Heavy debate and audience participation characterized the Ames Planning and Zoning Commission meeting Wednesday night.

The commission approved a special-use permit that would allow Kirk Hauge, owner of Hauge’s Salvage, to expand his demanufacturing (recycling) of white goods (appliances) at 610 S. Dayton Ave.

Hauge wants to be able to receive two truckloads each week of appliances and disassemble and recycle the metal parts, all while removing potentially hazardous materials such as “refrigerants, mercury-containing devices and PCB capacitors.”

This operation is in compliance with all Iowa Department of Natural Resources requirements, said Steve Osguthorpe, director of Ames Planning and Housing. The main concern of the commission was the 30 feet surrounding the concrete platform where disassembly would take place, as it is a heavily forested area.

Hauge said there will be an old fuel tank in his operation that will house all capacitors and mercury switches, and the concrete platform will soak up the most of spilled refrigerants. The rest will go into the air.

“There might be some visibility from Dayton; I’m not sure pending on this packet as you mentioned that the existing vegetation may not be sufficient,” Osguthorpe said.

The motion to approve the special permit passed unanimously, but with a planned implementation of a screen behind natural vegetation to block visibility of the concrete platform.

Although debate passed rather quickly with the special permit, the second item up for the debate, the amendment to the Land Use Policy Plan to provide exception criteria to the locational criteria for the convenience commercial node was drawn out and included passionate reprisals from two attendees.

This amendment, a recommendation from the Ames City Council, changes language concerning convenience commercial nodes in zoning policies. The language change would allow specifically for nodes within a one-half-mile of a village to develop a grocery store and a convenience store.

Ames Economic Development Commissioner Chuck Jons started the debate by questioning whether this amendment could be considered “spot zoning,” which is illegal, because this amendment would effect Somerset Village.

“Spot zoning, depending on how you use the term, is usually illegal,” Osguthorpe said. “There are situations when spot zoning is not illegal, and that is when you can address or rationalize for the broader public good and not just an individual property owner.”

Wendy White, associate professor of food science and human nutrition, is a property owner in the area of Somerset and voiced a concern that the change in this language would just allow for developing in villages that didn’t need it. She said this amendment would lead to more development in the Somerset area.

“I think that this process is biased to favor developers, and they always get what they want,” White said.

The amendment to the Land Use Policy Plan was passed with a 7 to 1 vote.