Planning Commission Minutes 11-03-1993
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, November 3, 1993.7 p.m.
Members Present: Cindy Lemm, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson, Brian Stumpf
Members Absent: Richard Martie
Staff Present:
Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill, Ollie Koropchak
1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Cindy Lemm at 7 :04 p.m.
2. A motion was made by Brian Stumpf and seconded by Jon Bogart to
approve the minutes of the regular meeting held October 5, 1993. Motion
carried unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
3.
Public HearingnConsideration of a request to amend 3-4 [Gl1(b) of the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance by amending the current requirement that a 2-
story dwelling contain at least 750 SQ ft of floor area per story. The section
would be amended as follows: "2-story dwellings shall contain a total
minimum floor area of 960 SQ ft. Minimum floor area for a 2-story dwelling
shall not include floor area necessary to accommodate stairwells."
Applicant, Value Plus Homes.
With the Planning Commission Chairperson, Cindy Lemm, noting that the
applicants were not there, she asked for a motion to continue the public
hearing until the next meeting when the applicants were here.
Therefore, a motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Brian Stumpf
to continue the public hearing until the next meeting when the applicants
are here. Motion carried unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
4. Public HearingnConsideration of a request for a 2-ft variance to the 10-ft
side yard setback requirement. Request is in coni unction with the
construction of an addition to a single family dwelling. Location: Block 5,
Lot 14, Lower Monticello. Applicant, Kevin and Mary Hook.
AND
5.
Public HearingnConsideration of a request for a 5-ft variance to the side
yard setback requirement requested in coniunction with construction of a
detached garage. Location is Block 5, Lot 14, Lower Monticello. Applicant,
Kevin and Mary Hook.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained Kevin and Mary Hook's
request for a variance to the side yard setback requirement to allow
construction of an addition to their home within a portion of the side yard
Page 1
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
.
setback requirement. Their request was for a 2-ft variance to the 10-ft side
yard setback minimum requirement. The Hooks are requesting the 2-ft
variance encroachment to enlarge the existing room on the east side of the
existing structure. Upon consideration of the variance request, the variance
should only be granted in those circumstances where a true hardship is
presented by a unique factor, generally topographical in nature, and not
self-created whereby the property cannot be put into reasonable use without
deviating from the ordinance.
Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing.
Lee Hatfield, adjoining neighbor to the west of the applicant's property,
informed Planning Commission members he had no problem with the
Hook's request, that it would be an enhancement to both his property and
also their property.
.
Dave Ecceles, Kevin and Mary Hook's builder, eXplained why location is
needed, as the entrance to the garage where it currently sits is located on a
straight-in location. To allow entrance into this garage, the garage must
remain in its present location within the side yard setback requirement.
Mr. Hook suggested that the Planning Commission members consider an
ordinance amendment to reduce the minimum setbacks for detached
garages.
Cindy Lemm then closed the public hearing and opened it up for further
input from the Planning Commission members.
Concerns addressed by the Planning Commission members were that if they
granted a variance request for an encroachment into the side yard setback
for additions to the existing structures, it might set a precedent for future
applications. The locations of garages when they were placed on the lots in
the Original Plat addition and the Lower Monticello plat additions in the
city of Monticello were placed here and there with no rhyme or reason to
their locations in regard to setback requirements. If a variance was granted
in this case, as might have been the case as some other variances at other
times by previous Planning Commission members, it would set a precedent
to future variance requests wherein there really is no hardship other than
the hardship that was created with location of these prior to these people
purchasing the property with no setbacks required by ordinance.
.
Therefore, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon
Bogart to deny the request for a 2-ft variance to the 10-ft side yard setback
requirement. Motion carried unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
Reason for denial is based on the finding that a hardship has not been
demonstrated and the property can still be economically used for the
purpose for which it is intended.
Page 2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
Upon previous discussion, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and
seconded by Jon Bogart to look at a possible ordinance amendment in the
Original Plat and Lower Monticello Additions in the city of Monticello to
allow detached garages or detached accessory buildings to be located closer
than the 10-ft minimum side yard setback requirement. Motion carried
unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
6.
Consideration of a request for a conditional use permit to allow outside
stora~c. Applicant. Custom Canopy.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained Custom Canopy's request
for a conditional use permit to allow outside storage in conjunction with the
recent development of their new facility. As part of the outside storage
conditional use permit, O'Neill explained some proposed conditions
associated with the conditional use permit allowing outside storage.
1.
The area north of the paved area is considered to be storage
area rather than parking area, this area is used primarily for
storage of materials to be used in future projects and also used
for short-term storage of semi-trailer trucks that carry
materials to and from work sites. It was determined that this
area will be screened from the view through the use of an 8-ft
high screening fence that will extend from the northeast corner
of the structure along the curb line to 10 ft from Fallon Avenue
right-of-way. The screening area will then be extended
northerly along Fallon Avenue to a distance of 100 ft from the
driveway access point on Fallon Avenue, then extended across
the property along the rear property line to a point
approximately even with the northwest corner of the existing
structure. The intent of the screening is to screen the view of
the storage from the Fallon Avenue right-of-way.
2. The storage area will be graded to allow drainage to the Fallon
Avenue ditch at an elevation approximately level with the
existing paved surface. The storage area will be surfaced with
a crushed concrete material. The entire area enclosed by the
fence will be covered with this material.
3.
It was determined that the landscaping plan would be modified
per ordinance requirements to incorporate the presence of the
screening fence, and the tree planting requirements would be
modified to include a larger development area. It was
determined the tree plantings would be established at 25-ft to
30-ft intervals along Fallon Avenue side of the screening fence.
Page 3
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
.
4.
No storage of materials shall be allowed in areas designated on
the site plan for parking. The grading plan and screening
fence design and setback will be subject to the review and
approval of the City Planner and staff.
Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing.
Cindy Lemm then read a letter from the Industrial Development Committee
expressing their concerns on the manufacturing that is occurring on the
paved area to the north of their existing building and also the outside
storage of materials on or near this paved area. The garbage dumpster in
its location in the southeast corner of the existing building, if it could be
relocated back inside the building or into a screened-in fenced area.
.
Mr. Birkeland, representing Custom Canopy, explained due to the nature of
the additional volume of their business this year, which was not quite
expected, they haven't had time to get the overhead crane inside, which
would take care of loading/unloading for a majority of the items which are
currently stored outside. He did agree that the area was being used for
manufacturing and also for the storage of some materials used in the
construction of the canopies which his company builds. Mr. Birkeland
questioned the height of the proposed screening fence that would be needed
to screen the majority of his property of the materials that would be stored
in there. You would still be able to see his two van trucks that are parked
in there and also the semi-truck tractors when they are parked in there,
even with an 8-ft high fence.
Chairperson Cindy Lemm then closed the public hearing and opened it up
for comments from Planning Commission members. Without the crane
being installed at this time, would the screening fence be completed by
December 31, 1993. They also voiced their concerns on the screening fence
in relationship to the material that would be stored on a semi-truck tractor
trailer. If the material is stored on this trailer, would the screening fence
still be of sufficient height to screen this?
There being no further comments from the Planning Commission members,
a motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Carlson to
approve the conditional use request allowing outside storage in an 1-2
(heavy industrial) zone with the following conditions:
1.
The entire area used for storage and hard surfaced parking and
an additional area approximately 100 ft north of that to be
entirely enclosed with an 8-ft high screening fence around the
east, north, and west side up to the existing northwest corner
of the building or up to the building of a proposed paint room
addition.
.
Page 4
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
2.
The storage area to be graded so as to allow drainage to the
Fallon Avenue ditch line at an elevation approximately level
with the existing paved surface. The storage area will be
surfaced with a crushed concrete material. The entire area
enclosed by the fence will be covered with this material.
3. The landscaping plan would be modified per ordinance
requirements to incorporate the presence of a screening fence,
and the tree planting requirements would be modified to
include a larger development area. The tree plantings to be
reviewed by City staff prior to planting.
4. No storage of materials shall be allowed in areas designated on
the site plan for parking or driveway, which also includes the
existing garbage dumpster placed out in the southeast corner of
the building to be relocated within the screened, fenced-in area
on the north side of the building.
5. Grading plan and the screening fence design and final location
will be subject to the review and approval by the City Planner
and staff.
Motion carried unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
7.
Consideration of a request for a conditional use permit which would allow
outside sales, outside storage, and consideration of a parking and drive aisle
conditional use permit. Location: Lot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park.
Applicant, Simonson Lumber.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained Simonson Lumber's
requests as follows:
1. Conditional use permit allowing outside sales. On the enclosed
site plan, you will note near the main gate is an area where
storage sheds are constructed and also used as a sales area for
these storage buildings. The location of the storage sheds does
not appear to be a problem, only if it is used for outside sales,
not for the use of the manufacturing or building of these
storage sheds in this area.
2.
Conditional use permit allowing- outside storage. The
ordinance requires that all outside storage be screened from
the view from the public right-of-way. The proposed plan by
Simonson's has the area on the west side of their building site
to be screened with a screening fence; however, Simonson's
would not like to screen the northeast portion of their building
Page 5
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
site which is currently used for building material storage where
customers can come in and pick up the building materials that
are needed, most generally the building material is dimensional
lumber in this area. This is the area which Simonson's would
not like to screcn at all.
3.
Parking lot and drive aisle conditional use permit. The
parking lot serving Simonson Lumber and the driving area
serving the lumber area were all designed prior to the zoning
ordinance. The parking lot features a paved area without curb
and gutter. Simonson's is requesting not to install curb and
gutter in these areas. On the west side of the property, they
are proposing to put in a cedar split rail fence.
4.
Landscaping. According to the ordinance, the site should
contain a minimum of 43 overstory trees. The current site
contains 11 overstory trees and some shrubs, which leaves 27
trees which need to be planted. The proposed plan calls for
planting of 18 additional trees. If a credit of 10 trees is
provided for shrub planting, there remains a deficit of 9 trees.
You will note on the proposed site plan where the additional
trees are proposed to be planted.
Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing. Mark KIaverman,
represcnting Simonson Lumber Company, explained that Simonson's is
proposing to meet the minimum city requirements as far as outside sales
area goes, as they will relocate the manufacturing or building of these
storage buildings to an area near one of their storage buildings in the back
of their lot. Therefore, the buildings, when they are completed, will be
placed in the area for the outside sales. In the outside storage area, they
are willing to screen on the west side of their property; and on the northeast
portion of their property, they would like to leave this open with no
screening fence installed around it. Mark indicated that this area is retail
oriented with the customers coming in to pick up their dimensional lumber
which is stored in these areas, whereas it's not used strictly by Simonson's
for the loading of these materials onto their trucks to be delivered out to the
customer's job sites. Parking lot and drive aislenwould like it to remain as
is without any curb and gutter around its perimeter. They are proposing to
add an additional cedar split rail fence along the west side of the parking
lot to further discourage customers from driving through this area off the
hard surfaced paving onto the grassy area. By the addition of curbing
around the existing parking lot, it would be cost prohibitive at this time, as
the parking lot is nearing its useful life expectancy and would be ready for
an overlay in the upcoming years. If the curbing is installed at this time
.
Page 6
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
.
and the patchwork that is going would have to go in in conjunction with the
concrete curbing, it would be cost prohibitive for them to do that at this
time. Mark also indicated they would propose to plant additional trees as
noted on the enclosed site plan.
There being no further comment from the public, Cindy Lemm then closed
the parking hearing and opened it up for additional comments from
Planning Commission members.
Planning Commission members felt the northeast storage area needed to be
screened, as well as the area on the west side of their building site.
Therefore, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon
Bogart to approve the conditional use permit allowing outside sales area
contingent on the following:
a. No construction of articles sold in the outside sales area is
allowed. Construction activities must occur within the
screened-in area of the facility.
b.
If the need for additional parking arises, the outside sales area
must be converted to a parking area at the discretion of the
City of Monticello.
.
c. Completion of the landscaping plan as required by the City.
Motion carried unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
Decision #2: A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon
Bogart to approve the conditional use permit allowing outside storage
contingent on the following:
a. The area containing lumber and other items for sale along with
Chelsea Road is considered an area for outside storage and
thus should be screened appropriately.
b. Completion of the landscaping plan as required by the City.
Motion carried unanimously with Richard Martie absent.
.
Decision #3: A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon
Bogart to approve a parking lot and drive aisle conditional use permit. The
east, west, and north sides of the existing parking lot perimeter to be
curbed with concrete curbing. Voting in favor: Richard Carlson, John
Bogart, Brian Stumpf. Opposed: Cindy Lemm. Absent: Richard Martie.
Page 7
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
Decision #4: A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon
Bogart to approve the landscaping plan as proposed. Voting in favor:
Richard Carlson, Jon Bogart, Cindy Lemm. Opposed: Brian Stumpf.
Absent: Richard Martie.
8.
Review potential residential development of Robert Krautbauer property
and identify development goals/perimeters.
Planning Commission members gathered around the table to look over the
proposed development of the Robert Krautbauer property and offered their
input into the potential development of his property. No formal action was
taken at this time.
Additional Information Items
1. Consideration of a variance request to Section 3-5 [D]9(j), which would allow
more than one (1) curb cut per 125 ft of street frontage. Applicant, Custom
Canopy. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come
before them.
2.
Consideration of preliminary plat approval of "Monticello Commerce Center
1st Addition." Applicant, Monticello Industrial Park, Inc. Council action:
Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
3. Consideration of preliminary plat approval of "Point Minnie." Applicant,
Stuart Hoglund. Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
4. Consideration of amendment to Chapter 16 of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance, which would permit the use of a temporary structure not to
exceed 700 sq ft that is accessory to a principal use on an interim basis for
a period not to exceed a specified maximum period of time. The interim use
is not considered to constitute an expansion of a pre-existing legal non-
conforming use where applicable. Applicant, Community United Methodist
Church. Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
5. Consideration of a variance request to allow a building addition onto a non-
conforming structure in a rear yard setback requirement. Applicant, Gene
Jestus. Council action: Denied as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
Page 8
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/3/93
6.
Consideration of amendment to Chapter 3-5 [D]9(f) of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance, which would allow curb cut widths in commercial and industrial
districts to exceed the width of 24 ft at the discretion of the City Engineer
and Zoning Administrator. Applicant, Monticello Planning Commission.
Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
7. Set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission meeting
for Tuesday, December 7, 1993, at 7 p.m. It was the consensus of the
Planning Commission members to set this as the date for the next meeting.
8. A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Brian Stumpf to
adjourn the meeting. The motion carried unanimously with Richard Martie
absent. The meeting adjourned at 9:57 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~.~~
Gar Anderson
Zoning Administrator
Page 9