Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 08-11-1981 . MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, August 11, 1981 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, John Bondhus, Bill Burke, Dick Martie, Loren Klein Members Absent: Ed Schaffer l-A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 14, 1981. A motion was made by Bondhus, seconded by Burke and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the July 14, 1981 Planning Commission meeting as presented. 1. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment - City of Monticello and Public Hearing - Conditional Use for a Horse Arena- Little Mountain Riders. . A horse riding association named Little Mountain Riders requested permission to build a 100 by 200 foot horse arena on a portion of property owned by Mr. Maurice Hoglund located directly east of the County Road 39 across fram Curt's Storage and Sales. The area pro- posed for the horse arena is presently zoned R-3, and as a result it would be necessary for the city to either adopt an ordinance amendment that would allow a horse arena in an R-3 zone as a con- ditional use or to rezone the property from R-3 to A-O, agricultural- open space, where a horse arena is allowed as a conditional use. . In an agricultural district (A-O), a horse arena is allowed as a conditional use provided that: 1. Animal holding, holding, grazing, and exercise areas are located a minimum of 1,000 feet from any residential, com- mercial, or industrial use district. 2. The land area of the property containing such use or activity meets the minimum established for that district. 3. The Planning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment or conditional use. Its judgement shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: A. Its relationship to the municipal comprehensive plan. B. The geographical area involved. C. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. D. The character of the surrounding area. E. The demonstrated need for the proposed use. 4. All applicable requirements of the state Pollution Control Agency are complied with. - 1 - Planning Commission Minutes - 8/11/81 . Mr. John Uban of Howard Dahlgren and Associates, consulting city planner, reviewed the horse arena idea and indicated in a memo that he did not feel this particular use was appropriate for any residential zoned property. Mr. Uban also indicated that even in an agricultural district, one of the conditions should be that the arena is compatible with the surrounding area and should still be a 1,000 feet from any residential, commercial, or industrial use within the district. A spokesman for the Little Mountain Riders indicated that the associ- ation would erect a three rail wooden fence for an arena and would possibly erect a judges stand, but that no other building on the property would take place. It was noted that such items as lights and a PA system may be possible in the future, but at the present time would not be part of the arena. The spokesman for the group indicated that the property owned by Maurice Hoglund has not been leased, but ~rr. Hoglund has given the group permission to use the property until such time as the property develops or is sold. The spokesman indicated that no animals or equipment would be parked or kept at the site over nite and that dust shouldn't be a problem in the area due to the fact that the riding area would be sand and gravel. . Mr. Chuck Ballard, a resident of the area, presented a petition signed by over 30 people living in the area indicating opposition to the construction of a horse arena. In addition, Mr. Ballard indicated that he felt that a horse arena was totally incompatible with a residentially zoned area and felt such a use was not suitable for any area within a city limit. In addition, Mr. Ballard felt that a horse arena complex could possibly devalue his property and would also create traffic hazards along County Road 39, especially with a large number of slow moving horse trailer vehicles. Mr. Troy Chaplin, also a resident of the area, expressed opposition to the proposal and felt that there was enough traffic generated when Curt's Storage and Sales has their auctions monthly and felt that the additional noise, etc., that could result from horse shows would be a detriment to the area. Mr. Chaplin noted that parking and traffic is already a problem when Curt's storage and Sales has auctions and if a horse show would be held at the same time, addi- tional traffic problems would result. Eleanor Thompson, a member of the Little Mountain Riders, noted that the proposed horse arena would be for recreational purposes and was not intended to be a cornrnerical establishment. She did not feel that crowds would be a problem and that traffic resulting from a horse show would be minimal. She also indicated that the property in question would be aesthetically pleasing in that only a white three board fence would be seen on the property and would not be unattractive to a residential area. . - 2 - Planning Commission Minutes - 8/11/81 . The Planning Commission reviewed the options available which included either adopting an ordinance amendment allowing a horse arena as a conditional use within a residential Zone or rezoning the property from residential to agricultural to allow a horse area as a conditional use. Even if the property was rezoned to agricultural, it appeared that some of the conditions presently provided for in the city ordinances such as 1,000 feet from any residential property could not be met by this site location. The commission members felt that by rezoning the property from residential to agricultural, it would be contrary to the direction of the city growth and the comprehensive plan of the city. In light of the over whelming opposition from the residential neighbors, a motion was made by Bondhus, seconded by Burke and unanimously carried to deny the request for an ordinance amendment thatwould~low a horse arena as a conditional use within an R-3 zone. In addition, a motion was made by Burke, seconded by Martie and unanimously carried to deny any rezoning of the Maurice Hoglund property from R-3 (residential) to A-O (agricultural). It was noted by the commission members to the organization that if an area could be found within the city limits that would not be objected to by the neighbors in the area, the Planning Commission might reconsider the request. . 2. Public Hearinq - Variance Request - Marn Flicker. Mr. Marn Flicker, owner of Flicker's T.V. and Appliance, requested a variance from Monticello Sign Ordinances to place six (6) premise identification signs on the new addition to his present building directly to the south of the now existing appliance store. presently, the east half of the new addition is leased to the Fifth Avenue Water- beds with the west half of the building to be leased to a dental clinic. r~. Flicker requested that the Fifth Avenue Waterbeds be allowed to place an identification sign on the west, south and east sides of the new building and that the proposed dental clinic be also allowed to place an identification sign on the west, south and east side of the building. Under the current Monticello Sign Ordinances, the maximum number of signs on any principal building shall only be two (2) premise identi- fication signs with only two walls being allowed for the display of the signs. Each wall can only contain one (1) premise identification sign. . Mr. Flicker noted that the reason for the request was that the waterbed store located in the east half of the new addition would not have ex- posure to the parking lot at the west end of the building without a sign and also that the dental clinic to be located on the west end of the property would not have exposure to the east along Highway 25 unless a sign was allowed on both ends of the building. - 3 - Planning Commission Minutes - 8/11/81 . Concerns were expressed by the Planning Commission members that if a variance allowing each business to have three signs for three directional exposure, a precedent may be set, whereby other buildings and businesses would also request similar type sign variances. Mr. Flicker noted that to have exposure on three sides, a building would have to be located on a corner and he did not feel that there were that many buildings in Monticello that would have this opportunity. Mr. Flicker indicated that if the six signs were not agreeable to the Planning Commission, then he would request that each business location be allowed two sides of exposure for two wall signs per business. As a result then, the east half of the building would have exposure on Highway 25 and the south side of the building, and the rear occupant, being the dental clinic, would have exposure to the west parking lot area and also to the south. In light of the fact that the present occupants of this new building would probably not need any product identification signs, a motion was made by Bondhus "seconded by Hartie and unanimously carried to allow four identification signs to be placed on this new building with one sign located on the east, one sign on the west, and two signs with south exposure provided that they are identification signs only with no additional product identification signs allowed. . 3. Public Hearing - Variance Request - Northern States Power Company. Mr. Ward King, representative of Northern States Power Company, re- quested a variance for curbing on a portion of the hard surfaced area of their new training center development. Mr. King requested that the curbing between the parking lot and the heliport on the northwesterly corner of the property and also the curbing along a portion of the entrance driveway between the road and the service area towards the rear of the building be eliminated. In addition, Mr. King noted that the training facility is proposing an over flow trailer parking area to be used only in the case of emergencies at the nuclear power plant, and requested that this area not be required to be hard surfaced in light of the infrequent use that it would receive. In regard to the over flow parking area, it was recommended by the Planning Commission that rather than having this area constructed in a gravel surface, it may be more aesthetically pleasing to have the over flow parking area surfaced with grass which would be more effective for controlling dust and drainage, etc. Mr. King noted that this would be agreeable to Northern States Power Company. Hearing no comments from the public, motion was made by Martie, seconded by Burke and unanimously carried to approve the variance request for the elimination of curbing between the parking lot and the heliport and also along a portion of the entrance driveway be- tween the road and the service area towards the rear of the building. . - 4 - Planning commission Minutes - B/ll/Bl . Motion was also made by Bondhus, seconded by Martie and unanimously carried to approve a variance from the hard surface requirements for the over flow parking area proposed at the training facility contin- gent upon the area being surfaced with grass. 4. Public Hearing - Variance Request - Travelers Advertising. Mr. Ray Galarneault, president of the Travelers Advertising Company, requested a variance to allow the erection of two (2) outdoor ad- vertising billboard signs on Lot 9 and Lot 11 of Thomas Industrial Park. Mr. Galarneault currently has purchased Lot 9 in the Thomas Industrial Park and would have a lease agreement for a sign site on Lot ll. . Previously, Blocher Outdoor Advertising Company of st. Cloud had lease agreements for Lots 9 and 11 of Thomas Industrial Park for outdoor advertising signs and recently that company has indicated to the city that they will be relinquishing their grandfather rights to the present signs located on these two lots. As a result, Mr. Galar- neault and his Travelers Advertising Company requested that they be allowed to replace those signs which Blocher Advertising Company relinquished their grandfather rights to with new signs of steel construction. Mr. Galarneault felt that this request was similar to ones previously granted by the city in allowing an existing billboard sign to be replaced with a newer type sign, which would not increase the number of signs allowed presently. It was noted by the Planning Commission members that although the recently adopted ordinance amendment does allow a billboard sign to remain until such time as the property further develops, it was the intent of the council that if a sign was taken down or the rights relinquished by the sign company and the property owner, replacement signs may not be allowed. Mr. Tim Franklin of Franklin Advertising Company spoke in favor of Mr. Galarneault's request and also felt that the request was similar to others granted previously by the council in allowing the replace- ment of an existing sign with an up graded model. Mr. Bidwell of Best In Webb printing Company located in the Industrial Park felt that any billboard signs taken down along the freeway should remain down. Mr. Bidwell indicated that his business along with others located in the Industrial Park feel that the potential exposure that the freeway provides is hindered, if the city continues to allow bill- boards to be replaced. A motion was made by Burke to approve the variance request allowing Mr. Galarneault to replace the two existing signs relinquished by Blocher Advertising Company with new signs. Motion died for a lack of a second. . - 5 - Planning Commission Minutes - B/ll/8l . Due to the intent of the ordinance to amortize the signs out over a period of years after the properties develop along the freeway, motion was made by Bondhus, seconded by Martie to deny the variance request allowing Mr. Galarneault to replace the two existing signs relinquished previously by Blocher Advertising. voting in favor was Ridgeway, Bondhus, and Martie. Opposed: Burke. 5. Public Hearing - Conditional Use for a planned Unit Development - Marvin George. Mr. Marvin George presented to the Planning Commission his develop- ment and final plans for the planned unit residential development to be located on Outlot A of country Club Manor. Mr. George indicated that the streets within the planned Unit Development will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association and that a Homeowners Association By-laws have also been prepared for this development. The final development plan as presented indicates that trees will be planted along the freeway as a buffer for the residential area. In addition, each cul de sac development area will have plantings sur- rounding the buildings as an additional buffer. Mr. George also noted that the present planned schedule of the development would occur over a five to six year period of time with each housing block being de- veloped separately. . It was noted by the building inspector that the Homeowners Association agreement is being reviewed by the city attorney who has yet to com- ment on its contents. Hearing no comments from the public, a motion was made by Bondhus, seconded by Burke and unanimously carried to approve the develop- ment and final plan stages for the Planned Unit Development presented provided that two rows of alternating scotch pine trees are planted approximately five feet apart along the freeway as a buffer zone and contingent upon the review and approval of the Homeowners Association agreement by the city attorney. 6. Public Hearing - Set Back Variance - Bondhus cor~oration. Previously, the Planning Commission approved a variance for the Bondhus Corporation to build a warehouse 22 feet from the front yard property line rather than 40 feet as specified in the ordinance. However, construction of the building has been recently started and it was discovered that the set back for the building is somewhat less than 22 feet and is closer to five or six feet from the property line. As a result, John Bondhus requested that an additional variance be granted allowing the building to set to within five feet of the front yard set back line. . - 6 - Planning Commission Minutes - 8/11/81 . Mr. John Bondhus indicated to the Planning Commission that one of his employees evidently moved the stakes indicating where the prop- erty line was and as a result, the building location waS altered. No comments were heard from the public regarding this variance and since the property in question is bounded by the highway on one side and the railroad tracks on the other, which would not effect adjacent property owners, a motion was made by Burke , seconded by Martie and unanimously carried to approve the variance request allowing the building to be located to within five feet of the front property line. Bondhus abstained from voting. 7. Public Hearing - C6nditionalU:::;e for a PUD.- Jack Kornovich. Due to a conflict, Mr. Kornovich was unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting concerning this item. It will be on the next agenda at the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for September 8. A motion waS made by Martie, seconded by Burke and unanimously carried to adjourn. . - 7 - .