Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 02-01-1994 . . . MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 1, 1994 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Cindy Lemm, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Brian Stumpf, and Richard Carlson Members Absent: None Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Cindy Lemm at 7:01p.m. 2. A motion was made by Brian Stumpf and seconded by Jon Bogart to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held January 4, 1994. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Hearing---Consideration of a variance to Section 3-9 E: 2 (b) ii of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which would allow display of two additional premise identification signs. Applicant. Holidav Stationstores. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained Holiday Stationstores' request to be allowed three premise identification signs on their building exterior walls. The plan as proposed does not show any product identification signs in addition to the three proposed premise identification signs. The ordinance allows two product identification signs and premise identification sign in addition to a freestanding pylon sign. Holiday Stationstores' request does not exceed the maximum square footage that would be allowed, that being 100 sq ft. Chairperson Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing. Mark Nelson, representing Holiday Stationstores, questioned the existing sign ordinance by today's standards where theirs would be a unique situation, that being frontage on Highway 25, West 7th Street, and also Walnut Street. With the ordinance being specific to one premise identification sign, Holiday Stationstores is stuck to only specific wall on which to display the Holiday Stationstore identification sign. Mr. Nelson explained in his request that with the unique situation where they are located and the chances of additional properties requesting this are probably very slim. So if the Planning Commission would be looking at an ordinance amendment to allow situations with buildings where they have more than two public right-of-ways which serve their property, they should be allowed to be granted additional signage to display their business fronting each of these public right-of-ways. Page 1 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/1/94 Chairperson Cindy Lemm then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for discussion amongst Planning Commission members. The discussion brought up by Commission members was as follows. The existing Flickers business location being allowed to have more signs than what the ordinance allows. Staff responded that Flickers had gone through two or three different variance requests to allow the additional wall signage. The signage as proposed does appear to be a much cleaner use of the signage in relationship to the size of the building and in its location. There should be no change needed, as one pylon sign and one wall sign should be sufficient to advertise your business name at your site. There being no further discussion amongst Planning Commission members, a motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Carlson to table the variance request to Section 3-9 E: 2 (b) ii of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, which would allow display of two additional premise identification signs for the City staff to research a possible ordinance amendment which would allow certain businesses with more than two public right-of-ways which serve their properties to be allowed additional premise identification signs. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Public Hearing---Consideration of a variance request which would allow two curb cuts where street frontage is less than 250 ft. Applicant. Libertv Savings. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained Liberty Savings' request to be allowed two curb cuts along existing street frontage having less than the minimum allowed by ordinance, that being 125 ft of street frontage along a public right-of-way per curb cut. O'Neill highlighted on the overhead transparency the proposed alternates that the City staff had come up with in relationship to the ingress/egress from the proposed remodeled location for the new Liberty Savings building off of East Broadway. Alternative #1 was to create a right-in only off of westbound East Broadway and a right-out onto westbound East Broadway, and allow two-way traffic on site out to Palm Street. Alternative #2 was to place a curb cut in the center of the two proposed driveway curb cuts to allow a right-in off of westbound East Broadway and a right-out onto westbound East Broadway. Alternative #3 was to leave the curb cut in place where the one is proposed to service the parking lot with the drive-through drive area to be redesigned to utilize this same curb cut for a right-in only off of westbound East Broadway and a right-out onto westbound East Broadway. Alternative #3 was to utilize the two new proposed curb cuts as proposed to allow a right- in off of westbound East Broadway into the parking lot and a right-out out Page 2 Planning Commission Minutes - 2/1/94 . of the existing parking lot onto westbound East Broadway and a right-out of the drive-through onto westbound East Broadway. Alternative #4 was to allow the two curb cuts as proposed which would allow crossing traffic to cross eastbound East Broadway and go eastbound on East Broadway or to go westbound on East Broadway. Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Braggleman, representing Liberty Savings, introduced the design team of Don Miller, President of Miller Construction, and Mr. Stuart Bailey, Miller Construction's staff architect. Mr. Braggleman highlighted the utilization of the proposed design as presented allows the customers to choose to go right out of the drive-through and the parking lot westbound onto East Broadway, or it also allows the customer to cross the center median and go eastbound on East Broadway out of the drive-through curb cut and also out of the parking lot curb cut. It also allows the customer in the parking lot to go from the parking lot into the drive.through driving aisle to proceed through the drive-through lane. The site plan allows for customers to enter only from Palm Street into their building site to go through the drive-through aisle or out into the parking lot. . Mr. Braggleman explained Liberty Savings' position in Monticello. Liberty Savings has experienced a considerable amount of growth in the mortgage department service out of their Liberty Savings location in Monticello. It is the intent of Liberty Savings to preferably stay in a downtown location rather than go out to a new site and build a new building. Liberty Savings has spent a substantial number of dollars of investment into their downtown location in St. Cloud off of Division Street and would, therefore, like to put a substantial investment into the acquisition and demolition of a portion of the existing former funeral home business building and totally remodel the interior and the exterior of the building to more resemble a savings and loan business building. At this time, Liberty Savings is not proposing to get into the banking business, but they are looking at that as an option. That is the reason for the drive-through portion of the building to be added onto the existing building. It approximately takes two years from initial application until you actually receive approval from a federal deposit insurance company to establish a banking facility at this proposed location. . Chairperson Cindy Lemm then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for comments from the Planning Commission members. Commission members dealt at great length trying to come up with a proposed solution to accommodate Liberty Savings' development need in relationship to what the minimum requirements of the ordinance would be. Page 3 . . . Planning Commission Minutes ~ 2/1/94 Therefore, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Brian Stumpf to recommend the alternative utilizing a proposed driveway curb cut for the parking lot to be a right~in only westbound off of East Broadway and a right~out only westbound on East Broadway. The drive~through to have a right-out only onto East Broadway. Motion to approve variance based on the finding that two driveway access points are acceptable due to the fact that one of the driveway access points is limited to one way out traffic only. With this proposed alternative, it should limit the congestion in this area. It is further recommended that the recommendation be referred to the County Engineering Department for their final design approval. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Public HearinghConsideration of a 12~ft variance to Section 3~9: C7 of the zoning ordinance. which would allow a sign to be set back 3 ft from the right-of-way. Applicant. Liberty Savings. AND 6. Public Hearing-~Consideration of a variance to Section 3~9: D2 of the zoning ordinance which would allow a non~conforming sign to be changed to another non-conforming sign. Applicant. Liberty Savings. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained Liberty Savings' site plan, which includes development of a pylon sign proposed to be located 3 ft from the Broadway right~of-way. The ordinance requires the pylon sign to be located no closer than 15 ft from the public right-of~way. The existing sign that was used in conjunction with the funeral home use provides the best location according to Liberty Savings to provide the best visibility for their site. Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Betterman, representing Liberty Savings, questioned some existing signs in the downtown locations where the signs are being allowed to be constructed closer than 15 ft from the public right~of~way. Cindy Lemm then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission members. Planning Commission members recognized Mr. Betterman's statement that there are other signs which have been allowed to be placed closer to the property line. However, the Liberty Savings proposed request would have a larger sign square footage than the maximum allowed, that being 50 sq ft, but would meet the proposed 18-ft maximum height. City staff proposed that the Planning Commission members look at an ordinance amendment that would be similar to the ordinance amendment that was done to address signage along Highway 25. That signage related to the amount of street Page 4 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/1/94 frontage which abutted the public right-of-way to get the maximum that would be allowed, that being 100 sq ft where the minimum that would be allowed is 50 sq ft. Therefore, a motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Martie to table the consideration of a 12-ft variance request to Section 3-9: C7 of the zoning ordinance, which would allow a sign to be set back 3 ft from the public right-of-way, and to table the consideration of a variance request to Section 3-9: D2 of the zoning ordinance, which would allow a non- conforming sign to be changed to another non-conforming sign. Motion carried unanimously. Additional Information Items 1. Chairperson Cindy Lemm read a letter which she would like to have distributed to Council members at their next regularly scheduled meeting regarding their position for an appointment to the Planning Commission. Cindy felt she had done a respectable job in her position as a Planning Commission member and also as Chairperson of the Monticello Planning Commission and felt that should not be counted against her as criteria for Planning Commission member reappointments. 2. The next regular scheduled meeting is proposed to be for 'l'uesday, March 1, 1994, at 7 p.m. It was the consensus of the five Planning Commission members present that that be the next date for the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. 3. There being no further business, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Richard Martie to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Ga y Ariderson Zoning Administrator Page 5