property. The staff report indicates
they already have more signage than is permitted. Mr. Poprave stated that if they wanted
additional signage on the building, they would have to amend what they have or
seek a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Sean, of Helger
Construction represented the petitioner.
There is some new signage above the new doors. They will not be added, they are only there
on the site plan to depict where the bays will be. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition
to this petition.
Mr. Rapanos stated he feels the
applicant seems to have met all the requirements and he is in favor of the
project. Mr. Mead agreed with Mr.
Rapanos. This looks very nice and he
feels it will be a nice addition to the existing facility. Mr. Eyre agreed, as did Mr. Jocks. Mr. Senesac asked about the four
contingencies listed in the staff report.
Mr. Poprave stated they still apply.
It was moved by Eyre and supported by Rapanos to recommend approving Site
Plan No. 252 with the following contingency items:
1. Stormwater detention system is re-verified to determine
that it can handle the new runoff.
2. Verification that the private
sanitary system will handle the additional capacities.
3. New
and relocated exterior lighting shall be fully shielded and not exceed 1.0 foot
candle of illumination at the property line.
4. Any
new or restriped parking spaces must be delineated
with “box” style striping.
The vote proceeded as follows:
YEA: Eyre, Jocks, Mead,
Rapanos and Senesac
NAY: None
ABSENT: Gaynor, Kozakiewicz,
Svenson
The motion was approved 5-0.
b. Conditional Use Permit No. 21 – Consideration of a petition
initiated by Robert LaBelle on behalf of Verizon Wireless to approve a conditional use permit to
allow construction of a 140’ tall monopole tower located east of Elisenal Drive, north of Wal-Mart.
Mr. Poprave showed the proposed site.
It is 135 feet in from the property line. The petitioner went through a zoning variance
last Tuesday. The variance was granted
from the Zoning Board of Appeals. They
granted him 149 feet in height. This
came from the FAA requirements that they could build up to 149 feet in
height. The tower is approximately 135
feet from the zoning boundary. The
petitioner would have to move the tower up to 14 feet to the west, depending
upon the height of the tower. The road
access to the tower would have to be plowed in the winter.
Mr. Rapanos asked about the fact that the land is leased. When cell towers are no longer needed, is
there some requirement that these towers must be removed? Mr. Poprave stated that there is a condition
that the towers are removed if they are no longer needed.
Mr. LaBelle spoke on behalf of the
applicant. The total length of the
access road is 120 feet. It is 20 feet
wide. At either location on the site,
they will be able to meet the requirements for setbacks for the tower. All the conditions will be satisfied by the
cellular tower company. Currently, the
zoning ordinance encourages 120 foot poles.
That is why you are getting all the other poles out there. There is no co-location on these towers. In order to promote co-location, they will go
to 140 feet at a minimum. They will
agree co-location. They are required by
the telecommunications act to allow co-location on their towers.
Mr. Mead asked how often these towers are maintained. The petitioner stated these towers require
very little maintenance. They usually
visit the towers about four times per year to check on it. They will arrange to have the road plowed in
the winter. Mr. LaBelle
stated they can get at least two more cellular companies on their tower. No one spoke either in favor of or in
opposition to this request.
Mr. Mead stated the petitioner seems to have answered all the questions
they had at their last meeting. Mr.
Rapanos stated this looks like another clean site plan and he is in favor of
this for the community. Mr. Eyre and Mr.
Jocks agreed.
It was moved by Mead and supported by Eyre to approve Conditional Use
Permit No. 21 along with the following contingency items:
1. The
equipment shelter is setback at least 25 feet from the front property line as
required by the Zoning Ordinance.
2. All
barbed wire is removed from the proposed site fence.
3. The
access driveway is constructed of sufficient material to support a 60,000 lb.
fire apparatus in all weather conditions.
3. The maintenance/removal affidavit is provided to the City Attorney prior
to Conditional Use Permit approval.
4. The petitioner agrees to co-location requirements set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance.
The vote proceeded as follows:
YEA: Eyre, Jocks, Mead,
Rapanos and Senesac
NAY: None
ABSENT: Gaynor, Kozakiewicz and
Svenson
The motion was approved 5-0.
5.
New
Business
Site Plan No. 253 – Consideration
of a petition initiated by Three Rivers Corporation, on behalf of Members First
Credit Union, for approval of a site plan including a 21,215 square foot
building addition on 3.11 acres located at
They would
like to see this petition acted upon tonight because it would give them two
extra weeks in the construction season.
It could be taken up by City Council at their June 12th
meeting.
Mr. Mead
stated he thinks he can deal with this tonight.
However, there are three members of the commission that are absent
tonight. He feels the process of having
two weeks between the petition presentation and the deliberation is a good
process. It gives the commissioners the
opportunity for additional input as well as members of the public an
opportunity to provide input. Mr. Jocks
stated he thinks this site plan fits in with the surrounding property. This site plan is fairly straight forward and
the commissioners can deal with this in a timely manner.
It was moved by Mead and supported by Eyre to move ahead with the
Member’s First Credit Union site plan approval:
The vote proceeded as follows:
YEA: Eyre, Jocks, Mead,
Rapanos and Senesac
NAY: None
ABSENT: Gaynor, Kozakiewicz and
Svenson
The motion was approved 5-0.
Mr. Rapanos stated this is another good site plan. The petitioner is prepared and has taken care
of all the concerns from staff. Mr. Eyre
stated that all the conditions are fairly straight forward and he is in support
of this site plan. Mr. Mead stated this
adds to the neighborhood and he is also in favor of this site plan. Mr. Jocks agreed.
It was moved by Eyre and supported by Rapanos to recommend approval of
Site Plan No. 253 with the stated contingencies.
The vote proceeded as follows:
YEA: Eyre, Jocks, Mead,
Rapanos and Senesac
NAY: None
ABSENT: Gaynor, Kozakiewicz and
Svenson
The motion was approved 5-0.
7. Communications
None
8. Report of the Chairman - Mr. Senesac discussed the meetings held last
week for additional public input on the master plan. Approximately 30 people
attended these
meetings at the Holiday Inn. There were
many people there
who would not
have been at City Hall.
The Chairman stated he will appoint the nominating committee at the next
meeting.
There is a meeting for the Master Plan on
Thursday, June 1st and this will be
primarily to
discuss traffic issues. The public is
invited to provide input at this
meeting.
9. Report
of the
June 12th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
§
Petition No. 530 – Consideration of a petition initiated
by John Rapanos to rezone approximately 10 acres located at
§ Conditional Use Permit No. 22 – Consideration of a petition initiated by Tom McCann to approve a conditional use permit to allow placement of a single family home on property zoned Office Service located at 416 George Street.
ACTION
ITEMS
§
Site Plan No. 252 – Consideration of a petition
initiated by Helger Construction Company, on behalf
of Feeny Chrysler, for approval of a site plan
including a 13,000 square foot body and paint shop on 7.13 acres located at
§ Conditional Use Permit No. 21 – Set public hearing to consider a petition initiated by Robert LaBelle on behalf of Verizon Wireless to approve a conditional use permit to allow construction of a 140’ tall monopole tower located east of Elisenal Drive, north of Wal-Mart. (public hearing June 23rd)
June 23rd
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
Conditional
Use Permit No. 21 – Set public hearing to consider a petition initiated by
Robert LaBelle on behalf of Verizon
Wireless to approve a conditional use permit to allow construction of a 140’
tall monopole tower located east of
ACTION
ITEMS
§
Site Plan No. 253 – Consideration of a petition
initiated by Three Rivers Construction, on behalf of Members First Credit
Union, for approval of a site plan including building and parking additions on
2.2 acres located at
§
Zoning Text Amendment 142A – Set a public
hearing for consideration of a petition initiated by staff to include
conditional rezoning in the City of
June 1st
§ Traffic Conditions
§ Presentation regarding non-motorized transportation
June 13th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
ACTION
ITEMS
§
Site Plan No. 253 – Consideration of a petition
initiated by Three Rivers Construction, on behalf of Members First Credit
Union, for approval of a site plan including building and parking additions on
2.2 acres located at
§
Zoning Text Amendment 142A – Consideration of a
petition initiated by staff to include conditional rezoning in the City of
June 27th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
None
ACTION
ITEMS
None
May 16th
No. 06-04 –
No. 06-05 – Robert
LaBelle on behalf of Verizon
Wireless for an area / dimension variance to permit a 140’ tall monopole on
property located at
Firehouse Soft
The City Council will be interviewing
candidates for Boards and Commissions on Tuesday, May 30th.
Mr. Poprave stated the
After the ZBA public
hearings, they made a text interpretation on the existing ordinance that, in
the future, Section 3.16 should be a decision that is recommended by the
10. Adjourn
Adjournment at
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Lynch
Assistant City
MINUTES