PL PACKET 10192004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes "Draft" September 21, 2004 Page 5 1 being used. She noted that if they rezone to an ROS district and then the addition of funeral 2 homes is a concern. She asked if there is a crematorium on the site. Mr. Stoick stated that 3 currently they do not have a crematorium on the site. She stated that it should be made clear 4 what the building types mean. She noted that in the presentation they mentioned several building 5 types and asked that they clearly define the building types. Mr. Stoick stated that they would be 6 happy to assist the City in defining the building types noting that the wording is ultimately the 7 City's responsibility. He reviewed the variety of functions provided by the funeral home with the 8 Commission. He stated they want to be sure that the City understands what they term as a 9 funeral home. 10 11 Chair Stromgren asked if preparation is the only function now located offsite. Mr. Stoick 12 confirmed that currently that is the only offsite function. Chair Stromgren asked if the chapel is 13 actively used for services or visitation. He also asked for clarification of the size. Mr. Stoick 14 clarified the size, layout and intended function for the funeral home areas. 15 16 Chair Stromgren referenced the text amendment that would allow funeral homes as a conditional 17 use in the ROS noting that currently crypts and mausoleums are already included as allowed 18 accessory structures. He asked if any of the Commissioners have any issues with making this an 19 approved conditional use. 20 21 Commissioner Tillman stated that it appears that this would be a more active spot adding that 22 conditional use might be a good way to go noting the unique situations. 23 24 Chair Stromgren agreed with Commissioner Young's concern regarding the wording and text 25 change allowing the conditional use is important and suggested that they give it some thought 26 before coming back to the Commission. 27 28 Chair Stromgren reviewed items within the conditional use including proximity to residential 29 areas and structures,nature of function of adjacent uses in zoning. He stated that he was very 30 surprised to see the proposal to demolish the existing gatehouse/administration building adding 31 that the question of whether or not a conditional use of one of the factors considered listed in the 32 amendment is the preservation of historical or cultural elements should be a part of the verbiage. 33 He stated that the City currently has six to ten historic buildings left adding that this would wipe 34 out 10-20%of the historic buildings in the area in addition to it being a loss of a local icon along 35 the parkway. 36 37 Mr. Stoick asked if the building is registered with the City as a historical building. Chair 38 Stromgren stated that it is not registered with the City as a historical building. He further 39 explained that the City does not have any registered building. He stated that the Commissioners 40 should keep this under consideration noting that this is not a small concern. He asked if there 41 were any other investigations as to how it could be used. 42 43 Mr. Stoick assured the Commission that they do not want to see it go if it serves its function. He 44 stated that they did review other areas of the cemetery and reviewed with the Commission. He 45 stated that the existing building does not provide accessibility and is no longer efficient. He