Planning Commission Minutes 04-14-1981
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, April 14, 1981 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Bill Burke, Dick Martie, Ed Schaffer, Loren Klein.
Members Absent: John Bondhus.
1-A. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 10, 1981 (There
was no regular meeting held in March of 1981).
A motion was made by Bill Burke, seconded by Dick Martie and unanimously
carried to approve the Minutes of the February 10, 1981 meeting, as
presented.
1.
Public Hearing - Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit Request for
Charles Ritze.
Phil Ritze, representing his father Charles Ritze, was present at the meet-
ing and eXplained his proposal for removal of soil from property they own
which is part of the northwest ~ of the southwest ~ of Section 3, Township
l2lW, Range 25N, which lies south of County Road 75, across from the existing
Ritze Manor. A conditional use permit is required whenever the extraction
of sand, gravel, or other material from the land in the amount of 400 cubic
yards or more, and the removal thereof is done. Monticello Ordinances
define this as "mining".
Mining shall be permitted only upon the issuance of a conditional use
permit within all zoning districts in the City.
This item was brought before the Planning Commission as defined as m1n1ng,
since normally it takes place under a provision as part of the subdivision
approval when grading is completed to bring the property to the proposed
grades. However, in this case, the subdivision is not being proposed as
such, only the grading work which would be necessary to bring the property
to the desired grade. Thus, a mining permit, such as defined by Monticello
Ordinances, was necessary. It would be Mr. Ritze's intent, that the fill
which would be removed from the mining site would be transferred to the low
area in Ritze Manor, to be used for fill to bring the lots up to the required
grade. Both of the areas in question, in this case, are zoned as R-1.
Adjacent to the property on which Charles Ritze is proposing to remove
soil for fill in another location, is a high area which Mr. Ritze dedicated
to the City for park area. However, in removing the soil from his own pro-
perty adjacent to the area dedicated for park, it would leave a high area
in the parkland. Mr. Ritze has agreed that he would enter into an agreement
with the City to remove the soil from the high area in the park also, thus
making the appearance of the area of the park and of the area where the soil
would be removed, more compatible in appearance upon completion.
- 1 -
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/14/81
There was a motion by Ed Schaffer, and seconded by Bill Burke, to recommend
approval for this mining operation, contingent upon it not taking longer
than ninety (90) days, and that Mr. Ritze consider entering an agreement
with the City for removal of the high area in the land which was dedicated
for a park, with all voting in favor.
2.
Public Hearing - Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit Request - Vance
Florell.
Vance F1orell, owner of the Freeway Standard Station, made an application
for a conditional use to allow open and/or outdoor storage and/or sales
on the parcel of the 1-94 Tri-Plaza where the Freeway Standard Station is
now located. This property is zoned B-3. Specifically, Mr. Florell's
request was for a proposed U-Hau1 Rental business.
Two items of concern in this matter were:
A. Outside services, sales and equipment rental connected with the princi-
pal use is limited to 30% of the gross floor area of the principal use.
(This percentage may be increased as a condition of the conditional use).
B. That the use does not take up parking space as required for conformity
to this ordinance.
Due to the nature of Mr. Flore1l's proposed rental business, it was necessary
as a condition of this conditional use to request the increase of the 30%
of the gross floor area of the principal use to a larger figure. However,
in increasing the area to larger than 30%, it is necessary to consider
not taking up parking space as is required for the conformity to the Ordinance.
Mr. Florel1 felt that even though he provides the required parking spaces
in conformance to what Monticello ordinance requires, that there is not a
need for all of the parking spaces required, and that there is adequate
room for all of his customer parking, etc., plus enough additional room
to allow him to provide U-Haul Rental from that property.
A motion was made by Dick Martie and seconded by Bill Burke to allow
the U-Hau1 business to be opened, contingent upon it not exceeding 30%
of the gross floor area of the principal use, and contingent upon the
second pylon sign, which advertised U-Haul rentals, being removed and
incorporated as part of the now-existing pylon sign. All voted in favor.
- 2 -
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/14/81
3. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Rezoning Request by Me1 Wolters in
the Meadows Subdivision Plat.
Mel Wolters, owner of The Meadows,
zoning of the Meadows from R-l to
Block 3, and Lots 1-15 and Lot 24,
was present and proposed changing the
R-2, for Lots 1-11, Block 2, Lots 1-9,
Block 4, and Lots 1 & 2 of Block 5.
Mr. Wolters made his proposal, based on a desire to locate zero lot line
duplexes on various lots throughout The Meadows subdivision, although he
indicated that it would be his intention to most likely not make more
than 50% of the lots with duplexes upon them.
Some discussion followed as to whether or not Mr. Wolters could be held
to his intention of only building duplexes on 50% of the lots if the
entire parcel were rezoned to R-2, and consequently, Dick Martie made
a motion, seconded by Bill Burke to recommend the change from R-l to
R-2 only on Lots 1-11 of Block 2 and 1-9 of Block 3. When Mr. Wolters
indicated he would be favorable to accepting that recommendation, all
voted in favor.
4.
Public Hearing - Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit Request (Re-
Hearing) for Medical Facilities Company.
On September 22, 1980, a public hearing on the rezoning and conditional use
for a proposed medical clinic east of the Monticello-Big Lake Community
Hospital was held. Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital had requested
rezoning of Lots 1 & 13, and the West 33' of Lot 2, Block 22, Lower Monti-
cello, and the east half of Oak Street lying between Block 22 and 23,
Lower Monticello, from R-1 to R-B. In addition to their rezoning request,
the Hospital had also made an application for a conditional use for a
proposed medical clinic.
At that meeting, it had been noted that previously, the City of Monticello
had received correspondence from people living in the area of Ellison Park,
expressing concern with the possible extension of River Street to accommodate
a parking lot at the rear of the proposed medical clinic. At that time,
the rezoning request and conditional use for the clinic did not propose
to have River Street extended to meet the parking lot, but rather it was
designed to have the parking lot traffic enter and exit onto Hart Blvd.
At that time, the developer of the Clinic indicated that, if for some
reason, Hart Boulevard could not be used exclusively as the entrance and
exit point to the parking lot, that they may approach the City for the
possible extension of River Street to the rear of the parking lot.
Barb Schwientek, Executive Director of the Monticello-Big Lake Hospital,
was present and indicated it is now the developers intention to extend
River Street to allow access to the parking lot, thus the rehearing was
necessary.
- 3 -
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/14/81
.
Mrs. Irwin Kallin, a resident of the area, presented a letter to the Planning
Commission, and outlined some of her concerns. They were as follows:
A. A potential of increased traffic flow which will increase the traffic
danger to the children.
B. A potential of further increased traffic if the parking lot is used by
Hospital customers rather than just employees as originally proposed.
C. A potential of lowering the asset value of their property as they now
have a quiet, low-traffic area and this could possibly change.
D. It could provide an idea, new remote area for additional problems
to occur at night, including drug useage.
E. It could create a great location for drag racing.
Further, a petition was presented by several of the neighbors in the area,
which basically outlined the same concerns as the letter presented by
Mrs. Kal1in.
.
Fred Topel objected if access were g01ng to be used to bring the ambulance
into the Hospital on River Street. Bud Jensen objected to increased traffic
in the area. Fred Topel was concerned as to who would pay the cost of
the assessments for the extension of River Street (this cost would be borne
by the abutting property owners, who in this case, is entirely the Hospital
District) .
Lowell Severson questionned whether or not a years delay could be instituted
before opening up River Street to see if it was really necessary.
Barb Schwientek pointed out that not passing on this issue would jeopardize
the proposed clinic.
A motion was made by Ed Schaffer and seconded by Dick Martie to recommend
opening River Street with better police protection in that area to be
provided. All voted in favor.
S. New Business -
.
Jim Sorenson, a representative of Blocher Outdoor Advertising Company,
was present to make a request that in light of the fact they would be
removing two of their outdoor advertising signs in Thomas Park, that
they would like to request a variance to erect a new pylon sign over
in Lauring Hillside Terrace. Mr. Sorenson was instructed by the
Chairman to make a formal variance application in the zoning adminis-
trator's office and pay the required fee, and that if this was done
in adequate time, that he could be placed on the next Planning Commis-
sion agenda on May l2, 1981.
- 4 -