Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 05-10-1988 . . . MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 10, 1988 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Richard Carlson, Joyce Dowling, Richard Martie, cindy Lemm, and Dan McConnon Members Absent: None Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff o'Neill 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at 7:41 p.m. 2. Motion by Cindy Lemm, seconded by Dan McConnon, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held April 12, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow construction of more than one apartment building on an unplatted lot; a conditional use request to allow construction of two apartment buildings in excess of the maximum number of units allowed; a conditional use request to allow construction of five apartment buildings in two phases. Applicant, David Hornig. Mr. David Hornig, developer of this proposed project, was present to propose an amendment to his previously approved conditional use request. Mr. Hornig was proposing under his current plan in phase I to be allowed to construct a 36-unit elderly subsidized building and a 12-unit family subsidized unit; and phase II would have consisted of two 12-unit apartment buildings. At the request of Mr. Hornig's lender, Farmers Home Administration, Mr. Hornig proposed to amend his project in phase I only to have phase I consist of three family subsidized buildings of which two would be 16-unit family subsidized buildings and one would be of the townhouse garden apartment type building. Mr. Hornig reiterated the only reason he is back before the Planning Commission members is that Farmers Home suggested he amend his plan to accommodate family subsidized buildings only, as the lender felt that another proposed project on currently owned City property, that being the Metcalf and Larson elderly project, would be better suited for the elderly project if he could redesign his proposed project to accommodate family subsidized buildings only. Chairperson Richard Carlson opened the public hearing for input from any of the planning Commission members. The Planning Commission comments were as follows. Mr. Dan McConnon questioned the story height on the buildings on the left hand side and also the story height for the two apartment buildings. Mr. Hornig responded with the building on the left consisted of 12 townhouse type garden apartments very similar to what currently exists in the Hillside Terrace subsidized apartment complex in that the variety would be of two story on slab type of construction. 1 planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . The two other buildings, which would be of 16-unit size consisting of approximately 12 2-bedroom unit apartments and four I-bedroom apartment units per building, would be of the two story on slab construction type also. Mr. McConnon also questioned what is West 7th Street as proposed on the project. In the existing map that was submitted with his agenda supplement, it indicated that West 7th Street would run directly into the center of this proposed project. zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Mr. McConnon that an extension of West 7th Street is proposed to extend southwesterly to accommodate a realignment of this road in relationship to a point up on Minnesota Street. Chairperson Richard Carlson questioned when phase II would happen and if it would occur with the extension of the West 7th Street project. zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Mr. Carlson that in all likelihood, unless development would occur in the very near future, and when and if the certificate of need is shown by Mr. Hornig, if these were on the same time table they could conceivably happen at the same time. But realistically, in all likelihood, the extension of West 7th Street would be in the future years to come anywhere from one to five or even five to ten years down the road, depending on the development of the major adjoining property owner to the south and west of the existing Monticello Mall. . Cindy Lemm questioned what the green area between the garages would consist of. Mr. Hornig indicated that there is a large green area which would exist between the two proposed detached garages. Depending on the needs which the caretaker of this project site would see with the tenants which would rent apartments in these different complexes, more than likely the type of activity which would occur would be of a picnic area, maybe even a small basketball court set-up and other areas for activities for the older children and also for the adults which may live in these apartments. Assistant City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, commented on the relationship of this project in regards to our overall Comprehensive Plan in comparison of the number of multiple family units we have in relationship to the number of existing buildable and built on single family lots. In the handout which Mr. O'Neill provided, it did indicate with these proposed projects on line the five total buildings within this project and the proposed 28-unit elderly project would bring us up to 44 percent multiple family units in comparison to 56 percent single family units. Under the Comprehensive Plan, we had set a percentage level not to exceed 45 percent. . Chairperson Richard Carlson then opened it up for any input from the public. Mr. Jack Beattie, representing J.B. Properties, managing company for several of the existing market rent apartment buildings in Monticello, was present to express his opinion on what is happening with the apartment buildings his firm manages in relationship to the high number of vacancies which are occuring within these apartment building units. Mr. Beattie indicated vacancies when he submitted his first letter in regards to the first public hearing which was held on 2 planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . Mr. Hornig's request. The vacancies were running anywhere from 5 to 12-1/2 percent. With the first quarter completed, the vacancies are now showing in some cases up to a 25 percent vacancy in some of the buildings. Mr. Beattie then indicated the vacancies which are currently running in the apartment building units which they manage for the different investors which they represent. They are as follows: The Lincoln Estates, 24 percent vacancy; The Jefferson Apartments, 13 percent vacancy; The washington square Apartments, 12 percent vacancy; The Lauring Lane Apartments, 22 percent vacancy; Monticello Manor, 22 percent vacancy; and the Terrace Six Apartments, 13 percent vacancy. . Mr. Beattie indicated that he wasn't in total opposition of the proposed project in that the developer is proposing a need which cannot be filled in the apartment building units which he manages in that they do not have three bedroom apartments within any of their apartment buildings which they manage. However, he did feel that the market is currently saturated and that depending on what happens with the interest rates and other factors in here, hopefully by late this summer and into the fall that these building vacancies will be declining back to an acceptable level. He suggested that the planning Commission and/or the City oounci1 consider a moratorium on any type of additional apartment building units to be constructed. He further indicated that the latest apartment projects that were completed, the 24 and the 30-unit apartment buildings, are also showing vacancies. And the owner of those two buildings, Mr. Gus LaFromboise, had wished he wouldn't have constructed them so soon in that the market is now oversaturated with the availability of apartment units. Mr. Tom Brennan, partner in Star City Realty, explained to planning Commission members that through the phone calls that come into his office, there is definitely need for family rental units in this community. His office receives at the bare minimum at least one call per day with somebody inquiring as to the availability of units for families to rent. With no single family houses available in the market, people have had to look to apartments as an alternative for finding lodging facilities for their families. However, with some of the larger family units that have contacted their office, they have found that there are no three bedroom units available for rent within the city. Commission members did question Mr. Brennan as to where these phone calls were coming from. Were they from people within the city of Monticello, or an outlying area of the city of Monticello, or are they definitely from out of the area. Mr. Brennan responded that he did not know, nor did his office question the inquirer as to where they are residing. . Jeff O'Neill questioned Mr. Hornig in his survey of which he had supplied the City a copy, was there definitely a need for this type of housing within the city of Monticello. His study incorporated a bigger area, including the cities of Big Lake and Buffalo, and also the outlying area around the city of Monticello and not just the city of Monticello in proper itself. He questioned Mr. Hornig, is this really a relocation of dislocated people from the metro area or out of the Monticello area 3 Planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . itself. Mr. Hornig could only respond that the survey that was done by a professional company, which he paid a sizeable amount of money to have the survey done, and did incorporate the areas definitely around the city of Monticello and the communities of Big Lake and Buffalo. He could not answer which percentage of the people were from the city of Monticello or the immediate outlying area around the city or was the majority of the response from the areas in and near the communities of Big Lake and Buffalo. Mr. Hornig indicated that the market study which was performed which he submitted along with his application to Farmers Home was carefully reviewed over the process of a whole day or additional time to review the information that submitted from this certificate to definitely show whether or not the market study will indicate a need for this type of housing within the area that was chosen. Cindy Lemm questioned the rationale of the study, if these people are actually contacted by phone or are they physically contacted in a door-to-door type survey. Mr. Hornig reiterated again that the lender carefully checks the studies which are submittd to him; in fact, his original study was done in October, and as his application came in, there was another study which Farmers Home had which is showed a study completed as recently as March. He indicated the lender, as indicated in the study, still shows a definite need for this type of housing within the Monticello area. Mr. Anderson questioned Mr. Hornig if he could indicate to Planning Commission members what the typical minimum rent might be for an apartment within his buildings. Mr. Hornig indicated that the example was with a $25,000 adjusted gross income, a person may be paying a minimum of $225 to $275 for a one bedroom apartment; $275 to $325 minimum for a two-bedroom apartment; and $375 to $400 for a three-bedroom apartment. He did also indicate that there is a definite minimum. If their adjusted gross income divided by the 12 months of the year did relate to an amount less than what the minimum rent would be, the applicant would still have to pay the minimum rent, or it could not be rented to them. . . Chairperson Richard Carlson then closed the public hearing portion of this request and asked for any further input from the staff or from any of the planning commission members. Chairperson Richard Carlson questioned if the staff could have an independent study done. Mr. Jeff O'Neill indicated to Planning Commission members that as part of the upcoming budget, the staff was preparing a survey type questionnaire to be sent out to all the city residents to see what type of needs may be needed within the community, not necessarily just apartments, but parks and other things which the City could provide. Mr. Carlson also questioned the current units of multiple family housing stock in the community over the last five years. Building Official, Gary Anderson, indicated to the Planning Commission members that the number of market rent apartment buildings built since 1983 are five 12-unit buildings, one 18-unit building, four 24-unit buildings, and one 30-unit building. The number of subsidized housing buildings built since 1983 would be one 4-unit building, one 8-unit building, one 26-unit building, and one 31-unit building. Dan McConnon questioned if in the Comprehensive Plan there is a different between the subsidized housing and the market rent 4 . . . Planning commission Minutes - 5/10/88 housing in relationship to the total number of single family units available. Mr. O'Neill indicated that there is no difference indicated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan only refers to multiple family units, whether they are subsidized or market rent apartment buildings. Motion by Joyce Dowling, seconded by Richard Martie, to table the conditional use request to allow construction of more than one apartment building on an unplatted lot; table the conditional use request to allow construction of an apartment building in excess of the maximum number of units allowed; table the conditional use request to allow construction of five apartment buildings in two phases. Motion carried unanimously. Reason for tabling of the request: planning Commission would like to review additional information to be provided by the City staff in regards to a city wide survey to be conducted by the City staff. Said survey format to be submitted to City council for their consideration at their next regularly scheduled meeting and possible distribution of the survey with the tabulation of the survey to be completed in approximately six to eight weeks. The possibility of this agenda item coming back to Planning commission members may be within the meeting in July. 4. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow construction of an attached garage within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant, Todd Theisen. Zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Planning Commission members Mr. Theisen's request to be allowed to construct an attached garage within the front yard setback requirement. The existing house on the east side, the Dahlheimer residence, is approximately 113 feet from the front property line, and the existing house on the west side of the Theisen residence is the Bud and Fran Fair residence, which is approximately 127 feet from the front property line. The average setback of these two properties would be 120 feet. The 120 foot average setback subtracted from the minimum front yard setback of 30 feet would equal 90 feet. One can have 66 percent of that difference, which would amount to 59.4 feet in addition to the minimum front yard setback of 30 feet, which would give us a minimum front yard setback of 89.40 feet. The applicant is proposing to be within 85 feet of the front property line, therefore requiring a 4.4 foot variance. The proposed garage would also fall within the sideyard setback, and the applicant is proposing to come within 5 feet of the side lot line to the property immediately west, the Bud and Fran Fair residence, to accommodate sufficient turning radii in front of the garage to allow a vehicle to enter and exit out of this proposed garage and do it within their own property. with no further input from the applicant, Chairperson Richard Carlson then turned it over to any input from the planning Commission members. The following statements are from the Planning Commission members. Mr. Richard Martie felt very uncomfortable about any garages to be constructed within the front yard setback, especially in this particular area of town. Zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Mr. Martie that the garages are allowed to be constructed within the front yard setback 5 . . . planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 and the ordinance was amended in February of 1986 to allow encroachments within the front yard to get closer to the front yard minimum setback when adjacent structures are placed in excess of the minimum front yard setback, as is the example in this case. Cindy Lemm questioned if the existing garage would be removed. Mr. Theisen indicated their intention was to leave the existing garage and use it for storage. Mr. Richard Martie questioned if the existing garage could be renovated or enlarged to accommodate a two-car garage. Mr. Anderson indicated to planning Commission members that Mr. Theisen had looked at that as an alternative; but due to the narrowness of the lot width of this particular lot, when a two-car garage would be constructed, a good portion of the view to the rear yard would be obstructed by this garage. Richard Carlson questioned the need for a variance request if the garage could be created without a need for a variance request. Zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Mr. Carlson that yes, the garage could be constructed to be of less depth. Instead of 30 feet, a garage could be constructed of 26 feet. But to allow turning radii and movement of a vehicle from the driveway into this garage and back out of the garage onto the driveway if it was placed within the sideyard setback, 10 feet would not leave enough room to accommodate the maneuvering out of the garage on their driveway, as they would have to back out onto a portion of their neighbor's driveway to get entirely out of the garage. With no further input from the public or from the Planning Commission members, motion was made by Dan McConnon, seconded by Richard Martie, to deny the variance request to allow construction of an attached garage within the front yard setback requirement. Motion carried unanimously. Reason for denial: The applicant's failure to demonstrate a hardship other than financial for the variance request. 5. Public Hearing - A preliminary plat request, proposed expansion of East Kjellberg Mobile Home park; and consideration of amendments to the city of Monticello zoning map. Applicant, Kent Kjellberg. Assistant City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, opened with narrative comments on the text of the preliminary plat. Mr. Kjellberg asked to interject with some information of his own prior to Mr. O'Neill proceeding with his narrative comments. Mr. Kjellberg wanted the planning Commission members to understand the adversities that this project has had to overcome to get to where it is tonight. The property consists of two Northern states Power company easements and also an Amoco Oil Company gasline easement. Mr. Kjellberg indicated that he, along with his registered land surveyor, Mr. Dennis Taylor, has been working on the development of this plan since August of 1986. He also indicated he would like planning commission members to seriously consider his preliminary plat request in that timing is of the essence to hopefully get some houses constructed within this construction season, as the interest rates have started to climb and he has already lost some potential home buyers because of that. 6 planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . Mr. O'Neill started out with his opening comments on parts of the Subdivision Ordinance in regards to the preliminary plat with which the developers have not complied in its entirety, and his comments are as follows. . As noted on the site plan, there are streets which actually dead end at the property line of this development. Within our ordinance, we require that temporary cul-de-sacs or turn-arounds be constructed at these points. The lots adjacent to Oounty Road 17 actually have a double front which are not suggested within the Comprehensive plan. The length of the streets are very close to the 1300 lineal foot maximum. All the residential lots are in conformance with the minimum of 12,000 sq ft, although there may be trouble with one of the lots being able to put a 1000 sq ft house on it. The street names are not within the general nature of the name of the development, The Evergreens Addition. The area for park dedication is not of sufficient amount to incorporate what City staff feels is enough of a land area to accommodate the ballpark, picnic area, and/or warming house for a proposed skating rink. The staff feels that the two adjoining lots to this park dedication land should also be dedicated to the City for park land. On the Amoco pipeline easement, the current setback as shown by the developer is 25 feet, with a possible mandate by the State being as much as 50 feet; or it could be at a projected maximum of a 200 foot building setback from the actual pipe itself. The drainage area under the north power line easement is not sufficient to handle the 100 year flood event, and it should be extended into more of the power line easement area and the depth be shortened up. With the depth of the bottom of the sewer pipe being at a 6-foot depth, the sewer line may have to be insulated up to the homes from the main line and also maybe some of the main lines would have to be insulated with this shallow of depth of the sewer line. With the short depth of the sewer, it may be limited to the type of housing which could be placed on there, that being of the split level or split entry type design. Otherwise, if a rambler is to be constructed to allow plumbing fixtures to be in the basement, a lift pump would have to be installed to lift the sewage up to the main sewer line corning into the house. Possible items which would be related to a developer's agreement that would have to be established prior to approval of a final plat. . Tree planting plan. Cluster mailbox plan. Sod establishment plan. Specifications for turn-arounds. Provisions for City acquisition by warranty deed of all park property and walkways. Financial guarantees and security bond relating to or integrated with the timing of the completion of the improvements. paying for and installation of the street signs. Development of landscaping and buffering between Out1ots A and B from Highway 25 and also plans for grading and seeding of the park land and buffering of park land from adjacent lots. 7 planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . Provisions for full-time inspection of all work and a clear understanding that the City will not accept dedication of utilities until such improvements are completely inspected and approved. Provision for an easement for the extension of water and sewer to Phase I of the project which crosses outlot that may someday become part of phase II. Then the alternatives were outlined, and they are as follows: 1. Developer must complete sewer, water, and storm sewer feasibility studies which address all phases of this project. Such studies must be signed by the registered engineer and signed by our City consulting Engineer. preliminary park plan must be redesigned based on input from the Planning Commission at its May 10 meeting. preliminary plat street names be amended to match the Evergreens theme. Covenance must be amended through the deletion of Section 26 which references to septic systems on subject property. Each deed must refer to presence of the Amoco pipeline if said pipeline is within 100 feet of any portion of the deeded property. . Developer to complete Environment Assessment Worksheet and receive approvals from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2. As stated earlier, the planning Commission does have until June 20 to make a recommendation regarding this plat. planning Commission can discuss this plat and table it pending further investigation regarding the hazards associated with the Amoco pipeline. 3. The planning Commission could recommend denial of the plat based on a finding that the public safety hazard would be created by a proposed establishment of building sites so near to the Amoco pipeline. The planning Commission could direct the developer to redesign his plat and incorporate a setback requirement on the pipeline that the planning Commission would be more comfortable with. Staff recommendations regarding the zoning issue. Planning Commission act to recommend to the City Council that the subdivision area be zoned as follows: Points north of Kirk Lane to be zoned as R-2 residential district; outlots A and B to be zoned R-3 with the exception of the corner lots to be created at the intersection of 25 and Mae Drive. The two corner lots at this site to be zoned for highway commercial activity. The balance of the property now being subdivided should be zoned as R-l residential district. . 8 Planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . Mobile Home Park The lots as shown in the proposed expansion of the existing mobile home park do exceed the minimum lot square footage required. The rest of the design for the mobile home park expansion will meet all of the minimum requirements for the expansion of this park in regards to our mobile home park ordinance development requirements. The meeting was then turned over for the developer's response. Mr. Kent Kjellberg's response was as follows. The developer will create a cul-de-sac road at the dead ends or a turn-around, whatever is needed. Mr. Kjellberg reiterated they had been working on this development since last August and the need for the Planning Commission members to seriously consider his preliminary plat tonight so that he can get on with the further development of his plans to complete this project. . Mr. Kjellberg felt any ponding and required depth of the storm sewer pond questioned under the north power line easement would be not needed in that the area had had many wells drilled and there is approximately over 400 feet down of all gravel surface. However, he would intend to extend the ponding area underneath the north power line easement further east to accommodate more area and thus be able to shorten up the depth of the pond itself. He intends to install the water lines at a minimal depth, with the sewer being at a depth of 6 feet, which would be to the bottom of the sewer pipe. Mr. Kjellberg also indicated that he wouldn't have any problem with the individual homes with the water and sewer lines run to them having them being insulated from the home to the sewer stub. The developer agrees to adhere to whatever setback that is established from the Amoco gas pipeline within the Amoco easement. On each of the development plats, it will show an Amoco gas line easement; and it will also show up as a separate agreement on each of the lots to be recorded with each of the lots once this entire plat is platted. Park dedication. . The developer would rather pay the cash and let the City develop the park but recognizes a need for a park for his proposed development. He would like the Planning Commission to seriously consider the area that he has provided for it and the additional land which is under the power line easement also to be incorporated as part of the minimum land area to be dedicated for park dedication. Mr. Kjellberg still contested that there was sufficient land area there for the development of the ballfield, skating rink, warming house, and picnic area and that they would not need two additional lots as proposed by the City staff. In the mobile home park expansion or development, Mr. Kjellberg indicated he will adhere to all of the minimum City requirements with the exception of the laundry facilities. Within the text of our mobile home ordinance, it does 9 Planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . require that the mobile home park have a laundry facility available for the tenants of its mobile home park. Mr. Kjellberg indicated all the mobile homes within his mobile home park have their own laundry facilities within each individual mobile home. In summation, Mr. Kjellberg indicated he would like the planning Commission to consider his proposal for the preliminary plat, as time is of the essence. He has already lost some of the potential buyers due to the increase in the interest rates; and to get anything started to be built in this construction season, he would have to get started very soon. In talking to other home builders in the Monticello area, they have told him that there aren't any good lots left in the city to build on. . Mr. Kjellberg then turned it over to his registered land surveyor, Mr. Dennis Taylor of Taylor Land Surveyors, for any additional comments he may have in regards to the plat. Mr. Taylor indicated that Mr. Kjellberg and Mr. O'Neill had pretty well covered the layout of the preliminary plat with its requirements. He did, however, indicate the following items. The two lots near the park which the City staff is proposing also be dedicated for park dedication have a possible selling value of $18,000 per lot, which times two would equal $36,000 in potential income and is lost to the developer because of these lots going for park dedication. When the park was laid out, it was laid out with the City's input; and now they are corning back requiring more land than what he felt was necessary for that with having substantial land underneath the easements to also use for biking trails or whatever in the nature of park development. In questioning about the depth of the sewer, Mr. Taylor indicated that at building permit applications, a certificate of survey would have to be supplied; and at that time, the Building Official could determine if the lines would need to be insulated from the service to the house. He saw no problem with this entire development having all full basements in them. Chairperson Richard Carlson then opened the meeting for any discussion from the planning Commission members. Joyce Dowling questioned the developer of the street names within his preliminary plat not coinciding with the theme of the name of his development plat, the Evergreens Addition. Mr. Kjellberg said these were original names that he thought would be unique for recognizing this development within the area. He had trouble coming up with street names that would be associated with the Evergreens plat. . Mr. Dan McConnon questioned the need for the north power line easement area that is to be used for ponding for a storm sewer pond and the need for a 6-foot cut. He indicated that in all likelihood, with the depth of the poles being only 10 feet, they have some problems with excavations in or near these power line poles. Mr. Kjellberg responded that they are proposing to extend the ponding area further east under the north power line easement to accommodate a shallower depth with a larger ponding area. Mr. McConnon also agreed with the developer in part that some of the power line easement area should be considered for park dedication but 10 planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 . had a problem with a good share of the portion of the power line easement being used for the actual construction of a proposed ballfield as part of the park dedication land area. He saw a problem with the activity of softball and/or baseball with the balls hitting the power lines which would be running overhead. Mr. Kjellberg responded that if the people playing ball, whether it be softball or baseball, could hit those power lines, the Minnesota TWins should come out and take a look at these players that would be able to do this. He then asked the city staff if the city Attorney had rendered his opinion in that there is a gas line running through this plat and if that should be in a recordable form with the lots which would abut this gas line easement. Mr. O'Neill indicated a probable type of document which would be recorded against the lots which would be affected by the gas line easement. Mr. Richard Carlson questioned who would take care of the mobile home park within this development when it would occur. The developer indicated that would be his responsibility to take care of the development of this park as part of his mobile home park expansion. . Some closing comments were then entered in, and Mr. Jeff O'Neill wanted to reiterate that the parks are very important for good quality residential development. In Mr. O'Neill's opinion, in looking at the existing parks within the city, they do lack significant good developable parks on the land which was dedicated for park dedication. Mr. Kjellberg indicated that, yes, lots are needed in the city that would be of a low cost and affordable for the proposed home buyers of which there is a need which is not provided within the city currently. Mr. Kjellberg felt that the park area was sufficient with the easements under the power line and the gas line would more than accommodate the park area that would be needed for this. He did, however, indicate that he would give up Lot 4 south of the Terry Lane cul-de-sac to the city for additional park land dedication. Mr. Dan McConnon questioned on how the value of the land is established for park land dedication. Mr. Jeff O'Neill responded that the park dedication is 10 percent of the raw land costs. Chairperson Richard Carlson then closed the public hearing portion of this and asked for any further comments from the planning Commission members. Mr. Richard Carlson questioned the park land dedication, in which phase would the park be developed. Gary Anderson responded that it would be developed as proposed in phase III. Dan McConnon questioned who is doing the EIS, Environmental Impact Study. That would be done by the developers on or before approval of the final plat. . with no further input from the public, motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Joyce Dowling, to table the proposed expansion of the east Kjellberg Mobile Home park and to table the consideration of amendments to the Monticello Zoning Map. Motion carried unanimously with Cindy Lemm absent. Cindy Lemm had left the meeting at approximately 10:00 p.m. The reason for tabling the request is that they felt that all the information was not presented to demonstrate that the feasibility study had been conducted and had been sent to the City staff for their review other than the approval that was given by our Consulting Engineer, John Badalich, of 11 . . . Planning commission Minutes - 5/10/88 Orr-Schelen-Mayeron. Upon review and completion of the feasibility study showing how the water and sewer and storm sewer would be laid out to interface with the future developments of Phase II and Phase III in relationship to the original development of phase I, it was the consensus of the planning Commission members to set a special meeting for Tuesday, May 17, 7:30 p.m., to consider Mr. Kjellberg's preliminary plat request, proposed expansion of the east mobile home park, and consideration of the amendments to the Monticello zoning Map. and meeting date would be conducted hopefully after the final orders are sent down from the Municipal Board in relationship proposed areas to be annexed into the city of Monticello. This time hearing and to the ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS 1. Variance request to allow a loading berth to be constructed in the public right-of-way setback requirement. Applicant, Automatic Garage Door. Council action: Denied variance request as per planning commission recommendation. Approved variance request with a loading berth to be constructed in part of the building. 2. A variance request to allow construction of a garage addition within the sideyard setback requirement. Applicant, Harvey Kendall. Council action: planning Commission's recommendation stands approved, as there was no variance appeal. 3. zoning Seminar Information. Zoning Administrator Anderson commended the planning Commission members on their decisions that were completed on the three public hearing agenda items before them tonight. The three Planning Commission members who were in attendance at this zoning seminar in St. ClOUd, Richard Carlson, Cindy Lemm, and Dan McConnon, a lot of information that was received from there carried through in some of their questions and as part of their decisions which were rendered here this evening. The two City staff members that attended this, Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant City Administrator, and Mr. Gary Anderson, zoning Administrator, felt it was a very worthwhile session and a lot of items that were brought up referenced to requests which we have been dealing with here in Monticello, not in much as name but in the similarity of the applicants requests that were presented at this meeting. 4. Municipal Board Final Hearing Information. Mr. Jeff O'Neill indicated that Tuesday, May 17, the Municipal Board will be reconvening to make a final action on their findings for the areas to be annexed into the city of Monticello. Mr. O'Neill has not heard of any additional lands or any changes in the boundaries which they have corne up with, and he felt that final approval would corne off of the same original findings of the area that was previously approved. 12 . . . planning Commission Minutes - 5/10/88 5. Consensus of the Planning Commission members present to set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission meeting for June 14, 1988, 7:30 p.m. 6. Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 11:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, d~~ Gary Anderson zoning Administrator 13