Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 06-24-2002 (Special Meeting) . . . MINUTES SPF:CIAL MEF:TING - MONTICF:LLO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday - .June 24, 2002 6:00 P.M. Members Present: Absent: Starr: Dick Frie, Robbie Smith, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten, Roy Popilek and Lloyd Hilgart Council Liaison Clint Herbst Fred Patch, Jeff O'Neill and John Glomski I. Call to order. 2. Chair Frie called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. and declared a quorum. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and an amendment to a Planned Unit Development to allow an auto body repair beilitv in the 8-3 district. ApplicantGould Brothers and Jay Morrell (.I G) John Glomski advised of Gou]d Brothers request for an amendment to a previously approved PUD and a conditional use permit to operate an auto body repair f~lcility on portions of two parcels currently owned by Jay Morrell. The properties are at 1205 and 1219 Ilighway 25 South, the former AutoMaxx building and the Glass Hut property. Glomski clarified that the Zoning Ordinance lists 10 special requirements fl)!, the issuance of this CUP, rather than 18 as stated in the staffreport. Most of the requirements relate to routine standards applied to commercial uses, including paving and curbing of all parking areas, lighting standards, landscaping and screening, drainage, dust. and noise control. Glomski advised that since this is a reuse of an existing structure, many of these conditions arc not app]icable, but he did advise them of issues that need to be discussed slleh as landscaping, outside storage and screening, parking and curbing. It was noted that Public Works Director John Simo]a had some concerns with parking on the City's ROW due to snowplowing and asked that this be discussed with the applicant. He stated that the Planning Commission could determine whether the applicant should add curbing to distinguish parking. There was further discussion regarding the landscaping and it was advised that the previous tenant had not put in the landscaping that was required at the time of the initial CUP. John Michaelis, Gould Brothers Chevrolet, had concerns about the landscaping requests also and stated that they would only be leasing the fonner Automax building. He questioned why there would be landscaping required around the entire property. Jeff O'Neill stated that initially this requirement was included due to both sites being used as common ownership. Frie asked if Michaelis was comfortable with the requirement for 25 -1- Special Planning Commission Minutes - 06/24/02 . trees and he stated that in previous discussions with Jay Morrell, owner of the property, it would be at Michaelis' expense and he is concerned with that. Michaelis asked how thc current business in the Glass Hut building was able to go in there without any orthe required landscaping, and Fred Patch, Building Official, stated the business was a permittcd use on this sitc and did not need to come befl)l'e thc Planning Commission. Glomski explained that the landscaping should have been done by the previous owner and understands Michaelis' concern. Patch advised that the PU[) remains active and this would bc an amendment thercfore the landscaping rcquirements are still required. It was stated that Jay Morrell is responsible for the landscaping as he is the propcrty owner. but it is to his discretion whether he requires the tenant to provide or the owner provides. Chair Frie opencd the public hcaring, and hearing no response, thc public hearing was closed. . The Planning Commission discussed previous issues regarding the Professional Approach Salon and Automax in regard to parking. DuiJ Davidson, Gould Brothers, stated the parking will be for 8 employees and short term customer parking only. Frie added that Professional Approach Salon has their parking clearly marked. Smith stated that he was not comfortable in asking the applicant to comply with landscaping rcquirements as this was the property owners responsibility. It was clarified that the business would not include retail and that they would maintain a small customer waiting area, but this is strictly auto body repair. The applicant stated that traffic would be entering from the cast side of the building where customers would leave their vehicles. Employees wClllld be moving the vehicles inside. Roy Popilek asked about the City's concern with parking on the ROWand if it is the City who plows. Glomski stated it's a bituminous, minimum maintenance road that he assumed the City plows. O'Neill stated it should not be a problem fl)}, the applicant to not park in the ROWand Davidson concurred. It was advised that John Simola's concern was that the parking lot is an encroachment into the ROW, and the possibility that the applicant would be putting some curbing in, or ifthcy requested asphalt/paving, as this may extend into Marvin Road. Davidson adviscd that there would only be approximately 15 cars, including employees, parked on their site at one time. Michaelis added that if they needed additional parking in the future, there is sufficient parking space to the south which would not affect the Salon's parking. . Frie asked Michaelis ifhe was aware of condition number 2 regarding paving and curbing, and that it can be deferred until Marvin Road is improved. Ile also asked O'Neill if the applicant could escrow for this. O'Neill stated there is no way to tell whcn the improvcments will be done and that it was not feasible to escrow. Frie asked what the length ofthc lease would be and Michaelis stated that has not yet becn resolved. Frie also stated he did not agree with landscaping being required by the applicant. Patch stated -2- Special Planning COllllnissioll Minutes - 06/24/02 . perhaps it could be a condition of the building permit instead, but Michaelis felt this would still be required of them by the owner. O'Neill added that the City previously added additional square footage to the site which is a good asset to the this site, and therefore they should not be afraid of asking the owner for the required landscaping. Frie also asked if 25 trees would be sufficient and Dragsten stated that he would not think they would want tree plantings on the Marvin Road side. O'Neill agreed, stating that in 2 to 5 years this site could be changed completely and they would have to then remove the trees. Frie felt that the Hvvy 25 side of the site needs to be landscaped and suggested leaving the 9 plantings in the back where they are. He also stated that in the motion they eould request a tree every 50 linear feel on the cast side. O'Neill stated that it may not make sense to put in all 26 trees in that one area, but that every 50 linear feet is quite sparse. It was advised that on the new E. 71h Street the trees arc planted one every 40 linear feel and the Planning Commission stated they comf()rtable with that. Frie stated this should be added to the list of conditions. . Patch added some concerns regarding building codes and fire codes. Public Works also may require a sampling manhole fl)r the sanitary sewer collection and he stated that he does not know if there is one already in place. Davidson stated that they would not be dealing with /1uids or oils, and that any work like that would be done at their other site. Patch slated a waste trap also needs to be in place and was not sure ifthere is currently one there or not. Must also have an "L" booth, and sprinklers for fire suppression are also required. Patch added that a licensed architect needs to provide the design for the building and also talked about paint storage, combustible materials, etc. There was no further discussion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROY POPILEK TO RECOMMEND APPROV AL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AUTO BODY REPAIR, SUBJECT TO TI IE CONDITIONS LISTED IN EXl11BIT Z WITH TIlE ADDITION TO ITEM I STATING REQUIREMENT OF ONE TR1.J..: EVERY 40 LINEAR FEET ON TI-125; ADDITION OF ITEM 7 STATING NO PARKING ALLOWED IN CITY ROW OF MARVIN ROAD; ADDITION OF ITEM 8 STATING THAT TIlE lJSE CONfORM WITH ALL BUILDING PLAN STANDARDS AND PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS FOR lJ"TlLITY DESIGN, AND ELIMINATING ITEM 2 REQUIRING CURB TO BE PLACED ON MARVIN ROAD WITHIN 24 MONTHS. TIlE "NO CURB" REQUIREMENT IS FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD OF TIME; BASED ON A FINDING THAT TilE USE IS APPROPRIATE FOR TilE ZONING DISTRICT AND TilE PROPOSED SITE. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Decision 2: Amendment to the Planned Unit Development . A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT, BASED ON TilE FINDING TIIAT THE USE IS SIMILAR -1'0 -3- . . . Special Planning Commission Minutes - 06/24/02 THAT Of THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND THAT TI--IIS USE IS CONSISTENT WITI I THE COMPREIIENSIVE PLAN. RICIIARD CARLSON SECONDED TilE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Adiourn A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITII TO ADJOURN TilE MEETING AT 6:45 P.M. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED TilE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. .~~I~ (g~~cr There was further discussion by Chair frie regarding this item being placed on the City Council's consent agenda directly following this special meeting. frie felt that special meeting agenda items being heard just prior to City Council meetings should not be placed on the consent agenda in the future. -4-