Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWALKER MANUFACTURING REZONING & PRELIMINARY PLAT - COUNTY REFERRAL - 27-88 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES April 25, 1988 WALKER MANUFACTURING REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT -COUNTY REFERRAL Debbie deBesche gave staff's description of the project. Bob Walker stated he understood that the project does not fit the current zoning and land use plan. He stated that the property would be located adjacent to a turf farm area. He commented that this project can not go into an existing industrial zoned area and have the water to grow 20 acres of turf. Member Edwards asked if it was not financially feasible to locate within the City. Mr. Walker stated he can not afford to buy within the commercial use. Member Edwards asked if Woodward Governor used City -treated water. April 25, 1988 Page 19 0 Paul Eckman stated Woodward Governor uses water from the Sherwood Lateral Ditch. Mr. Walker stated he thought they used wells. Member Kern asked what provoked the need for I -Industrial zoning. Mr. Walker stated he plans to build a larger site and around the building would be a turf site. This would require the I -Industrial zoning. Member Crews asked if the turf farm was an agriculturally related industry. Debbie deBesche stated it was close but the area surrounding the property was still FA farming. Member Edwards asked if it would be an agricultural use if Mr. Walker wanted to constrect an under glass carnation farm. Debbie deBesche stated this would be an agricultural use. Tom Peterson stated this was a difficult judgment call on the part of staff. A large percentage of what Mr. Walker would be doing would be considered agri- culturally related. Member Kern stated the main concern was not necessarily what Mr. Walker was proposing but with the fact that the industrial zoning resides with the land. He inquired about the nature of the manufacturing. Mr. Walker stated the manufacturing was light and clean. He indicated inside storage was required for the product. Member Kern inquired about the noise or fumes that would be generated. Mr. Walker stated there was virtually no noise and the painting operations would have to meet the required standards. Tom Peterson commented that staff wanted to bring to the Board's attention that, if the use was abandoned or changed, the Board could have the opportu- nity to review the area again. This would give everyone a higher level of confidence regarding the project. Member Strom stated the proposed use could be interpreted as an agricultural use. He indicated he would be in favor of recommending approval of this use if there was some mechanism attached to insure re-evaluation in the event of abandonment or change. Member Kern stated that he was not sure how to phrase the concerns of the Board in the form of a recommendation to the County. April 25, 1988 Page 20 t Paul Eckman stated that since the Board was making a recommendation to the County, it could be left up to them to decide if they have the power or authority to approve this land use. He asked if this cannot be done, would the Board still be recommending approval. Member Crews stated that if this could not be done, the Board would like to look at the project again. Member Edwards asked if there was a way to recommend with a variance or create a different designation. Member Kern stated the change in zoning was the issue being addressed. He added he was concerned about the future uses. Member Brown asked how many employees would be required. Mr. Walker stated he has 40 employees at the present time. These employees work on one shift. Member Brown commented that Mr. Walker had found his needs outgrew the current facility. She asked how the new facility would accommodate his needs in the next five years. Mr. Walker stated the project has allowed for expansion. He commented that he anticipates 60 to 75 employees within the next 3 to 4 years. Member Brown commented that Mr. Walker had previously stated the product was not shipped or received by rail. She asked if the product was transported by truck. Mr. Walker stated that this was correct. He stated that he projected three to four shipments per day. Member Edwards asked if Mr. Walker could apply for a variance based on the hardship of not being able to utilize the building to its fullest extent and still retain the FA zoning. Paul Eckman stated it was hard to give an opinion on what the County would do. But if the property were within the City, and Mr. Walker was asking for a variance due to some hardship in terms of the use, a standard subdivision variance could be granted. Tom Peterson stated the variances run with the land, not the individual owner. Member Kern stated there was a reluctance with approving this application because the industrial designation could mean anything later on. April 25, 1988 r Page 21 Member Kern moved to recommend the approval of the Walker Manufacturing Rezoning and Preliminary Plat - County Referral with the intent that it be returned for referral if the County can not assure us that the project would not return to the Board if any changes in use, intensity or ownership occurred. Member Strom seconded. Member Crews stated he was in support of the project because he felt it is agriculturally related. Member Brown stated she felt this was an industrial use. Member Strom stated that if the area was developed for single family units, there would be more traffic generated than what would be created from this project. Member Kern stated that he would not have made the motion to recommend approval to City Council if he felt the area would become an industrial site. Motion passed 4-3. Members Edwards and Brown and Chairperson O'Dell voted no. OTHER BUSINESS Tom Peterson noted that a work session meeting on Wednesday, May 18, 1988, at 5:00 p.m. in the CIC room, would be held to discuss the Downtown Plan draft. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m.