Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES AUGUST 26, 1992~~ ;`:. Planning & Zoning 8/26/92 Those Present: Chairman: John Millar Members: Davawn Beattie Mary Ann Mounts Dave Pincock Jeff Walters Madison County: Richard Smith City Clerk: Rose Bagley Councilman: Jim Flamm Attorney: J. D. Hancock Excused: Marsha Bjornn Scott Mortensen Jim Long A motion was made by Mary Ann Mounts and seconded by Davawn Beattie to approve the minutes July 22. All Aye RE: K MART PLAN REVIEW K Mart Plan Review for a parking layout. The plane are to take out the shops north of K Mart. They will put about a 60~ expansion on K Mart. They will take out some parking but will add parking on the north. They have bought some property from Louisiana Pacific for parking for employees. That will bring them in compliance for parking. The board ~. • discussed the entrance to the parking on the west. It is a dangerous corner. The board recommended that we require the installation of two stop signs, that they raise the grade enough so it comes out on a level grade, and the exit be a right hand turn only. A motion was made by Davawn Beattie to approve the plan with the above stipulations, seconded by Dave Pincock. All Aye RE: ZONE CHANGE ON OLD PAMIDA PROPERTY Zone change on old Pamida property - They propose to change the zoning to HDR to allow building apartments on that property. Dale Walker showed site plans. The property was zoned commercial prior to the new ordinance which allowed apartments. It is still zoned commercial but the new zone will not allow apartments. The board felt that since they are surrounded by either apartments or businesses the property was compatible for either. Richard Smith told him it sounds like everyone is in agreement to it but under the new zoning ordinance, apartments are not a permitted use in HBD. A motion was made by Dave Pincock to recommend our approval to proceed with a Public Hearing to change the zone from HBD to HDR. Seconded by Mary Ann Mounts. All Aye RE: 6 PLEX AT 167 W 2ND S - DAN MANNING Dan Manning was at the meeting to present a site plan for a 6 plex at 167 West 2nd South. John Millar told him the six foot setback on the • side is not in compliance, it will need to be nine feet on the West side. The parking is not adequate for the number of cars. He needs to provide the dimensions - square footage of apartments. He needs to f ~~ ~/ meet the requirements in zoning book addressed in 6.9. Mr Manning was • told to come back to the next meeting with the corrected plane. RE: ABANDONMENT OF RIGHT-A-WAY NEXT TO WALKER SUBDIVISION Abandonment of right-a-way next to Walker Subdivision. John Millar declared a conflict of interest and asked Mary Ann Mounts to chair this issue. They are requesting narrowing of N 3 E and 300 feet of Barney Dairy Road. This is a portion of the city that was in the original plat where all streets are basically 99 foot width. When the right-a-way was acquired to put in Barney Dairy Road, a 60 foot right-a-way was acquired primarily from Walkers for that road. As 3rd East comes up and crosses the canal, and about 200 feet up the right-a-way is back to the 60 feet. The Walkers are requesting that the right-a-way goes back to the property owners. A motion was made by Davawn Beattie and seconded by Dave Pincock to recommend to the City Council to abandon 19 1/2 feet on each side of the road. All Aye RE: IMPACT ZONE Impact Zone - Richard, Jerry and Davawn have been working on proposed definitions for agricultural zones for the impact zone. Richard said they did not come up with a formal definition of the agricultural area. They talked about some problems that had been discussed initially. There was some concern about having two designations. In (' looking at the zoning ordinance, the only difference in the • agricultural zones is to have one which would allow growing crops and a second one to allow livestock and animals. In the city ordinance, the growing of fibers, grains, fruits, and vegetables is all permitted use in the residential zones and commercial. What we are talking about is animals or no animals. John told him animals are already precluded by the ordinance. Do we really want to have three agricultural type zones, one residential, Agricultural 1, which would be growing crops, Agricultural 2, which would be growing of crops and livestock? Although one is a commercial operation, it will generate the same sort of noise and activities. The general feeling of the three of them was we should have a Residential Designation, and Agricultural Designation where in Agricultural would allow all types of Agricultural uses including livestock. We tried to focus on the size of the lot that would be required to allow some sort of agricultural use which would include animals. The general feeling was anything above one acre would be allowed to have livestock. The reasoning used was two acres isn't large enough to have two horses on; it is big enough to have some chickens or pigs or whatever. If you have a two acre lot and are not allowed to have livestock, then what do you use the ground for? That is what we have come up with, an agricultural designation and a residential designation for one acre or less. They could put a dairy in the impact zone if it was an Agricultural designation originally. John Millar asked where is it an Agricultural Designation and where is it a Commercial Feed Lot? Richard stated that there is a designation between Agricultural and Commercial. There was a concern if someone had 2 acres or 5 acres and wanted to have 150 rabbits on it or some pigs on it. If we implement these rules, they need to be written to I take into effect existing uses, then if someone wants to have that sort of an operation, then they have to go outside of the impact zone to do it. We need to take everything into it with the existing. use. The use runs with the land. (discussion) Mary Ann has logged everything in the impact zone as Residential, Business, Commercial, Church, School, Public, Vacant, Agricultural, Pasture, and City Limits. Richard suggested that we take all the uses as they come in right now, and try to designate them as agricultural type uses even if there is a residence on it. If someone wants to come in and build homes, on the Barney Dairy Road, he will have to come in and get a zone change from agricultural to residential. Those homes out there are strictly residential and under one acre and shouldn't have livestock on them. They are going to be in the city and be asking for sewer and water hookups with in the next five years. Any future building out there should be subject to the city rules. There is a two fold advantage to having as much as we can designated agricultural. All the frontage is being sold off and we don't have a farm to market road anymore. Davawn Beattie recommended that we move on this as soon as possible. John Millar said we need to establish some criteria for rural residential. We will need to modify our Sub Division Ordinance. Richard stated we need to define it and declare the impact zone. He said he appreciated how cooperative the city has been with the county. This takes no action on the county's part. The city could step in and declare the impact zone and define the impact zone. The county really doesn't have any say in the matter according to Statue. The mayor said if we write it up we could get it approved by the county and city and that would be the easiest way. John said there are some steps we need to take. The maps need to be condensed down to one map to where it is a zoning map. He said he would get that done. Richard stated that if someone wants to build a home on his farm there would not need to be a zone change. They can come in and convince us it is agricultural and he has a justifiable reason to put in on the main road because he probably will never have a road up into his agricultural land. Richard suggested we should get the impact zone defined under the direction of the city. Initially start with an Agricultural Zone, Industrial Zone, Rural Residential Zone and then when it is in place put it on the map. We need an Agricultural Open and Agricultural Residential. One acre lot size with one dwelling per lot. (discussion on curb and gutter in impact zone.) John would do the map, and Richard, Jerry, Davawn and J. D. would work on the definitions. • i ' '"~ `- L Richard asked if the council would declare the impact zone as we defined it and declare Jerry and Richard as well as Scott to be on the Planning Board and declare the zones at their next meeting. A motion was made by Mary Ann and seconded by Dave to adjourn. All Aye.