Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 11-12-1986 . . . MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION wednesday, November 12, 1986 - 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Richard Carlson, Barbara Koropchak, Joyce Dowling. Members Absent: Richard Martie, Warren Smith. 1 . The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at 7:05 p.m. 2. Motion by Joyce Dowling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to approve the October 14, 1986, Planning Commission meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimouslY. 3. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow a curb cut for a driveway access in excess of the 24-foot maximum driveway width. Applicant, J .M. Oil.. with no one present from J.M. Oil, Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning Commission members the applicant's variance request. Mr. Anderson explained to Commission members that this request was coming to them after the fact, as the applicant already has his curb cut in. Zoning Administrator Anderson explained to Planning Commission members the reason for the variance request which was needed to allow a semi-truck tractor to enter into a driveway access wider than the maximum 24 feet allowed by ordinance. Having heard the background information on the applicant's request from Zoning Administrator Anderson, motion was made by Barbara Koropchak, seconded by Joyce Dowling, to approve the variance request to allow a curb cut for a driveway access in excess of the 24-foot maximum driveway width. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow a house to be constructed within the sideyard setback requirements. Applicant, Rodney Dragsten. with Mr. Dragsten not present at the meeting, zoning Administrator Anderson explained to Planning Commission members the applicant's variance request. Mr. Dragsten had proposed to construct a new house with an attached garage for a total length of 63 feet, 4 inches. With a 10-foot setback on the garage side of this proposed lot, it would need a 3 foot, 4 inch variance on the house side of the newly constructed house. Planning Commission members felt uncomfortable with the applicant's request in that he was trying to build a bigger house than what would fit on the lot. If one is proposing to buy a lot to build a new house, you try and work it within the minimum setbacks, which are required by the City Ordinance. zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, indicated to Planning Commission members he received a letter from Mr. Greg Roden, the current owner of this vacant lot, which Chairperson Richard Carlson then read aloud for public information. Mr. Roden was indicating that he was in objection to the applicant's -1- Planning Commission Minutes - 11/12/86 . variance request in that he has not entered into a purchase agreement on this lot and that he was willing to sell the applicant additional land needed at a fair market price to accommodate his proposed new house and attached garage. Mr. Carlson then closed the public hearing and asked for any additional information from the Planning Commission members. There being no additional information, motion was made by Joyce Dowling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to deny the variance request to allow a house to be constructed within the sideyard setback requirements. Motion carried unanimously. The reason for denial is that with no purchase agreement signed on this property, the applicant is merely trying to get a variance for this size of house on this lot without actually owning the lot. Additional Information Items 1. Request to hear a previously tabled rezoning request. Applicant, Oakwood Industrial Park Partnership. A motion was made by Planning Commission member, Joyce Dowling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to bring the previOUSly tabled rezoning request back to the table for further discussion. Motion carried unanimously. . 2. A tabled rezoning request to rezone platted property from 1-2 (heavy industrial) to 1-1 (light industrial). Applicant, Oakwood Industrial Park Partnership. . Mr. George Phillips, partner in the Oakwood Industrial Park Partnership, was present to propose down zoning of the remaining Oakwood Industrial Park property from 1-2 (heavy industrial) to 1-1 (light industrial). Mr. Phillips explained the rationale for down zoning from 1-2 to 1-1. The properties which have been sold there have been for light industrial to commercial type of business enterprises, and the likelihood of the partnership selling to a company that would fit into the 1-2 category is quite unlikely at this time or anytime in the future. Additional rationale for a heavy industrial company not relocating into the existing Oakwood Industrial Park is that there is no rail trackage to the property, and the smaller acreage within these lots would not accommodate heavy industrial type businesses, as they need more land than what each one of these lots would currently provide. Commission members questioned the need for the down zoning to 1-1. If you have contrOlling rights when you sell the property to a prospective business, a light industrial business could go into the heavy industrial zone. If you didn't want a heavy industrial business to come into the Oakwood Industrial Park, you can merely deny selling them the property. Mr. Phillips explained the likelihood of the possibility of the proposed new middle school being located on the south side of the freeway. with the type of zoning which tends to be around a school site being residential, they would like their property down zoned to light industrial so they could encourage light industrial businesses to relocate in their industrial park. -2- Planning Commission Minutes - 11/12/86 Commission members felt very uncomfortable rendering a decision on the applicant's request in that no further information had been submitted to them prior to the meeting. zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Planning Commission members that no additional information was submitted to them, as there was no additional information to submit to them. The only reason it was before the Commission is that the applicant requested that their request be brought back onto the table for further discussion so a decision could be made. Commission members felt they could give a better rationale for a decision if some type of zoning is proposed to be shown on a zoning map of the area around the proposed new school site or sites. With the following information taken into consideration, the applicant requested that his request be tabled at this time. Motion by Joyce DOWling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to again table the applicant's request for rezoning platted property from 1-2 (heavy industrial) to 1-1 (light industrial). Motion carried unanimoUSly. 3. Motion by Joyce Dowling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission meeting for December 2, 1986, 7:30 p.m. 4. Motion by Joyce DOWling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 4'~~ Gary 'Anderson Zoning Administrator -3-