Planning Commission Minutes 05-05-1992
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, May 5, 1992 - 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Dan McConnon, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart,
Richard Carlson
Members Absent:
Cindy Lenun
Staff Present:
Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill
1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Dan McConnon at
7:02 p.m.
2. A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon
Bogart to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held
April 8, 1992. Voting in favor: Richard Martie, Jon Bogart,
Richard Carlson. Abstaining: Dan McConnon.
3. Public Hearing--A conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of
the Monticello Zoninq Ordinance which requires that a planned
unit development include an area of at least 3 acres.
Applicant, Investors Toqether. AND
Public Hearinq--A replattinq request to subdivide Outlot A of
the East View residential subdivision. Applicant, Investors
Toqether. AND
4.
5. Public Hearing--A conditional use request allowing a townhouse
development in an R-2 zone.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, stated that Investors
Together has encountered some engineering problems with their
proposed townhouse plat. Due to the delay, they are
requesting the Planning Conunission to continue the public
hearings.
Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the public hearings.
There being no input from the public, Chairperson Dan McConnon
then opened the meeting for comments from the Planning
Conunission members.
There being no input from the Planning Conunission members, a
motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Jon Bogart
to continue the public hearings for the following items: A
conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance which requires that a planned unit
development include an area of at least 3 acres; A replatting
request to subdivide Outlot A of the East View residential
Page 1
.
.
.
Planning Conunission Minutes - 5/5/92
subdivision; and a conditional use request allowing a
townhouse development in an R-2 zone. Motion carried
unanimously.
6. Consideration of callinq a public hearinq on rezoninq Thomas
Park Drive area from B-2 to I-l zoning district desiqnation.
Applicant, Monti Motors and Hoqlund Bus Company.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the request by
Monti Motors and Hoglund Bus Company to rezone the Thomas Park
Drive area from B-2 (limited business) to 1-1 (light
industrial) zoning. O'Neill explained that the rezoning is
proposed for all of the Thomas Park addition and a portion of
an unplatted tract of land owned by Hoglund Bus Company lying
just north of the Monti Motors lot in Thomas Park.
O'Neill went on to explain that this is a request for the
Planning Conunission members to call for a public hearing on
rezoning the areas described above from B-2 (limited business)
to 1-1 (light industrial) zoning.
Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input
from the public. Mr. Wayne Hoglund, Hoglund Bus Company,
explained that he would like the area that is currently used
for old bus storage area to be rezoned from B-2 to I-l. If
the area is rezoned, he intends to install a 6-foot high
screening fence around the perimeter of the bus storage area.
Mr. Pat Townsend, part owner of Monti Motors, explained that
he and his partner, Mr. Jamison, are proposing to expand the
existing Monti Motors business to include repair and sale of
boats and boat-related accessories.
Dan McConnon conunented that information regarding the subject
properties could be discussed at the public hearing.
There being no further information, a motion was made by
Richard Martie and seconded by Richard Carlson to call for a
public hearing on the rezoning of the Thomas Park Drive area
from B-2 to 1-1 zoning. Motion carried unanimously.
7. Consideration of application for a home occupation permit.
Applicant, John Zavodnick.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the request by
Mr. Zavodnick to perform skate sharpening and to sell hockey-
related accessory equipment from his home. O'Neill outlined
the approved uses of a home occupation within residential
Page 2
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92
zoning districts. The proposed use by Mr. Zavodnick did not
appear in the list of allowable uses within the home
occupation section of the ordinance; however, the proposed
home occupation may meet the intent of the ordinance.
Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input
from the public.
The Zavodnicks explained their proposed use would be primarily
for the sharpening of hockey skates. Due to the present lack
of a sporting goods store from which to purchase hockey-
related equipment in the city of Monticello, the Zavodnicks
are proposing to offer a service where equipment could be
ordered from a catalog or purchased from stock at their
residence. The proposed use of their residence would be
primarily seasonal during hockey with hopes that they could
establish a pick-up and drop-off center at the school for ice
skate sharpening rather than individuals bringing the skates
to their residence.
.
Planning Commission members basically didn't have any problem
with the sharpening of skates at the residence. The activity
is seasonal. They were concerned, however, with the
additional traffic that would be encountered with individuals
delivering and picking up skates. It was recommended that
skates be picked up from teams after practice and delivered
all at once, thereby reducing the number of individual trips.
Another concern was the use of the residence for display of
hockey-related equipment for sale. Planning Commission
members stated that they would see no problem with the
Zavodnicks operating as a mail order business only with
deliveries made directly to purchasers.
There being no further input from the Planning Commission
members or the public, it was the recommendation of the
Planning Commission members to approve a home occupation for
the operation of a skate sharpening business at this residence
and to encourage the owners to have a catalog order operation
only for the purchase of hockey-related equipment with the
equipment being shipped directly to the purchaser. Approval
was given on a temporary basis for one hockey season only.
Consensus was by all five commission members, as Cindy Lemm
has now joined the meeting.
O'Neill noted he would incorporate the Planning Commission
comments into the permit terms.
.
Page 3
Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92
.
8. Review site plan--public works facility expansion project.
Consider calling for a public hearinq on amendments to Section
10-6 rC] and 10-8 of the zoninq ordinance.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the site plan
for the proposed new public works expansion project. O'Neill
explained that the public works facility expansion would
consist of three phases, with phase I being the proposed new
maintenance building.
.
In reviewing the site plan, O'Neill pointed out the proposed
relocation of the motor fuel dispenser to the west end near
the property line between the Westcello Apartment parking lot
and the public works facility. Evergreen tree plantings will
be installed along the westerly property line with
approximately 10 feet between each tree.
Hard surfacing is proposed in phase I only on the westerly
portion of the site extending to the existing pole building,
along the west side of the new proposed maintenance building,
and in the westerly portion of the existing water department
and public works office building.
As part of phase II, a new salt storage building would be
attached near the northeast corner of the proposed new
maintenance building, and a new washroom bay would be
constructed between the existing maintenance shop and the new
maintenance storage facility building, and new restrooms and
lunch area would be attached to the south side of the existing
maintenance shop.
Phase III would include connection of the existing maintenance
shop and the existing water department and public works office
building.
O'Neill noted that technically, a zoning ordinance amendment
is not necessary to allow the public works facility to be
constructed because the existing use is considered a permitted
use. Specifically, the zoning ordinance stated:
PERFORMANCE ZONE PERMITTED USES:
Only the following uses are permitted uses within
a PZM district:
[C] Those uses that exist prior to the adoption
of this chapter.
. Page 4
Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92
.
A literal interpretation of the language above would indicate
that the public works facility (former NSP site) is allowed as
a permitted use because it existed prior to the adoption of
the chapter (PZM district regulations).
Staff is recommending that the ordinance be amended by
eliminating Section [Cl above because it also has the effect
of labeling the activity conducted by Ruff Auto as a permitted
use. As a permitted use, Ruff Auto could expand into other
property in the PZM zone. The negative potential of this
occurring is staggering. Much of the land near Ruff Auto is
undeveloped and could potentially be used by Ruff for
expansion areas. Particularly, the land owned by Tom Brennan
between Ruff Auto and the freeway is in the PZM zone. From a
technical standpoint, according to the literal interpretation
of the ordinance, Ruff could expand his junk yard into these
areas.
.
0' Neill suggested that it was not the intent of the PZM
regulations to allow Ruff Auto or other uses incompatible with
the PZM district purpose to be allowed as permitted uses
without the constraints associated with being lawful
conforming uses. Unfortunately, a literal interpretation of
10-6 [Cl would lead one to think that all uses in the PZM zone
in existence at the time of adoption are now considered
permitted uses. City staff requests the Planning Commission
to review this matter and consider calling a public hearing on
abolishing or amending 10-6 [C]. In addition to abolishing
10-6 [C], Planning Commission is asked to call for a public
hearing on establishment of a zoning ordinance amendment that
would allow operation of a municipal public works facility as
a conditional use in the PZM zone.
Following are comments on the sketch plan submitted.
1.
Screening Fence. Planning Commission recommends that the
site plan be amended to include a fence along the western
boundary of the property screening the view of the public
works facility from the apartment property. The Planning
Commission did not support inserting metal slats in the
existing fence. They felt it proper to either construct
a new wood fence or install redwood slats in the existing
fence.
2.
Gasoline Storage and Dispensinq. Planning Commission
strongly recommended that the station for storing and
dispensing gasoline be moved to the other side of the
property directly east of the exit from the new storage
building.
.
Page 5
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92
3. Driveway and Parking Phasing. Planning Commission felt
that the plan as proposed, which shows the phasing in of
drive areas with subsequent development phases, is
consistent with what Planning Commission and the City
have allowed in the past; therefore, the proposed phasing
of parking and drive areas is acceptable.
4. Storage Areas. Planning Commission was comfortable with
allowing the storage/drive areas to continue to be
surfaced with a gravel surface. It was agreed that these
areas can be watered if complaints about dust are heard
from adjoining property owners.
5. Landscapinq. Planning Commission recommended that
additional trees or screening material be planted in
locations where they could provide additional screening
of outside storage.
It was also recommended that a row of seedlings be
planted on the boundary of the property adjoining the
railroad right-of-way.
Finally, it was recommended that a bituminous surface be
developed at the entrance to the gravel surface area on
the east side of the property. This will reduce the
amount of gravel material that could possibly track onto
the county right-of-way.
There being no further input from the Planning Commission
members, a motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by
Richard Carlson, to set a public hearing for the next
regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on June 2,
1992, to consider an amendment to Sections 10-6 [C] and 10-8
of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Motion carried
unanimously.
Additional Information Items
1. A variance request to allow construction of a house and garage
on a lot with less than the minimum square footage.
Applicant, Ed Kruse. Council action: No action required, as
the request did not come before them.
2.
A conditional use
in an 1-1 ( light
Council action:
recommendation.
request to expand a bowling alley facility
industrial) zone. Applicant, Al Joyner.
Approved as per Planning Commission
Page 6
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92
3. A conditional use request to allow auto body repair in a B-3
(highway business) zone. Applicant, John Johnson. Council
action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
4. A request for an ordinance amendment to add private
retractable antenna tower to be allowed as a conditional use
in a PZM (performance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, Tom Ware.
Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
5. A conditional use request to allow a private retractable
antenna tower to be allowed in a PZM (performance zone mixed)
zone. Applicant, Tom Ware. Council action: Approved as per
Planning Commission recommendation.
6. A variance request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development
include an area of at least 3 acres. Applicant, Investors
Together. Council action: No action required, as the request
did not come before them.
7 .
replatting request to subdivide Outlot A
residential subdivision. Applicant,
Council action: No action required, as
come before them.
A public hearing--A
of the East View
Investors Together.
the request did not
8. A conditional use request allowing a townhouse development in
an R-2 zone. Applicant, Investors Together. Council action:
No action required, as the request did not come before them.
9. A variance request to allow construction of a warehouse
building within the front, rear, and side yard setback
requirements. Applicant, J .M. Oil. Council action: No
action required, as the request did not come before them.
10. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission members to set
the next tentative meeting date for Tuesday, June 2, 1992,
7 p.m.
11. A motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Cindy Lemm to
adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:49 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
#~
Gary nderson
Zoning Administrator
Page 7