Loading...
City Council Minutes 10-13-1992MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, October 13, 1992 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held September 28, 1992. Dan Blonigen requested that the 7th paragraph on page 3 pertaining to the policy for charging for tree chipping service be clarified by including a reference to the new charge for tree chipping service. After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the minutes of the meeting held September 28, 1992, with the proposed revisions as outlined. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. A. Gary and Peggy Kramber, newly appointed City Assessors, were introduced to the City Council by City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller. On behalf of the Council, Mayor Maus welcomed the Krambers to the City staff. The Krambers thanked Council for being appointed to the position. B. Jenny Hoglund registered a complaint regarding Dan Blonigen. She noted that Dan Blonigen made statements to her that indicated prejudice. She was concerned that Dan Blonigen has a conflict of interest because he is prejudiced against American Indians; therefore, he should not be able to vote on the upcoming bus contract, which her bus company is bidding on. She requested that the City take under advisement the possibility that Dan Blonigen not be allowed to vote on the bus contract issues because of conflict of interest. Ken Maus stated that the question would be submitted to the City Attorney. Dan Blonigen asked Hoglund if she had any of the conversation on tape where he supposedly made remarks that would indicate that he is prejudiced against American Indians. Blonigen responded to the accusation by stating that he will consider the source of the complaint. Page 1 Council Minutes - 10/13/92 4. Consideration of rezoning West Side Market/Conoco property from R-1 (single family residential) to B-1 (neighborhood business). Applicant, Tom Holthaus and Matt Holker/West Side Market. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the rezoning request. He outlined the recommendation made by the Planning Commission, which was to deny the rezoning request based on the finding that the rezoning would constitute spot zoning. It was the view of the Planning Commission that the zoning map as originally drawn is correct and should not be amended. O'Neill stated that the situation has not changed significantly since this issue was addressed by Council in November of 1990. He noted that Council should analyze the situation in terms of the rezoning decision criteria. The request should be measured in terms of its impact on geography and character of the adjoining area, possible depreciation of value of adjoining properties, relationship to municipal comprehensive plan, and the demonstrated need for such use. Tim Keane, the attorney representing the applicant, outlined reasons why the rezoning should be allowed to occur. He noted that the applicant is limited in his ability to expand its present use. He stated that comprehensive plan policies #2 and #9 are consistent with the proposal. The existing 1,700 sq ft store and potential 3,000 sq ft store would not result in intrusion into the residential area. At this time, there are no plans to change or intensify the use. He went on to state that the B-1 district is already restrictive. Keane mentioned an appraisal done by Jack Maxwell which analyzed whether or not conversion of the original Charlie's West Supper Club to a convenience store would have a detrimental effect on surrounding residential property. Keane noted that Maxwell stated that the reverse would be true. It would mean improvement to the neighborhood over its continued use as a supper club. Keane also indicated that according to recent sales of homes in the area, the average listing days is 74 and the selling price is 96% of listed price. Keane asked the Council to consider what is the intent of the B-1 district. Does it apply here? He noted that it is his belief the request is consistent with the purpose. Clint Herbst noted that the size of the building is relatively small and, therefore, sufficient to handle the local demand. Why is there a need to expand the size of the structure if the local demand is being served? Herbst stated that depreciation of adjoining properties is already occurring. He noted that there has been a house on the market for some time directly adjacent to the property that has not sold. The presence of the store has hampered the sale of this property. Page 2 Council Minutes - 10/13/92 Keane mentioned that the rezoning request should not be construed as spot zoning because a B-1 zone could inherently be located within a residential area, as it is a neighborhood commercial district. Ken Maus responded to Keane's remarks by saying that Keane's claim that there has been no impact on the value of the land because properties have sold at 96% of the listing price does not take into account the fact that these properties may have been listed at a lower price to start with due to the presence of the store. Maus also observed that this rezoning could be construed as spot zoning because the proposal calls for a B-1 zone to be placed directly in the middle of an R-1 zoning district. This qualifies as such because there is simply no transition between the business zone and a low density single family zone. Typically, a multi -family or R-2 district would be between a neighborhood business zone and an R-1 zone. Shirley Anderson stated that she did not feel that there is a demonstrated need to change the zoning district designation. Brad Fyle stated that he sees no problem with the structure that is there. He is not in favor of the rezoning. The lot was purchased with the zoning district regulations in place and understood at that time. Dan Blonigen stated that he thought Council made a mistake in allowing the West Side Market to be rebuilt in the first place. If we were going to allow it to rebuild, we should have changed the zoning as well. Blonigen did not believe that there was a detriment to the neighborhood created by the rezoning as proposed. Clint Herbst stated that the applicant certainly has a right to come forward with a request for the rezoning. He mentioned that next time they come forward, he would like them to present additional information for an issue that might have an impact on a previous decision. Tom Holthaus remarked that with the present building there is no storage space, very little office space, and compressors must be stored outside, which makes the present building very difficult to operate and maintain. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the various conditions associated with a convenience store in a B-1 zone. Ken Maus noted that these restrictions were added to the B-1 zone last year in an effort to provide assurance that any commercial development in a B-1 zone will be done in a manner sensitive to the impacts of that use on the adjoining R-1 neighborhood. Clint Herbst noted that he's concerned about the close proximity of the driveway access to the intersection of Otter Creek Road on Highway 75. It would be in the best interest of the West Side Market to modify the access for Page 3 Council Minutes - 10/13/92 the sake of safety. He did not feel that the City should be granting a rezoning and conditional use permit in exchange for something the property owner should be doing anyway. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to deny the rezoning request based on the finding that the rezoning would constitute spot zoning, the rezoning would result in depreciation of adjoining properties, and the zoning map as originally drawn is correct and should not be amended; therefore, there is no demonstrated need for the rezoning as proposed. Voting in favor: Clint Herbst, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus. 5. Consideration of amendment to a conditional use permit which would allow operation of a restaurant/arcade. Applicant, Hillside Partnership. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed an application for an amendment to a conditional use permit which would allow a restaurant/arcade to operate in the 6th Street Annex. The 6th Street Annex consists of 26,200 sq ft of retail area. According to this proposal, 1,700 sq ft of the retail area would be used for a restaurant, 700 sq ft for the kitchen area, and 2,100 sq ft for the arcade area. A maximum of 34 arcade machines is also proposed. O'Neill informed Council that the original parking lot design called for retail use of the structure only. Introducing restaurant and arcade type uses will have an impact on the parking lot demand. According to the city ordinance, the type of facility proposed will result in a deficit of 24 parking stalls. He went on to review the plan for making up the parking stall deficit, which includes re -striping of the lot to provide for compact car parking, which would result in an additional increase of 6 spaces. The remaining deficit of 18 spaces would be accounted for via "proof of parking" provision. Under this provision, the developer would guarantee that he will develop 18 additional parking spaces as the need arises. The timing of the installation of the additional parking would be defined by the City. The developer would provide the City with a certificate of deposit in an amount equal to the cost to install the additional parking area. If the developer does not install the additional parking as required by the City, then the City has the latitude and the funds to install it. O'Neill went on to describe the areas that are available for additional parking. None of these areas would require a variance. Judy Leming mentioned that the business will be promoting the use of the parking in the rear through various incentives and by providing double glass doors as an entry way in the rear. Page 4 Council Minutes - 10/13/92 After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve an amendment to the conditional use permit allowing a restaurant/arcade to operate at the 6th Street Annex site contingent on the following: a. The restaurant shall be limited to 1,700 sq ft. b. The kitchen shall be limited to 700 sq ft. C. The arcade shall be limited to 2,100 sq ft. d. The number of arcade machines shall be limited to 34. e. The parking lot shall be re -striped to include compact car spaces and achieve an increase of 6 spaces to the present number (132). f. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City guaranteeing potential development of at least 18 parking stalls. The timing of the development of the additional stalls shall be solely at the discretion of the City. The design of the additional parking stalls shall be consistent with city code. g. All existing landscape plantings removed with the installation of additional parking shall be immediately reinstated. Any proposed use of the Burlington Northern/5th Street right-of-way for landscape plantings must be approved in writing by Burlington Northern. h. A bike rack shall be installed near the entrance to the restaurant/arcade. i. The restaurant/arcade shall be located in the building in a manner that will allow direct access to both the front and rear parking areas. This alternative is based on the finding that the proposed addition of a restaurant to the site (17%) is incidental to the retail activities occurring at the site. The development as a whole, therefore, continues to be essentially retail in orientation. The additional traffic created by the restaurant/arcade use will not exceed the capacity of the roads or parking lot serving the site; therefore, the addition of the restaurant will not negatively impact the neighborhood. Motion carried unanimously. Page 5 Council Minutes - 10/13/92 6. Consideration of approval of final plat of the Monticello Mall subdivision. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the request for approval of the final plat of the Monticello Mall. O'Neill informed Council that Barry Fluth requested that City Council consider adding this item to the agenda of the meeting scheduled today. The item was not included in the original agenda because the proposed final plat was not delivered to city hall until 9:30 a.m. on Monday, October 12. O'Neill noted that when the preliminary plat was reviewed by Council, it was determined that the agreement governing joint use of sanitary sewer, water, storm water, and parking facilities needed to be prepared prior to final plat approval. This document has not been submitted. City signature on the plat should be withheld until this documentation is provided. John Simola concurred that some of the issues relating to identification of the locations of sanitary sewer and water systems have not been finalized; therefore, it would make sense to withhold signatures on the plat until this information is obtained. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the final plat of the Monticello Mall contingent on preparation of agreements governing maintenance of utilities serving the plat and any adjoining properties. Motion carried unanimously. There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator