Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 06-09-1981 MINUTES . REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, June 9, 1981 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, John Bondhus, Bill Burke, Dick Martie Loren Klein. Members Absent: Ed Schaffer. I-A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 12, 1981. A motion was made by Bondhus, seconded by Burke with a unanimous vote to accept the minutes of the May 12, 1981 meeting. 1. Public Hearing - Subdivision Request - Mel Wolters. Mel wolters presented his subdivision plans as proposed. He stated that he would be willing to alter the lot sizes and configuration in order to accommodate the city's request for possible further easements for a frontage road and possible access to property to the west of his subdivision. . Mr. Wolters also stated that he would be willing to deed the low land area of his parcel of property to the city for drainage purposes, however, he would like to see a covenant placed on that property which would not allow future development of that property to buildable lots. That is; he was concerned that the property not be filled and thereby the wild life lose its home. Mr. Wolters was requesting that his subdivision be allowed to be developed without sewer and water improvements. He would like the subdivision to be able to provide its own wells and septic tanks, thereby, possibly creating property that would be less expensive for development and attract those businesses which could not afford possibly to purchase land where all the improvements were installed. The Planning Commission chose to take Mr. Wolters comments and their comments to the planner for his consideration and recommendation to be returned on July 14, 1981's meeting. 2. Public Hearing - Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit Request - Methodist Church/Lindberg. Pam Lindberg presented her request for a conditional use and rezoning of the property where the united Methodist Church is located. Specifi- cally, that is; Lots 8, 9, and 10, of Block 19, of the original plat, City of Monticello. . - 1 - Planning Commission Minutes - 6/9/81 . Mrs. Lindberg is proposing to open the Pumpkin Patch Nursery School in the lower level of the educational unit of the Methodist Church, and in order to do so must have a conditional use after the property is rezoned. Also, there would be the possibility of amending the ordinance to allow a nursery school as a conditional use in an I-l zone. If a nursery school were allowed in an I-I zone as a condi- tional use, possibly some strict consideration should be placed on granting that nursery school as a conditional use in that zone. Mr. Jim Ridgeway, owner of Wrightco, stated his objection to the possibility of a nursery school being located so close to his plant. He was concerned that small children might wander away from the general area of the school and possibly become injured by the machinery and big trucks at the Wrightco Plant. Mr. Ridgeway also felt that the zoning change request was not compatible to the gen- eral zoning of the area. . Rev. Douglas Nicholas, pastor of the Methodist Church, was present and expressed the church's views that they have a commitment to the use of the church facility for the community. He also stated that the church is not interested in a permanent situation with the Pumpkin Patch, but rather is interested in only a two to five year intern project with Pumpkin Patch until they can find a more per~ manent facility. As a result of the conversation between the applicant and the Planning Commission, it was decided to hold a public hearing at the July 14, 1981 meeting, at which time consideration ~ill be given to making a nursery school allowed as a conditional use within an I-l zone, and placing guidelines upon that use as a conditional use within an I-I zone. 3. Public Hearing - sideyard Set Back Variance - Fred Culp. Fred Culp, who owns Lot 11, Block 3, Anders Wilhelm Estates, was present to make an application for a sideyard variance of four feet to allow a six foot sideyard set back in an R-l zone, where a ten foot sideyard set back is required. His request for a sideyard set back of less than ten feet is similar to many others made in the Anders Wilhelm subdivision which are related to the property lines not being at a right angle to the street, thus, the houses take more of the property than would normally be used because they are built parallel to the street rather than being parallel to the sideyard property lines. . - 2 - Planning Commission Minutes - 6/9/81 . There were no objections from the abutting property owners to this variance request. A motion was made by Martie, seconded by Bondhus and unanimously approved. The appeal process to a variance was explained to Mr. Culp. 4. Public Hearing - A Variance for a Sign - Dave Jameson. Dave Jameson was present to request a variance from the Monticello Sign Ordinance which allows an identification sign in an R-3 zone which does not exceed two square feet in area. Mr. Jameson requested a sign of approximately eight square feet, which would be approximately nine feet in height. This sign would be approximately four times the size of an identification sign allowed in an R-3 zone. This request was based on the desire to make the property that the Jamesons have more visible to visitors who might be coming to see their restored homes, etc. . The sign would not actually be located on the Jameson property, but would be located on a parcel of land owned by the school district. The Jamesons were able to negotiate approval from the school district to place the sign on their property with a contingency that the school be held harmless in case of damage to any individual because of the sign or any damage to the sign. A motion was made by Martie and seconded by Bondhus to grant this variance request contingent upon no other signs being requested in the future and that the agreement be made between the school district and the Jamesons as requested by the district. All voted in favor. The appeal procedure was explained to Mr. Jameson. 5. Public Hearinq - Set Back Variance - John praught. Recently, Mr. John Praught was granted a variance to build a second garage on his property within five feet of the rear property line. However, during the construction mistaken in the property corners built his new building five feet County Highway 75 right-of-way. Ritze Manor and is zoned R-l). of Mr. Praught's garage, he was of his property and inadvertently, over the property line onto the (The property is Lot 29, Block 2, - 3 - . . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 6/9/81 After discovering that his building was five feet across the property line into the right-of-way of County Highway 75, rather than five feet onto his property, Mr. Praught contacted Mr. Larry Koening of the Wright County Engineer's Office. Mr. Koening indicated that if the city were willing to go along with a variance allowing him to build to the property line, that they would be willing to allow the five foot over build onto the right-of-way provided that if in the future, it were necessary to move that garage building or to do work along that right-of-way, that it would be the owners responsibility for removal of the building or damages which might occur to it. That responsibility would have to be by a signed agreement which would be contingent upon the property and all subsequent property owners. There were two letters presented at the Planning Commission Meeting from those who received notice of the public hearing, stating that they objected to this variance being granted. A motion was made by Burke and seconded by Bondhus to grant this variance request, con- tingent upon John Praught providing the county and the city with a document which would be contingent upon the property and all sub- sequent property owners providing that if, and in the future, if it were necessary to remove that garage building or to do work along that right-of-way, that it would be the owners responsibility for the removal of the building or damages which may be caused to it, and that the city and the county be held harmless in any accident or problems which might occur because of the building being over the property line onto the right-of-way. The appeal procedure was explained to Mr. praught. 6. Public Hearing - Sideyard Set Back Variance - Ron Schluender. Ron Schluender who owns Lot 1, Block 1 of Anders Wilhem Estates, made a request to allow him to build a 24 foot garage upon his property. This garage would come within five feet of the sideyard of his lot. As was the case in item #3, Mr. Schluender needs the variance be- cause of the configuration of the lot and also because of the extra ten foot sideyard set back on the corner side of his lot. A motion was made by Martie and seconded by Burke to grant this variance with all voting in favor. The appeal procedure was explained. - 4 - . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 6/9/81 7. Public Hearing - A Variance Set Back - Bondhus Tool Company. John Bondhus of the Bondhus Tool Company made an application for a variance to build a building within an I-I zone using a 22 foot set back rather than the 40 feet which is required by ordinance. This property is located east of the existing Bondhus Tool Company building and lies between County Road 75 and the railroad. Because of the pie shape of the lot and the narrow amount of land; that is, 86 feet between the railroad right-of-way and highway right- of-way, it is necessary to make this variance request for a 22 foot set back on both sides rather than 40 foot set back. It is because of the I-l zoning that a 40 foot set back is required. If the 40 foot set back requirement were adhered to strictly, in the case of this property, it would only allow for the construction of a 6 foot wide building to be erected on the 86 foot wide parcel of land. without a variance of this type, this parcel of land could easily be considered as unbuildable and worthless. A motion was made by Martie and seconded by Burke, with all voting in favor of granting this variance. The appeal process was explained. 8. Unfinished Business from the Regular Meeting of May 12, 1981. Further discussion was held regarding the proposal, as proposed by the City Counci~ to consider amending the ordinances to require that buildings of three or more stories within the community be allowed only as a conditional use, thus, giving the city some control over the fire safety within those taller buildings. There was concern that if a three story building were allowed, at random, without some council control, it might become a requirement that the city purchase a hook and ladder truck in the future in order that insurance rates might not be affected. A motion was.made by Martie, seconded by Burke and given unanimous consent provided that the ordinance be amended only if the council felt that by not amending the ordinance, it would require the need for a new hook and ladder truck possibly, or that it would possibly cause a rate increase for the insurance premiums within the city. M et 'ng Adjo;rAed... ' ~ L en D. Kle1.n Zoning Administrator - 5 -