Planning Commission Minutes 04-03-1990
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, April 3, 1990 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present:
Dan McConnon, Mori Malone, Richard Martie,
Cindy Lemm, Richard Carlson
Members Absent:
2.
3.
None
Staff Present:
Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill
1.
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Dan McConnon at
7:28 p.m.
Motion was made by Mori Malone, seconded by Cindy Lemm, to
approve the minutes of the March 6, 1990, Planning Commission
meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Public hearing - A variance request to allow construction of
a detached garage within the side yard setback requirement.
Applicant, Daniel Whaylen.
Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning
Commission members and the public Mr. Whaylen's request to
construct a detached garage wi thin the side yard setback
requirement. In looking at the enclosed site plan, you will
notice the house has an abnormal setback from the minimum
30-foot front yard setback. When it was placed on the lot, it
was probably the highest point of the lot, and the lot was
graded to allow the house to be placed almost in the center of
the lot with room to allow construction of a single attached
garage on the south side of the property. The east side of
the property would have only allowed construction of an 8-foot
garage. Mr. Whaylen purchased this house as it currently
exists and is proposing to construct a detached garage to
within 2 feet of the side lot line requirement.
Chairperson McConnon opened the public hearing. There being
no input from the public, he opened the meeting for any
discussion from the Planning Commission members. A concern
brought up by the Planning Commission members was construction
of the garage within 2 feet of the property line. Being that
close to the property line makes it very hard to control the
water runoff and the drainage along the property line.
Page 1
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/3/90
Motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Richard
Carlson, to approve the variance request to allow a detached
garage to be constructed within S feet of the side lot setback
requirement, thereby granting a S-foot variance from the
minimum side yard setback requirement. Motion carried
unanimously.
Reason for approving the variance request: Due to the
location of the house, no room was allowed to compensate for
a normal attached garage to be built onto this property. By
placing the detached garage at the ml.nlmUm setback
requirement, it would cover over one-half of the existing
front of the house. By allowing it to be built within S feet
of the property line would allow sufficient room for surface
water drainage along this side lot line.
4.
Public hearing - A variance request to allow construction of
an attached garage within the side yard setback requirement.
Applicant, John Barash.
Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning
Commission members Mr. Barash's request to construct an
attached garage up to within 6 feet of the side lot line.
When Mr. Borash purchased this house, it was placed on the lot
to allow a IS-foot side lot setback on the south side of the
property; and on the north side of the property, they allowed
a 34-foot side yard setback. The main entrance to this house
is in the center of the front of the house, and there is also
an entrance onto a deck in the rear of the house. To gain
entry from the garage to the house requires a person to go
outside of the garage to the front or rear doors of the house
as it exists. Mr. Borash is proposing to construct a stairway
into the basement of his proposed garage, therefore requiring
an additional 4 feet of width to accommodate this basement
stairway. The area that is left once the stairway is put in
allows for a 24' x 24' standard size garage.
Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the public hearing for
input from the public. There being no input from the public,
the meeting was opened for comments from the Planning
Commission members. The Planning Commission's concern was
with the style of the house, and they questioned other areas
where variances have been granted in this particular
development and adjoining developments in regard to
encroachments into side yard setbacks.
Page 2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/3/90
There being no further input from the Planning Commission
members, motion was made by Mori Malone, seconded by Richard
Martie, to approve the variance request to allow construction
of an attached garage up to 6 feet from the side lot line,
therefore granting a 4-foot variance from the minimum 10-foot
side yard setback requirement. Motion carried unanimously.
5.
Conditional use request to
(performance zone mixed) zone.
allow a car wash in a
Applicant, Dean Hoqlund.
PZM
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained to Planning
Commission members and the public the applicant's conditional
use request to allow a car wash in a PZM zone. In his
explanation, he explained the rationale that was used for a
6-foot side yard setback on the east portion of the property
in a B-3 (highway business) zone where the minimum side yard
setback requirement would be 10 feet. Under the PZM zoning,
other setbacks are allowed to be considered by Planning
Commission and City Council. Mr. 0' Neill indicated to
Planning Commission members that the conditions under the
conditional use process for a car wash have been addressed in
their site plan as submitted. A question that remains
unanswered yet is the noise that would be emitted from a car
wash when a vehicle is being washed in the automatic drive-
through car wash section. I f there is drying equipment
installed for this car wash project, noise suppressors should
also be considered.
Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the public hearing. The
applicants indicated their design at this time will not
incorporate a drawing unit on the automatic drive-through car
wash portion. If the concern of the Planning Commission
members was that the automatic car wash enter and exit doors
be closed when a car is being washed, it could be done. They
didn't have any problem meeting that requirement.
Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input
from the Planning Commission members. Additional concerns
addressed that are not addressed as conditions within the car
wash conditional use request were as follows:
1.
The doors be closed when the automatic car wash is
in operation.
Page 3
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/3/90
2.
On the west side of the property where it abuts the
next adjoining lot, if future development occurs on
that lot and it is performed by this group of
developers, an island delineator be installed to
separate the parking driving lane from a new
proposed business to the west.
The developers work with City staff to come up with
some type of screening landscaping plan on the
north side of the property line.
3 .
4.
The hours of operation were discussed and felt they
should be set at 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
With no further input from the Planning Commission members or
members of the public, a motion was made by Cindy Lemm,
seconded by Richard Martie, to approve the conditional use
request to allow a car wash in a PZM (performance zone mixed)
zone with the following conditions:
.
1. The doors be closed when the automatic car wash is
in operation.
2.
On the west side of the property where it abuts the
next adjoining lot, if future development occurs on
that lot and it is performed by this group of
developers, an island delineator be installed to
separate the parking driving lane from a new
proposed business to the west.
The developers work with City staff to come up with
some type of screening landscaping plan on the
north side of the property line.
3.
4. The hours of operation were discussed and felt they
should be set at 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously. Reason for approval: This
approval is based on the finding that the development is
consistent with the geography and character of the area.
6. Consideration to review potential amendments to the hard
surfacinq and curbinq requirements of the ordinance.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained to Planning
Commission members some of the research that he had done for
the proposed ordinance amendment to certain areas of the
parking size requirement, parking hard surfacing, and curbing
requirements. The proposed parking space size is a 9' x 20'
minimum parking space size with the exception that 25% of the
required parking spaces can be 7-1/2' x 16-1/2' compact
.
Page 4
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/3/90
parking spaces. The proposed amendment suggested by
Mr. O'Neill would allow employee parking spaces to be 8' x 18'
in size. Also a suggestion would be to decrease the minimum
parking length from 20 feet to 19 feet total length.
Mr. O'Neill explained he would do some further research on
this potential amendment and get back to them at a subsequent
meeting.
Possible ordinance amendments to the curbing requirements were
also discussed. Those areas intended for possible amendment
dealt with an area in a parking lot where we may have a future
parking lot constructed where a surmountable transition curb
could be constructed. For driveways in excess of 24 feet in
width, curbing would not be required in those driveway
entrances.
.
Another area addressed was the hard surfacing for which
Mr. O'Neill did not come up with a recommendation on not
requiring surfacing in certain areas. A discussion was held
amongst Planning Commission members regarding the definition
for surfacing and the curbing in regard to a particular use.
It should be a short definition where Planning Commission and
City Council can consider it under a conditional use request
to allow less than what the minimum requirements are now. The
possible ordinance amendment as suggested would deal in the
area of a loading/unloading dock where the principal area is
used by the customer for pickup and/or delivery of goods and
where customers will be purchasing and picking up a finished
product and would require the hard surfacing and curbing
around its perimeter. But if we got into an area that is used
predominantly by the business for its own use and is secondary
to the principal loading/unloading area and customers are not
required to come to this area to pick up a product, this area
could receive no curbing or hard surfacing if it didn't affect
the overall drainage for this affected area.
Mr. O'Neill indicated he would do some further research on
these proposed ordinance amendments and get back to the
Planning Commission at a subsequent meeting.
.
Mr. O'Neill explained to Planning Commission members he had
been approached by the owner of the Monticello Theatre,
Mr. Mike Muller, in regard to possible expansion to a four-
screen theatre. Under the current text of our ordinance, the
minimum requirement for off-street parking is one space per
four seats. Mr. 0' Neill explained that in talking to our
consulting planner, John Uban, his recommended requirement for
a multi-screen theatre be one parking space per five theatre
seats. Also in looking at the area of the proposed expansion,
Page 5
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/3/90
(the building would be expanded west up to approximately the
center of the existing driveway off of Broadway, which is
owned and used by Wright County State Bank), Mr. Muller
proposes to establish additional parking spaces immediately
west of the proposed end of the building. The area in which
the proposed parking would go currently houses Stokes Marine's
building. The bank is proposing to purchase Stokes Marine,
demolish the building, and lease back parking spaces to
Mr. Muller for his use in trying to create the number of
addi tional spaces needed to meet his requirement for the
addition of the two new screens to the theatre. Under the
proposed seating arrangement and the proposed number of seats,
Mr. Muller would need to come up with 85 additional parking
spaces or a signed commitment from affected property owners
allowing those spaces to be used by his theatre customers.
Also to accommodate additional area needed for off-street
parking space, lots that are currently vacant during the
theatre hours are: 1) the East Bridge Park parking lot;
2) the Realty World Maxwell building parking lot; 3) the
Northwest Medical Clinic parking lot; and 4) the parking lot
between the old Monticello Fire Station and the existing A-V
Room. Joint parking spaces are allowed within 300 lineal feet
of the subject property. The lineal footage would have to be
increased from the theatre property to get to some of the
above-mentioned lots.
Mr. O'Neill explained to Planning Commission members that
Mr. Muller would like to get underway with construction by
May 1 if possible and would like to have the Planning
Commission consider a special meeting.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission members that
they would be open to a special meeting when the earliest date
could be set up for that.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS:
1.
A variance request to allow no curbing or hard surfacing in
certain areas of a driving area and loading/unloading area.
Applicant, Martie's Farm Service. Council action: Denied
variance request. Motion to direct staff to prepare potential
amendments to the hard surfacing and curbing requirements of
the ordinance.
2.
Consideration of a preliminary plat application, Plant 20
subdivision. Applicant, Remmele Engineering, Inc. Council
action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
Page 6
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/3/90
3 .
Consideration of adopting a resolution finding the Remmele tax
increment finance plan to be consistent with the comprehensive
plan for the City. Council action: Approved as per Planning
Commission recommendation.
4.
rezone an R-1 (single family
(performance zone mixed) zone.
as per Planning Commission
A rezoning request to
residential) lot to PZM
Council action: Denied
recommendation.
5.
A conditional use request to allow a car wash in a PZM
(performance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, West Side Market.
Council action: No action necessary, as the request did not
come before them.
6.
Consensus of the Planning Commission members to set the next
tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission meeting
for May 1, 1990, 7:30 p.m.
7 .
Motion was made by Cindy Lemm, seconded by Mori Malone, to
adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:17 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
4~~.
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
Page 7