Planning Commission Minutes 03-20-1979
.
.
.
~
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, March 20, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Fred Topel, Ed Schaffer. Loren Klein (ex-officio).
Members Absent: Dave Bauer, Dick Martie.
1. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Fred Topel, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously
carried to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held
February 20, 1979.
2. Public Hearing for Consideration of Subdivision of Lot by James Refrigeration.
James Refrigeration Company made application to subdivide the lot they own
on south Highway 25 where the Tom Thumb store is being currently built.
Their proposal was to make two lots of approximately 39,465 square feet and
the other lot 32,670 square feet. Both lots, if approved, would exceed
the 100' width requirement.
The subdivision, as proposed, indicates that the driveway access off of
Oakwood Drive onto Parcel A would require an easement from Parcel B.
Without an easement from Parcel B, Parcel A would be landlocked if the
subdivision was approved as presented. After discussion with the repre-
sentative from James Refrigeration Company, it was the consensus of the
Planning Commission to change the lot line so that Parcel A, the present
Tom Thumb Store site, would have a direct access onto County Road 117.
Motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Fred Topel and unanimously
carried to approve the subdivision provided a new certificate of survey
was drawn up showing that Parcel A would have direct access onto County
Road 117.
3. Consideration of Variance Request for pylon Sign Ordinance Requirements
for Rosewood Corporation.
Rosewood Corporation, owner of the Monticello Mall, requested a variance
to allow the expansion of an existing pylon sign from 108 square feet to
approximately 160 square feet. The variance was necessary in that the
current ordinances only allow one pylon sign per business and the Shopping
Center already has two pylon signs. The two pylon signs that are in
existence would be grandfathered in, but the ordinance provides that any
non-conforming sign cannot be expanded or enlarged without a variance.
Mr. Ken Bureau, representing Rosewood Corporation, indicated that they
would consider taking down the second pylon sign but that it would be
more costly than what it would be worth, and asked that the variance
be granted to just expand the present sign which would still be within
the 200 square foot limits for the area.
~
.
.
.
~
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/20/79
Motion was made by Fred Topel, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously
carried to approve the variance allowing the Monticello Mall to expand
the present pylon sign at their entrance provided it does not exceed the
200 square foot maximum allowed for this area.
4.
Consideration of a Variance Application - Electro Industries.
Mr. William Seefeldt, of Electro Industries, was proposing to build a new
cold storage warehouse building at their present industrial site, and re-
quested the following variances:
A. A setback of 16' rather than 40' as required in an 1-1 zone; and
B. To waive the hardsurfaced parking requirements and only be required
to have portions of the concrete curbing as required.
Mr. Seefeldt asked that he be granted the variance to build his new
building 16' from the property line rather than the 40' since this would
allow his new structure to be in alignment with the existing building.
Mr. Seefeldt felt that as long as this area is rural in nature and that
no services exist to the area and that the road is gravel, he also
requested that the hardsurfaced parking requirements be waived for his
business.
In regards to the setback variance, a motion was made by Ed Schaffer,
seconded by Fred Topel and unanimously carried to approve the 16' setback
variance for the new addition since this would be in alignment with the
present structure.
In regards to the hardsurfaced parking requirements, a motion was made
by Fred Topel, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously carried to deny
any variances from the concrete curb barriers and hardsurfaced parking
requirements of the ordinances. The reason for the denial was they felt
this would set a precedence for other industries, whether it was Oakwood
Industrial Park or wherever, to ask for a similar type variance.
5. Discussion on Setting a possible Second Meeting Date for the Planning
Commission for Each Month.
It was the recommendation of the Building Inspector, Loren Klein, that
during the busy season of the summer months the Planning Commission
consider meeting every two weeks if a certain item or the need arises
for discussion.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that if it was determined
by the Building Inspector that a special meeting was needed for certain
items, that they would be agreeable.
Motion was made by Fred Topel, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously carried
to adjourn.
RW/ns
- 2 -