Planning Commission Minutes 04-17-1979
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, April 17, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Dave Bauer, Dick Martie, Ed Schaffer.
Members Absent: Fred Topel
1. Approval of Minutes.
A motion was made by Dave Bauer, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously
carried to approve the Minutes of March 20, 1979, as presented. A
motion was made by Dave Bauer, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously
carried to approve the Minutes of April 3, 1979.
2.
Public Hearing - Rezoning of Block 10 of Original Monticello Plat
from R-3 to R-l or R-2.
At their March 26, 1979 meeting, the City Council of Monticello was approached
by a group of citizens in Block 10 of Monticello and the surrounding area
expressing concern over the possible development of an apartment house in
Block 10. At the time of the request, the Monticello City Council did inform
the concerned citizens that there was no specific zoning action that the
Council could take that evening relative to rezoning; however, they did
take the following action:
A. Requested the Planning Commission hold a hearing to rezoning Block 10.
B. Put a moratorium on any building permit approvals for multiple family
dwelling units in Block 10 until the recommendation of the Planning
Commission came back to the City Council and the City Council took
final action.
As a result of this action, a public hearing has been properly published and
notice has been given to property owners within 350' of Block 10, to consider
rezoning the Block from R-3 (Medium Density Residential) to R-l (Single Family
Residential) or R-2 (Single and Two-Family Residential).
At the outset, Gary Wieber, City Administrator was requested by the Chairman
to explain the history behind the zoning of Block 10. Mr. Wieber explained
that the zoning of Block 10 has been R-3 since 1972. He further explained
that in contacts with the City Planner and City Attorney, there was concern
relative to rezoning the property to R-l or R-2 in order to avoid a particular
proposed development. Mr. Wieber did explain that the Planning commission
may want to consider rezoning the south half of Block 10 to R-l or R-2 to
protect property owners in that area from future multiple family dwelling
units. The particular proposed development at this point was located on the
north half of Block 10, specifically, Lots 8, 9 & 10 of Block 10.
At this point, the meeting was opened for the public hearing portion, and
the following comments were received:
- 1 -
Minutes - Planning Comm. - 4/17/79
.
Darwin Straw - owner of property on south half of Block 10, would like
to see the entire Block stay as an R-3 zone. Mr. Straw indicated that
although he had no immediate plans for multiple family dwelling unit,
he would like to leave this option open for himself or a subsequent
buyer of his land.
Jim Murrax - owner of Lots 8, 9 & 10 of Block 10. Mr. Murray owns the site
that is proposed for a seven-unit apartment house by Ron White. Mr. Murray
indicated he bought the property for apartments, and would be very much
opposed to rezoning at this time.
Ron White - Developer who has the option on Lots 8, 9 & 10 of Block 10,
indicated that he had an option to buy the property specifically because
it was zoned as R-3, and if it is rezoned, he simply would not purchase
it.
Jack Maxwell - Realtor - He had indicated this puts Mr. Murray in a very
bad position since he purchased another home with no contingency due to
the fact that he had an option to sell Mr. White his property.
.
Ron Peters - owner of property on the south half of Block 10, indicated
that the neighborhood would probably have to accept the current proposal
of Ron White's for an apartment, but would request rezoning the rest of the
Block to R-l or R-2. He indicated he did not realize the area was R-3 when
he purchased his property. Mr. Peters went on to say that he took
exception with Darwin Straw's initial opposition to an accessory building
that was being planned at one time by Mr. Murray, but now Mr. Straw
apparently is in favor of multiple family housing in the area. Mr. Peters
felt that Mr. Straw was not being consistent since he had previously
opposed the accessory building and now was in favor of multiple family
which Mr. Peters felt would be more detrimental to the area than the
previous proposal by Mr. Murray.
Karen Hanson - property owner on north half of Block 10 said she was very
concerned with the number of apartments in the area of Block 10 and that
within a very short distance of Block 10 and including Block 10 there would
be approximately 80 apartment units.
Mr. and Mrs. Roger Chartrand - The following written testimonial was received
by the Planning Commission and signed Chartrand Residence, apparently referring
to Mr. and Mrs. Roger Chartrand. "We are in agreement with the rezoning of
Block 10 from R-3 to either R-2 or R-l. Rezoning is the only feasible thing
to be done; considering the traffic problem we would have with the additional
cars an apartment building would bring. "
Motion was made by Dave Bauer, seconded by Dick Martie and was unanimously
carried to deny the rezoning request. Some of the reasons for the denial
of the rezoning request are as follows:
~. Area had been R-3 for at least seven (7) years.
.
B. Comprehensive Plan shows this specific area as multiple family and
it was felt that consistency should be maintained with the Comprehensive
Plan and the area should be left as is.
..,. 2 -
Minutes - Planning Comm. - 4/17/79
C. Intent of zoning ordinance by design is to group multiply family
dwelling units within the same general area.
.
A motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Dick Martie and unanimously
carried to adjourn.
Gar
eit
GW/ja
.
.
-3-