Planning Commission

Spearfish Planning Commission Agenda Tuesday, February 4th, 2020 - 3:00 PM Meeting Location: City Hall City Council Chambers, 625 N Fifth Street, Spearfish SD 57783 A. Call To Order B. Roll Call C. Approve the Minutes from January 21, 2020 D. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest E. Items for Action 1. Request: Amend the C-1 Central Commercial parking requirements Location: C-1 zoning districts Applicant: City of Spearfish Action: Provide comment and input; no action required 2. Request: Approve a voluntary annexation and change of zoning from County AG- 1 to City AG. Location: 6025 E Colorado Boulevard Applicant: John Bartelson Action: Hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council F. City Council Update G. Public Comment Public comments are welcome at this time, however, no action will be taken. H. Adjournment ADA Compliance: The City of Spearfish fully subscribes to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you desire to attend this public meeting and are in need of special accommodations, please notify the Building and Development Office at 642-1335 and 24 hours prior to the meeting so that appropriate auxiliary aids and services are available.  Spearfish Planning Commission Regular Session Minutes January 21st, 2020 The Spearfish Planning Commission met in regular session on Tuesday, January 21th, 2020 at 3:00 pm in the council chambers at Spearfish City Hall. Chairman Kruskamp called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm. Roll call was taken with the following members present: Toby Bordewyk, Barbara Zwetzig, Greg Kruskamp, Meghan Byrum, Drew Skjoldal, and Bob Meyer. Absent: Larry Vavruska. Also present: City Planner Jayna Watson, Assistant City Planner Daniel Van Holland, and City Attorney Ashley McDonald. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Zwetzig moved, Skjoldal seconded and all voted to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday January 7th, 2020 as presented. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Kruskamp called for any potential conflicts of interest to be identified. No conflicts were expressed. 1. Request: Approve an update to Appendix A Zoning, Article V. Section 6. Sign Regulations Location: City-wide Applicant: City of Spearfish Watson provided an overview of the proposed sign regulations and presented changes to the proposal from the previous meeting. Watson presented concerns and recommendations brought by the Business Community from a January 15th input session. Minor language changes and specific regulations for signs posted by new subdivisions were requested by the Commissioners. Meyer expressed concern regarding interior signs placed in windows and viewable from outside. Chair Kruskamp opened the floor for public discussion at 3:20 p.m. no comment was provided and the public hearing closed at 3:21 p.m. Bordewyk moved, Zwetzig seconded and the Planning Commission voted 5-1 (Meyer dissenting) to recommend approval including a new regulation allowing 2 signs at 20 square feet with no lighting to be allowed at the entrance of a subdivision with a sign permit and revising the word “advertising” to “information” in D.6.d.(2). 2. Request: Amend the C-1 Central Commercial parking requirements Location: C-1 zoning districts Applicant: City of Spearfish Watson explained the purpose behind the proposed changings to parking regulations within the C-1 zoning district and gave an overview of the changes, the design guidelines, and the proposed review process. Discussion was held on the following topics: 1.) the use of County assessed values for the mandatory criteria; 2.) the impact of parking on surrounding residential neighborhoods; 3.) holding a public hearing with the Planning Commission for C-1 redevelopment plans; 4.) creating criteria for energy efficiency; 5.) and making the improvements to the right-o-of- way a mandatory criteria. Chair Kruskamp opened the floor for public discussion. The following persons provided comment: Jessica Dale, Jared Capp, John Dale, and Dr. Rachel Headley. 3. Request: Approve a voluntary annexation and change of zoning Location: 6025 E Colorado Boulevard Applicant: John Bartelson Jerry Myrtleson spoke for John Bartleson, who was not present, and discussed the applicant’s interest in being annexed. Watson explained staff analysis and recommended the Planning Commission set a public hearing for February 4th, 2020. Meyer moved, Zwetzig seconded and all voted to set a public hearing for February 4th, 2020. ELECTION FOR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Skjodal nominated Kruskamp for chair, Zwetzig seconded and all voted aye. Zwetzig nominated Skjodal for vice chair, Byrum seconded and all voted aye. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Watson reported on the items that were scheduled to go before the City Council on Tuesday January 21th, 2020, following the Planning Commission meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Joe Jorgenson provided his input on Commission procedure, the sign ordinance update, the annexation of the Bartelson property and the C-1 parking requirements. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the commission, Kruskamp adjourned the meeting at approximately 4:20 p.m.  PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE MEMORANDUM February 4th, 2020 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jayna Watson, City Planner RE: C-1 Parking Update/Redevelopment Incentive The goal of this update is to offer an incentive for property redevelopment by eliminating the required off street parking in this zoning district for certain redevelopment proposals that meet specified criteria. Because the applicant may voluntarily choose to follow these optional criteria, the standards recommended are specific. If an applicant is unable or unwilling to meet these standards, the standard off-street parking requirements would apply. The Comprehensive Plan lays out land use strategies for the contiguous city, referring to all built out locations within the city connected to each other via infrastructure. This redevelopment proposal forwards two of these strategies: Encourage the adaptive re-use of existing structures and under-utilized lands to raise the visual quality and vitality in the community, reduce sprawl, and make efficient use of existing community infrastructure, AND encourage preservation of trees located in public streets and parks as well as on private property. Where property lacks vegetation, introduce new trees. At the last meeting, the Commission reviewed the current staff recommendations. Discussion was held regarding whether or not to have a Planning Commission hearing before the City Council hearing, whether the right-of-way improvements ought to be mandatory, adding criteria for ecologically friendly projects, and how valuations will be determined for G.1.a.2. It was also discussed that the an evaluation of the impact a change in parking requirements would have on nearby and adjoining residential neighborhoods may be necessary. See new criteria a.4, as this would be similar to how findings must be made on conditional use permits. The following is an updated concept for the C-1 zoning redevelopment incentive. Attached is an explanation of the landscaping point system, the updated text, a zoning map highlighting the impacted area and an update to the proposed design guidelines for the mandatory criteria.. Staff seeks the Commission’s input on these concepts and proposals. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan - Landscape points assessment Of the “C” Commercial Districts, only C-2 and C-3 zoning specifically states that landscape is required. C-1 zoning does not mention landscape requirements. Note the differences below in how this development standard is written in each district: C-1 Section 5.F: Minimum off-street parking and loading requirements per city code. C-2 Section 7.F. Minimum off-street parking, loading, and landscape requirements per city code. C-3 Section 7a.F. Minimum off-street parking, loading, and landscape requirements per city code. Owners that do not wish to provide any landscape under the redevelopment program currently are not required to do so under the C-1 zoning requirements. Owners that do wish to add landscape to their site could receive credit for any type of landscape provided. For example: 50 x 140 lot = 7,000 sq. ft 7,000 sq. ft Minus 5,000 sq. ft. for building footprint ____________________________ = 2,000 points required for landscape Landscape points options Large Tree – 2000 points each Medium Trees – 1000 points each Small Trees – 500 points each Shrubs – 250 points each Ground cover other than grass – 100 points per every square yard Grass - 10 points per every square yard Opaque Hedge – 5 feet in height x 15 feet long – 500 points. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 2 Section 5. C1 Central Commercial District. A. General description. B. Primary uses permitted C. Uses eligible for conditional use permit D. Area regulations E. Height regulations F. Minimum off-street parking and loading requirements per city code, or according to the C1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan. G. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan. 1. For any new or renovated structure, the required parking for non-residential land uses may be reduced under the following criteria. a. Mandatory Criteria: 1. Building design will incorporate features as described in the document titled: City of Spearfish Design Guidelines for the C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan. 2. Site structures must have an increase in valuation that is the greater than 200% from the previous years assessed value. Building valuation and value of additions will be verified by Building Official or based on building permit information. 3. Existing public right of way must be improved with new on-street parking spaces or re-striping of existing on-street spaces that meets 10% of the required off street parking requirements. 4. The proposal will not result in any unusual or unreasonable parking impacts to properties lying beyond the area proposed in the redevelopment plan. b. Optional Criteria – In addition to the mandatory criteria above, a minimum of two of the following must be satisfied: 1. Existing public right of way is improved with new on street parking spaces that meets 20% of the off street parking requirement. 2. Existing sidewalks are widened to a minimum of 8’ 3. New street trees provided at the rate of 1 per 50 feet of site frontage. 4. Provide landscaping per city code 5. Utilize ecologically sustainable designs and technologies in the project, such as, but not limited to: i. water conservation ii. energy efficiency iii. renewable energy iv. rainwater management systems. 6. Other criteria (TBD). 2. Review and approval process. Upon receiving a complete application, the zoning administrator will place the request on the Planning Commission’s agenda and the Commission will forward their recommendation to the City Council for a final decision. a. All redevelopment incentive plans require a public hearing with both the Planning Commission and, upon the Commission’s recommendation, the City Council. Notice of C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 3  the public hearings will be provided to all properties within 140 feet of the proposed development property lines and postmarked 10 days before the hearing. Notice will also be published 10 days before the public hearings in an official publication. b. When a proposal includes a street frontage not adjoining the applicant’s property, the owner of the property on the non-adjoining street frontage must authorize the application. c. After the City Council approves a Redevelopment Incentive Plan, a change to the Plan that results in major building modification or alteration of the approval criteria shall require a new public hearing by the Planning Commission and City Council. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 4 C1 Zone C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 5  City of Spearfish Design Guidelines for the C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Summary - In exchange for reducing the requirements for off-street parking spaces on private property, the zoning ordinance refers to these design standards that will guide decision making for if the building qualifies for the parking reduction. Key objectives of these guidelines – Provide a benchmark for what level of building design and construction is expected. Design features - Proposals for redevelopment will be assessed in the following areas:  Overall design expectations  Exterior finishes and colors  Building entries and window arrangement  Variations in exterior wall alignment  Roof forms Overall design expectations The forms and styles of buildings can range from dramatic and contemporary to conservative and traditional designs. No specific style is preferred over another, and design creativity is strongly encouraged. Buildings can either blend into the setting, or they can stand out from it. Community vitality is achieved when there is both consistency and contrast in the built environment. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 6 Exterior finishes and colors – interest can be added to a building simply by introducing a change of materials, a change in direction of the materials, or an accent finish. The following are examples: C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 7 Building entries and window arrangement – Building entries should have features that identify this location as a distinct place apart from the rest of the structure. Awnings, canopies and changes in the exterior wall features are examples of ways to orient people toward building entrances. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 8 Window placement and size can provide creative interest in a building. For buildings with long exterior walls, a variation in window sizes and shapes can help reduce these long wall expanses. Awnings and canopies over windows provide visual rhythm and interest as well. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 9 Variations in exterior wall alignment – shifts in the vertical or horizontal alignment of exterior walls reduce the apparent height or length of a building, even if the shift is not significant. For example, the exterior wall finish on the first story of a two story building could be thicker than the floor above it, or the second story could overhang the lower floor by a short distance. This adds visual grounding to the overall building appearance. This same method could be applied to the alignment of a wall. C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 10 Roof forms – A large, overwhelming roof can be minimized by introducing different roof planes. Flat roofs should have different parapet heights. Hip and gable roofs should have intermediate gables, dormers and similar intersecting rooflines to break down a top-heavy visual effect. Shed roofs can be layered, intersecting roofs. Varied parapet heights on a flat roof Shed roof Hip Roof with Dormers Gable Roof with intermediate gables C-1 Redevelopment Incentive Plan Page 11  Spearfish Planning Commission Staff Report Meeting Location: City Council Chamber 625 Fifth Street, Spearfish SD 57783 Staff Contact: Jayna Watson, City Planner, 605-717-1122; jayna.watson@cityofspearfish.com Daniel Van Holland, Assistant City Planner, 605-717-1126; daniel.vanholland@cityofspearfish.com MEETING Tuesday, February 4th, 2020 at 3 P.M. DATE AND TIME: APPLICANT: John Bartelson REQUEST: Approve a voluntary annexation and change of zoning ACTION: Hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council CURRENT A-1 General Agriculture (County Zoning) ZONING: PROPOSED AG (City Zoning) ZONING: LOCATION: Colorado Boulevard City limit line Elkhorn Ridge Campground 6025 E Colorado Boulevard This request will annex 39.49 acres into the city, allowing the applicant SUMMARY: to hook up to a water main in Colorado Boulevard Page 1 Spearfish Planning Commission Staff Report Meeting Date: February 4th, 2020 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY:  Property is currently zoned in county as A-1 General Agriculture  Site currently not connected to city infrastructure  Contiguous to Vieland property  City limits are located north, across Colorado Boulevard and also border the property to the east. PROPOSAL DETAILS: There is no immediate plan for development except for making a water connection. This proposal would bring 39.49 acres of contiguous land into city limits and allow the owner to connect the property to a city water main serving Elkhorn Ridge to the east. STAFF ANALYSIS: Infrastructure The owner will tap the water main along Colorado Boulevard with an 8” pipe then reduce to what size is needed to serve the property. This would allow the city to serve other properties and prevent a proliferation of smaller taps. If sewer services were needed in the future, the developer would need to build a gravity flow to the Elkhorn Ridge lift station. Comprehensive Plan This property falls under the “Developing City” definition of the Comprehensive plan. Per the Comprehensive Plan, the city will: Include lands that could be annexed or potentially served by future city infrastructure in the 3 mile extra territory platting jurisdiction. The land to be annexed is immediately adjacent to city limits, thus falling within the 3 mile extra territorial jurisdiction and is actively seeking to be served by City infrastructure. Annexation of this property is in line with the City’s strategies for the Developing City in the Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Property owners within 200 feet and inside city limits have been notified of public hearing, notice was also published in the City’s official newspaper. The staff report was submitted to Lawrence County for review and comment. No comment received. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve ATTACHMENTS: Page 3 - Images of the Property Page 2 Spearfish Planning Commission Staff Report Meeting Date: February 4th, 2020 Colorado Boulevard Page 3 Spearfish Planning Commission Staff Report Meeting Date: February 4th, 2020