Kearney Planning Commission Meeting – January 17, 2020: Multiple Land Use Approvals
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Kearney Planning Commission Meeting – January 17, 2020
The Kearney Planning Commission convened on January 17, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. in City Council Chambers. The commission considered several land use applications, including rezoning, plat approvals, and conditional use permits for properties within the city and its extraterritorial jurisdiction. All items were approved unanimously with conditions as recommended by staff.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Melinda Benson (neighbor) expressed concern about potential groundwater contamination from oil used at the proposed asphalt batch plant. She questioned whether oil would percolate into the soil. Applicant Sean Vontz responded that asphalt oil is thick and sits on top of the soil, and that storage facilities would not have runoff. Staff noted the site is not in the city's wellhead protection area.
Discussion Items
K and S Second Subdivision (Items 5–7)
- Applicant: Mitch Humphrey, representing Mark and Anna Kottmeyer.
- Proposal: Rezone 2.34 acres from AG (Agricultural) to RR-2 (Rural Residential), and approve preliminary and final plat for a single lot (1.1 acres) with a 50-foot road right-of-way dedication. The property is at 8725 17th Avenue, outside city limits but within the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ).
- Key Details: The lot contains an existing house and outbuildings. The Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy (NDEQ) determined that a review was not needed because the structures predate current regulations. Staff found the rezoning compatible with the future land use designation (RE) and the lot compliant with RR-2 standards.
- Public Hearing: No public comments.
- Outcome: Unanimous approval of all three items.
Asphalt Batch Plant Conditional Use Permit (Item 4)
- Applicant: Sean Vontz, Vontz Paving, Inc., for Waters View Inc. Property located south of 11th Street and east of Imperial Avenue, zoned AG.
- Proposal: Conditional use permit (CUP) to operate an asphalt batch plant for temporary, project-based use. The plant would be placed on the same site as a previously approved gravel pit, at least 600 feet from the nearest residence (closest is over 1,200 feet away).
- Key Details: The plant would use bag houses to filter dust; the applicant stated that modern plants minimize smoke and fumes. A slight smell may be noticeable within 1,000 feet, but prevailing winds carry it toward the interstate. The permit duration is two years, starting when equipment is placed, with an option to renew if no valid complaints and continued project needs. Hours of operation: 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., same as resource extraction. Truck routes and road maintenance follow the gravel pit plan.
- Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions as stated in the memo.
- Public Hearing: One speaker (Melinda Benson) expressed groundwater concerns. Vontz and staff addressed these.
- Outcome: Motion to approve with conditions passed unanimously.
Meridian West Second (Items 8–12)
- Applicant: Craig Bennett, Miller & Associates, for 21st Century Investment Co., LLC. Property: northwest corner of 30th Avenue and West Highway 30, within city limits.
- Proposal: Vacate platted utility easements and the existing Meridian West subdivision (Outlot A and lots 1–20); rezone from C-3/PD (General Commercial/Planned Development) to C-3 (General Commercial); and approve preliminary and final plat for five larger lots. A 40-foot private frontage road and utility easement would serve the lots.
- Key Details: The original 2007 plat envisioned multiple smaller lots with condominium-style units; the new plan creates five lots with direct access to Highway 30 and a private drive. The PD overlay was no longer needed because no substantial development occurred. Stormwater detention will be provided on each lot. Commissioner Melissa Scott-Pandorf, also on the board of the adjacent animal shelter, raised concerns about the existing access drive layout; Bennett explained it was designed for tractor-trailer traffic. The private drive will be maintained by the property owner.
- Staff Recommendation: Approval.
- Public Hearing: No public comments.
- Outcome: Unanimous approval of all five items (vacation of easements, vacation of subdivision, rezoning, preliminary plat, final plat).
Turkey Creek Third Subdivision (Items 13–18)
- Applicant: Craig Bennett, Miller & Associates, for Turkey Creek Properties, LLC. Property west of Yanney Avenue and north of Interstate 80, in the ETJ.
- Proposal: A package of six items: (13) vacate utility easements; (14) vacate parts of Turkey Creek Second Subdivision; (15) rezone from RR-1/PD (Rural Residential/Planned Development) to AG (Agricultural) for 23.92 acres; (16) approve a 199.45-acre preliminary plat; (17) approve a final plat for an 8.7-acre lot (Lot 1 and Outlot B); and (18) a conditional use permit for continued sand and gravel mining on 57 acres.
- Key Details: The project aims to expand an existing lake (created by sand and gravel mining) and improve drainage in the area. A bypass channel will be constructed to alleviate flooding. The applicant met with the two adjacent homeowners (Rogers and Gideons), who expressed full support. The new road (Talmadge Street) will be built to public standards and will replace the existing gravel construction road. The CUP is for five years (maximum allowed) with standard conditions: 12-hour operation (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.), road maintenance, and conformance with regulations. Staff noted that the rezoning will terminate the previous development plan only for the area rezoned to AG.
- Staff Recommendation: Approval for all items.
- Public Hearing: No public comments.
- Outcome: Unanimous approval of all six items.
Key Outcomes
- All motions were approved unanimously by the commission members present (Chairperson Dave Malone, Vice-Chair Monte Dakan, and members Joey Cochran, John Rickard, Brent Yaw, Melissa Scott-Pandorf, Jeffery Baker, Jamie Bernu, Kristi Gargan). Roll call votes recorded ayes for each item.
- The meeting adjourned after board member comments and a motion to adjourn.
Notes
- The commission noted that the Nebraska Planning and Zoning Association conference is scheduled for March 4–6, 2020, and members may register at city expense.
- Chairperson Malone thanked staff and commissioners for their assistance.
Meeting Transcript
That is zoned RR2 in the area. The piece that we're talking about we're requesting to zone to RR2 there. As you know, the lots that are developed that are in the city's jurisdiction for that matter, pretty much across the state. Uh, if they're going to have well and septic and they're less than three acres, they have to have the Department of Environment and Energy's approval to satisfy the Title 124 requirements for the separation of the well and septics and those sorts of things. You do have a letter, or at least I presented a letter to the planet or the planning staff from the individuals with the state of Nebraska indicating that their reviews not needed due to the age of the structures. They included the original Kamar house and their review to ensure the they'd cover their bases. It is interesting that any project that is situated where the home or the structure is older than the adoption of their regulations, they don't they they don't take governance over that from the subdivision aspect. So if what I'm saying is that really we didn't have to go through a process where we do percolation tests and the soils tests and those sorts of things. What they will do is, for example, in this situation, should a new buyer come in and decide to put in a new well or rebuild the septic system, then the well or septic installers responsible for addressing that situation. So it's been my recommendation to the staff and and even this commission that maybe we look at the codes and and address that that element such that the state doesn't have to write a letter for every one of these to the city when these small parcels come up that they have no interest in taking care of. But that's kind of a side note. Um the area to be zoned consists of two point three four acres with the resulting lot to the I'm gonna look to the preliminary plat the resulting lot 1.1 acres with a 50 foot of right-of-way dedicated for public road. On this screen, the uh area outlined in red here is about where the house is. There's some other small outbuildings that some of them are fairly portable, I think, uh from the standpoint they've been there a long time, but but uh they're not they're not uh situated such that a like a house with a great foundation and so forth or a basement. I would assume that that someday uh if if there'd be any reconstruction or something or another along there that any building would have to be pushed back behind the setback line as required by your code, but right now it's kind of a legal non-conforming use or something like that. I'm not sure of the exact terminal terminology. Legal non-conforming structure. That's the structure. There you go. So really uh I do have a designation of the flood zone A on the map, but the shading didn't really show up very well on this aerial photo image, but basically all this north area for the most part is in zone A. There's a fenced-in area around the existing house site that sits up on top there of the property, it's on a hill that that's not in zone A. So there's plenty of room should they have to put in a new septic or well or add on to the house or whatever have you to satisfy the front, rear and side yard setbacks in the future. The uh final plat, I guess, would look like that with the resulting lot, the road right-of-way dedication. And essentially, that's my presentation. There isn't really a whole lot to this project. Um it got a little complicated when we had to address some of the state issues or the DEQ issues, but uh that wasn't so bad overall. So, with that said, if you have any questions, I can I can answer them or defer to Colette. Commissioners have any questions for Mr. Humphrey. Um staff, do you have any uh comments? Yep. Um the reason we're here is because this isn't our jurisdiction, it's outside the corporate limits and inside the extraterrestrial or the ETJ. Um they're rezoning the 2.3 acres from AG to R R2. The remaining portion, like Mitch said, will just remain zoned AG and just be put on the farmstead portion, so that's how that kind of stays. When we're looking at it from the staff's finding of facts for support, R R2 zoning is compatible with the future land use NAP designation of RE. The development is consistent with Chapter 18 district R2's zoning purpose. This is exactly what that zoning was made for. The lot is compliant with R R2 zoning district site development regulations in the area in in lot area, lot width, rear yard setback, height, building coverage, and impervious coverage. The development is consistent with uh 2016 comprehensive plan policy that was stated in the memo. Um this subdivision layout is compatible and complements the surrounding rural estates, it's in the same line as them. Um we also will not have a subdivision agreement for this subdivision because it's an already existing one, and um Mitch is right, staff accepts the letter that came from the NDEQ. There's they have no issue with the existing, if they don't have an issue, we don't have an issue. Um so in the end, staff recommends approval for rezoning preliminary plot and final plot as shown in the application and presented today. Thank you. Do any of the commissioners have any questions for staff? Uh this is a hearing. Is there anyone also present who wishes to be heard on these matters? If so, please state your name and address. I don't see any. No.
openpublica.com