Planning Commission Agenda Packet 12-18-1979AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, December 18, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
%1 p,01/
MEMBERS: Jim Ridgeway, Dave Bauer, Dick Martie, Ed Schaffer, Fred Topel.
Loren Klein (ex -officio)
1. Consideration of Approval of Minutes - ReVlar Meeting of
November 20, 1979. FJ S.'IL, '9 M *- ! L(,r.
2. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Rezoning Request by Mr.
Bradley Larson.
3. Consideration of a Variance Request from Ordinance Provision a on
Home Occupations - Dr. Clarence McCarty.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMPASSION
Tuesday, November 23, 1979 - 7:30 P. M.
Members Present. Jim Ridgeway, Dave Bauer, Dick Martie, Ed Schaffer, Fred Topcl.
Members Absent: None
1. Aporoval of Minutes.
On a motion made by Dave Bauer, seconded try Ed Schaffer, all members voted
unanimously to approve the Minutes of the October 16, 1979 Regular neeting_
2. Consideration of a Variance Request to Allow a Second Accessory Buildinq -
Robert Jameson.
Marion Jameson was present tc, address her request to re -erect an 1857 log
cabin on their property. Since it is considered a second accessory building
a variance would be necessary. The 10' x 27' building would Iw located
approximately 160' cast of the existing hoube on their 5 -acre lot which
is located south of the High School, and no setback variances would he
required for the building which will serve as a private museum.
Mr. Dave Mauer questioned whether the building would use footings and if
the building could be used for a residence. The response to 1-th ques-
tions from Mrs. Jameson was in the neqative.
On a motion by Fred Topel, so corded by Dav,• Bauer, All vot-1 in favor of
recommending approval of thin variance.
3. Consideration of a Variance Reguest of Monticello Ordinance on Urivrway
Opening Width, Parking Lot Perim ter Curbinq and Certificate of Occupancy -
Monticello Dorchester VFW Poo t.
tir. Gtuart Iloglund and Mr. Run larson, reprec-�ntinq the Monticello VFW Puu t
were preoent roqueoting a variance to I- to eliminate purtiono of it -
curb mound the parking lot and also requeoted a wider driveway opening
at the new Club Building on south Cedar Street, and Also a permanent l.u,d
ocaping variance. Currently, Monticello Ordinance requires parking letu t.,
he hardourfaced and be complL.tely nurrounded with concrete curbing to ron-
trol drainage with no driveway ol- ninga larger than 24' in width without a
variance. At the time the new parking lot was developed thin pnot fall,
it woo not conatuucted according to the directions of the City Engineer
And rather than n part of tho lot draining towards Cedar Street, nearly
all drainage in towards the freeway ditch in the wont. Thu lot was con-
st.ructed aloo with an entraneo/exit driveway approximately 90' in width.
Since the drainage of the VFW l+arkinq lot it) new towards the freeway ditel,,
the VFW Post feelo curbing all around the lot would Ir, unneren;,ary and would like
to only develop curbing along the cast edge of the parking lot which abuts.
Cedar Streot.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 11/20/79
3. (Continued)
Mr. Mark Woe11, with the Minnesota Department of Transportation, has expressed
some concern about adding any additional drainage created by the VFW parking
lot into the I-94 ditch system. The City of Monticello is in receipt of a
letter from the Minnesota Department of Transportation requesting we take
no further action on this parking lot until they have had up to 30 days to
have their hydrauligist study the situation and determine whether or not
the drainage from the parking lot would further overload the freeway drainage
system at this time.
Also, the Post would like to maintain a 90' driveway opening at the entrance
of the parking lot rather than construct two 24' wide driveway openings as
were proposed at the time the building permit was issued, and as required
by Ordinance. It should be pointed out that when the building permit was
applied for, the drainage plan was submitted to the City Engineer for his
approval, as required by ordinance, and the owners agreed that the parkinq
lot would be constructed as per the submitted plan, and it was on that basis
that the permit was issued. However, the owner changed the design and completed
the installation of the parking lot hardsurfacing without notifying the City
of the change and getting approval of the DOT to further drain their drainage
water into the Freeway ditch, which would have caused the need for a variance
hearing before the fact rather than after the fact, which is the present case.
Regardless of the outcome of the variance request, the VFW was also requesting
a temporary certificate of occupancy until August of 1980 to give them time
to complete the parking lot and landscaping requirements.
A motion was made by Dams Bauer and seconded by Dick Martio to grant the
rortifieate of occupancy contingent upon bond being pouted in the amount
necessary to bring the parking lot up to the requirements of the City
Engineer and the hydrauligist from the Department of Transportation, to
grant the elimination of the curbing as requested unless it would be necessary
to complete the drainage requirements for the parking lots to grant only a
temporary landscaping variance and to deny the 90' wide driveway opening
variance and require the two 24' driveway openings, as would he required
by Monticello Ordinance. This motion passed unanimously.
4. Request for a Simple Subdivision of Proportv - Quintin tanners and nan Giddings.
Mr. Quintin Lanners iD proposing to purchase tats 11, 12 and the F.aot 10' of
but 13, of Block 40, Original Plat of Monticello from the Dan Giddings pro-
perty at 648 West Broadway. Procantly, the Giddings property conniato of
Loto 11, 12, 13, 14, a 15 of Block 40. Mr. lannora request to subdivide
Lot 13 into two parcels would create a larger lot when it wan added to
Lot 11 G 12. lots 11, 12 a the oast 10' of 13 would then create ono large
baro, buildable lot and the present house and garage, which would alt on
the West 23' of Lot 13, 14 i 15 would create ono more lot with dwellingo.
A certificate of survoy was not presented at the meeting, but any final action
would be ponding upon a proper certificate of purvey being filed in the
City Office.
1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 11/20/79
C. (Continued)
A motion by Dtck Martie, seconded by Fred Topel to approve this request
passed unanim.•tely.
ting adjorrned A a 30.
Loren D. Klein L
Building Official
LDK/ns
•+ ! , •, t , i.�^.:,;,a i•.�y't fGi i it r' + ,\
5i IC � �SY tcot ,. Cnzl N ''"`~•=-.'-�:«�.-...-.:l � �'li: ,�.f •t.,.. �-i
PLS O ��;! ;y ! • :^t +.. ( r 'a'. • .
s7,0141 G Av t.BYBtlD r i ,V +•.." �;.'� ►� i.,. '
AICA
f.
HIGHWAY
ti 1
1
t
\'4 it ryr
'i j-t�T. ••� ",i.:Y jr.,:•C.+,; ,�L ..• ..,.. _ -.� _,. l..C(Vt,�cJtt4
' `� �rlh�. "i.:t�t:�' � ��-• ... m` ,,+„� �- Cif¢_ B �.._
\� • .. l�: ?:i �1 i4: k•l}' acre ao [sra'R . i +i ii•' -'3.11-' ! Ail,
1C
.�• r • Clue ce +, r "'
o—
it
!�
14,
rFR
ICMWAY
3 `'
Prep�t 8r
A. -d BY
N
titi
W3.4
(::PA
31
3:
i
II
3:
it
a
II
.1e
1
,?•f9 A4,.41,
C
'" i�R.# /-il•'c �� 6A.y
L rti./r j IE /
• 7..'../ �'/t....r r < r7v.. � low.•. O N /�,�v.i.1v�
— r �' i s. iia r�o P.}+a c ✓
//
— l�V N(.LLNFii 46• "90,—/
C Xl17IN
� �wlgtDr•o...
/ (meq. SED-
/
�GG
✓
LLT-?
e D;.3,lat �.1e-1 Q9L
/
L�ert 2�o K�
A ,o 4'1
4-7P
5-1 �r•P..1, w'.k(., Q- 1 Zo,.)c ,
MICROFILM TITLE PAGE
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Planning Commission
Agenda Books
1980
V
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
2. Public Hearing - Rezoning Request from R-1 to R-2 - Bradley Larson.
Mr. Brad Larson is requesting that the property presently owned
by the First Baptist Church be rezoned from R-1 to R-2 (initially,
his request for rezoning was for a change to R-3, but since townhouses
as he is proposing to build can he done in an R-2 zone, he has
revised his request).
The intention to rezone is to allow for the construction of five
four -unit townhouses.
The property in question lies between the Railroad tracks and west
Broadway (County Road 75). There is only one single-family dwelling
nearby on the same side (south) of the County Road, although most
of the homes on the north side of the County Road are single family.
Thera are two business locations to the west of the property, and the
present location is whore the First Baptist Church is located. Pre-
sent intentions are to make a duplex out of the Church building, which
must be vacated as a church by August 1, 1990 unless the special
use permit were extended.
Mrs. Candy Johnson, a property owner within 350' of the proposed
rezoning, hao stated her objection to the rezoning of the property,
feeling that the area should remain R-1, or single family only.
In the near future, Mr. Larson plans to ask for a conditional uoo
permit for building townhouses on this parcel if rezoning is approved.
CONSIDERATION, Recommending approval or denial of thin rezoning
requoot.
REPERENCESt Map showing location of proporty.
APPLICANT: Bradley Larson, contract purchaser of the property.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA - 12/18/79
3. Consideration of a Variance Request from Ordinance Provisions on
Home Occupations - Dr. Clarence McCarty.
Dr. Clarence McCarty would like to purchase the former Dan Giddings
property on Lots 13, 14 6 15 in Block 40, Original Plat for his
new residence in MontirP11—
Dr. McCarty is a dentist and would like to open an office in one
room of his new home. Since the practice of dentistry does not
comply with the home occupation definition in our ordinances, a
variance would be necessary.
If the request were granted, only Dr. McCarty would practice his
business there and he would not use a receptionist or any other
employees.
There is adequate off-street parking on the property and no sign
other than could normally be placed on a home in an R-2 zone would
be used.
Caroline Ellison, who lives at 707 West Broadway, is opposed to a
dentist's office in an R-2 zone, and was concerned with a precedent
this might set.
CONSIDERATION, Reconumnd approval or denial of this variance request.
REFERENCES, Map depicting location of property.
APPLICANT, Dr. Clarence McCarty.
04MO✓eo 12-18--99
JA resldentu of Candy Law we are firmly oppoaO to chv>ging tF:, zoning
` of the so-called 'Baptist Church Property' from the eatablichod R-1 to R-3. The
decision to oppose this rezoning proposal is. Laced on the following reaconst
1) We purchased our property with the asuuranco that we n>ro helping, to
establiah a growing single family rouldential neighbaA=d in which
any further construction would conform to the ciiy''a or,!orly plan which
designates the area in quention�as R.I. Any rodium:or high-dobuity
dwellings would change the integrity of our young neighborhood and ala
affect rr�r property valued advercely.
2) Sten though County'Aoad 75 is considered a thoroughfnm, :ao townho,taaa
would create traffic conflicts with the eotablfuhod traffic patterns
of our entire neighborhood. Our neighborhood down not rated mora traffiv.
Oodium or higb=density dwDllingn 'within such a class proximity would
dofinitoly cause an incroaaa in traffic. This would romtlt in a greatar `
hazard for the numerous young chaldron.
Qtr purpbre to not to quootlon'the need for townhouuoc-or cunaoatniuzu in
:iontioollo. We feel however, that uinco the city of 11onticollo eu.i -� ..ox into
roelono for apocaic purponeo.by knowliedguable city plamwra, rx 0g.01 -.4,.
property oaror❑ and tax pnyoro. be'able to doponu oa this c,atinuf.ty. 'dR I., l.r1--",,
now oltWlo family dwollirgn into this noi&borhood. ginco tkoro to 1!,rl ati•ciltiWo
in other cress of the city that to currently doolgttatod R -i. +a fcol t'cr 4v t
O.cranetratcd ootid for thio property to be changed from clrZlo fanily ec]1ya
Yo would like to thank the planning commiuoion for giving. u), n;: x nidcnt.a
wir3 will be coot directly uffuctod by say decision tiaio trotatur.;lty t1.<c ,r,,cI,%,
the njortunity'to rotes our concorn.
=(r . 14• ui�7L Crl���u�''�`u
l�h��;o`
�.1 !iii 7' . t • � � t