Planning Commission Minutes 08-02-1988
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, August 2, 1988 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present:
Richard carlson, Cindy Lemm, Richard Martie, Mori Malone,
Dan MCConnon.
Members Absent:
None
Staff present:
Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill.
1. Meeting called to order by Chairman Richard Carlson at 7:34 p.m.
CLARIFICATIONS:
Mr. Dan MCConnon asked for a clarification on the motion that was granted
on the variance request by the Coast to Coast Store. Motion should
reflect that the square footage allowed be stricken from the motion and
that the reason for granting the motion should be re-stated that the extra
sign height was warranted because of the safety factor involved and strike
out square footage in its entirety and the additional height would be
needed to receive exposure from the public right of way of walnut street
and West Fourth street instead of Walnut and pine Street (Highway 25).
.
Cindy Lemm also would like to clarify the motion she made for the variance
request by Mr. Merrill Busch and it is as follows: statement should be
added after the motion carried unanimously that the reason for the
granting of the variance would be of the historical preservation of this
property.
2.
Motion by Dan MCConnon, seconded by Cindy Lemm to approve the minutes of
the regular meeting held, July 12, 1988. Motion carried unanimously.
3.
Variance request to allow construction of a garage addition within the
front and sideyard set back requirements. Applicant, James Cellette.
Mr. cellette was present to propose his variance request to allow
placement of an attached garage within the front and sideyard set back
requirements. With no input from the public, Chairman Richard Carlson
opened up for any input from the planning Commission members.
Mr. Richard Martie questioned the amount of set back the proposed garage
would have to the neighboring property to the southwest, which would be
the Birkholder property. Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson indicated
that their would be at least a 20 foot sideyard set back between the
proposed garage addition and the closest portion of the northeast end of
the Birkholder house.
.
Mr. Dan MCConnon questioned the footage from the property line in the
northeast corner of the proposed garage addition. He also questioned if
the applicant could build a smaller garage. Mr. Cellette answered that
the footage may vary a foot to a foot and a half instead of 8.8 feet it
could be 7.3 feet to the side property line from the proposed northwest
corner of the garage. Mr. Cellette also indicated that he did consider
building a smaller garage to stay within the front and sideyard set back
1
planning Minutes - 8/2/88
.
requirements. He indicated that he likes to do wood working projects and
by allowing the longer garage, it would allow him to place a shop in the
back portion of the garage and also by allowing the garage to be pushed
forward four feet it would allow him to go out of the garage entrance door
instead of the overhead garage doors.
Richard Carlson indicated that the smaller garages, as which were proposed
when these houses were built are too small by today's standard. That now
when they do build garages they are building larger and more wider garages
to accomodate two car garages. Jeff O'Neill indicated that the
determination of the square footage of the garage in relationship to the
request. The hardship was created by the developer in the placement of
the house on this lot. Chairman Richard Carlson indicated that in the
past, Planning commission hears on the average two requests per year from
this development and the adjoining development, the Anders Wilhem Addition
in regards to variance requests to allow a garage within the sideyard set
back requirement.
.
Mori Malone questioned the size of the lot in relationship to the house
which is on it. Zoning Administrator, Anderson indicated to Ms. Malone
that the house was so placed on the lot that centered it on the lot
instead of allowing enough room for a two car garage of the width that is
most desired right now. Dan McConnon questioned the width of the
drainage utility easement. Anderson indicated to Mr. McConnon that we
have 6 foot drainage and utility easements on the sides of the lots and on
the front and rear we have a 12 foot drainage and utility easement.
with no further input from the Planning commission members on a motion by
Cindy Lemm, seconded by Richard Martie to approve the variance request to
allow construction of a garage addition within the front and sideyard set
back requirements. Motion carried unanimously. Reason for approval is
the hardship was created by the developer of this project.
4. A variance request to allow construction of a new detached garage within
the sideyard set back requirements. Applicant, Kermit Bensen.
Mr. Kermit Bensen was present to propose a variance request to allow
placement of a new detached garage within the sideyard set back
requirement. Mr. Bensen's proposed new detached garage would replace the
existing smaller single car garage and would match up to be the same size
as his adjoining property owner to the west, Don and Nancy Smith's
detached garage.
.
With no further input from the public, Chairman Richard Carlson then
opened it up for any input from the planning Commission members or City
Staff. zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson presented a letter to Chairman
Richard Carlson to have read from Don and Nancy smith, adjoining property
owner to the west, expressing their total support for Mr. Bensen's
request. Mori Malone indicated in driving by the site, she saw no problem
with the variance request as proposed by Mr. Bensen in that it would match
up with the existing garage of Don and Nancy Smith in that they have a
shared driveway to service both garages.
2
.
.
.
Planning Minutes - 8/2/88
Richard Carlson questioned if Mr. Smith's garage should receive fire rated
sheetrock sheeting on it now, even though it was built approximately five
years ago. zoning Administrator, Anderson indicated that we would deal
with the existing building permit application should this variance be
approved. At that time, this garage would have to receive the fire rated
sheeting within any portion of the garage that falls within 10 feet of the
adjoining smith's garage to the west. If the smith's were to expand their
garage or to remodel their garage at that time, fire rated sheathing
would be applied in the portion of the garage that falls within 10 feet of
Mr. Bensen's garage. Mr. Dan McConnon questioned to what the fire rated
sheeting means. Zoning Administrator, Anderson indicated that any
portions in the occupancy that a garage is classified, which is M-l
occupancy, any portion of this M-l occupancy would fall within 10 feet of
another structure or an R-3 single family dwelling structure within 10
feet of the area would have to receive fire rated sheathing.
With no further input by planning Commission members or City Staff, motion
by Richard Martie, seconded by Mori Malone, to approve the variance
request to allow construction of a new detached garage within the sideyard
set back requirement. Motion carried unanimously. Reason for approval of
the variance request is that it is a shared garage and this would be the
best location for the detached garage.
5.
A variance request to allow two driveway curb cuts in excess of the
maximum allowed. Applicant, M & P Transport.
Mr. Jay Morrell, partner in M & P Transport, was present to propose a
request to allow 50 foot expansion on of an existing 24 foot wide driveway
and also the creation of another 50 foot driveway curb cut off of Dunas
Road. zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson indicated that the setback for
driveway curb cut width is at the property line. Additional widths of
driveway curb cuts are done by constructing wider turning radi between the
property line and the existing bituminous pavement of the street which
services this driveway curb cut.
zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson questioned Mr. Morrell if the
semi-truck tractor with the trailer behind it can adequately make a turn
going south on Fallon Avenue in making a righthand turn and proceeding
west onto Dundas Road. Mr. Morrell indicated that the backend trailer, as
it makes its full turn onto Dundas Road would actually be off the
bituminous pavement portion of the Dundas Road.
With no further input from the public, Chairman Richard Carlson opened up
for input from the planning Commission members. Richard Martie indicated
that 50 feet would be the minimum needed to accornodate a semi-truck
tractor with a trailer behind it to make a turn off of city street into a
proposed business. Dan McConnon questioned if he could reduce the 24 foot
curb cut, which exists and just keep the 50 feet that he is asking for his
variance. Mr. Morrell indicated that he would like to leave the existing
24 foot curb cut to accomodate semi-truck tractor traffic in the area to
service the building on the southeast warehouse building which he has
leased out additional space for Decorative Services to use. A good share
of their material is brought in by semi-truck tractor and there is a
loading dock outside of this building to accomodate loading and
unloading.
3
Planning Minutes - 8/2/88
.
With no further input from the Commission, motion by Richard Martie,
seconded by Dan McConnon to approve the variance request to allow two
driveway curb cuts in excess of the maximum allowed. Fallon Avenue curb
cut would be expanded 50 additional feet to accomodate a total width of 74
feet and the driveway curb cut along Dundas Road would be created with a
50 foot curb cut. Motion carried unanimously.
A variance request to allow a driveway to be reconstructed within the
sideyard set back requirement. Applicant, Michael Wieber.
6.
Mr. Wieber was present to propose his variance request to allow his
driveway to be reconstructed and a portion of this driveway, which would
accomodate a parking space, to be allowed to bring it right up to the side
property line.
.
Mori Malone questioned the location of the driveway in relationship to the
string line or by the stakes put up. Mr. Wieber responded that it is by
the string line where the proposed driveway would be reconstructed. Jeff
O'Neill questioned Mr. Wieber if a car was parked in the location
proposed, and a person stepped out of the car, would they be on his
property or on his neighbor's property. Mr. Wieber responded that they
would be on approximately two feet of his property when getting out of a
car parked in this location. Chairman Richard Carlson then read a letter
from the neighboring property owners to the west, Mr. Dan Carlson voicing
his concerns of locating this driveway portion up to the side property
line. Richard Martie questioned the width of a parking space as required
in relationship to the proposed 12 foot parking space that Mr. Wieber is
proposing. Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson indicated that the parking
space size is of 9 feet in width for vehicles. Dan McConnon questioned if
their was a vehicle parked up by the sidewalk entrance in which he uses
off of his driveway to get up to his house, if two vehicles could be
parked side by side in this location. Mr. Wieber responded that two cars
cannot park side by side in this area. Assistant Administrator, Jeff
O'Neill indicated to Planning Commission member that their might be a
compromise in that Mr. Wieber would like to have 12 feet and by ordinance
the maximum you could go without a variance is 9 feet.
No further input from Planning commission members or City Staff, motion by
Dan McConnon, seconded by Cindy Lemm to approve the variance request to
allow a driveway to be reconstructed within the sideyard set back
requirement. The driveway would be placed 2 feet from the side yard
property line where 3 feet from the side lot line is the minimum set
back. Motion carried unanimously.
7. variance request to allow placement of a pylon sign within the side back
requirement of a public right of way. Applicant, J & K property.
Ken Maus was present for the proposed re-placement of their existing pylon
sign in new location, which would be within the setback requirement of a
public right of way.
.
4
Planning Minutes - 8/2/88
.
With no further input from the public, Chairman Richard Carlson then
opened it up for any comments from the planning Commission members or City
Staff. Dan McConnon questioned the actual setback distance from the
public right of way in relationship to the two curb placements as shown on
the enclosed site plan. zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson indicated to
Mr. McConnon the placement of the pylon sign would be 6 feet from the back
of the new curb on the frontage road going past the plaza and 4 1/2 feet
from the existing curb that was placed on their property. Zoning
Administrator, Anderson also indicated that due to the new alignment of
the frontage road, the sign that exists was in the center of the new
frontage road that is under construction.
With no further input from the Commission, motion by Cindy Lemm, seconded
by Dan McConnon to approve the variance request to allow placement of the
pylon sign within the setback requirement from a public right of way.
Motion carried unanimously.
Reason for Planning Commission approval, is that they do not approve of
the setback within the public right of way, but this is the best location
for this re-located pylon sign to get the maximum amount of exposure from
the east County Road 75 roadway.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS:
1. Site plan review. Applicant, David Hornig.
.
Mr. Hornig was represented at the meeting by his family members due to a
meeting schedule conflict. The family representing Mr. Hornig indicated
on the enclosed site plan is the only change that they made from what was
previously submitted was that the buildings where switched. The 12 unit
townhouse is now situated on the north side of their lot and the 16 unit
apartment building has been relocated to the west side of the lot. The
other changes are that the one 12 unit townhouse building has now been
broken up into two 6 unit townhouse buildings.
Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson indicated to the Planning Commission
members that the site plan, with the landscaping developed on it does meet
or exceed all the minimum requirements of our landscaping ordinance. With
no further input from the public or the planning commission members,
motion by Cindy Lemm, seconded by Mori Malone to approve the site and
landscaping plan for the family subsidized apartment project to be known
as "Lauring Green". Motion carried unanimously.
Review the proposed ordinance amendment on landscaping requirements.
2.
.
Assistant City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill indicated to Planning
Commission members the proposed changes to the landscaping ordinance as it
exists today. The section that is proposed to be changed is when the
property is being developed on an acreage of land that it be based off of
the area of land that is developed and an additional 30 feet surrounding
the area being developed. The only change is that the City Council, at
its discretion may allow the phasing in of installation of landscaping
over a period of three years. These were the two basic changes to the
existing Monticello zoning ordinance. It is at Mr. O'Neill's suggestion
5
.
.
.
Planning Minutes 8/2/88
that the Planning Commission members look at the proposed amendment and
add or delete anything that they see to be inappropriate for that. The
intent of this was to bring it before the planning Commission members for
their review prior to review before the Housing Development Authority and
also the Industrial Development Committee.
Subject to the Housing Development Authority and/or the Industrial
Development Committee a final proposed draft for an ordinance amendment on
the on the landscaping ordinance section will be brought back before the
Planning Commission members probably at their September 6, 1988 meeting
through the public hearing process of the proposed changes.
3. proposed ordinance amendment on regulating the type of exterior building
construction.
Mr. O'Neill informed the planning Commission members that the Industrial
Development Committee had received the proposed amendment on the
Industrial/Commercial Building Exterior Restrictions. The Industrial
Development Committee felt that they needed more time to review the
proposed changes and they would discuss it again at their next regular
scheduled meeting in August.
4.
Simple Subdivision request to subdivide three residential lots into two
residential lots. Applicant, Don Bauer.
Council action. Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
5.
variance request to allow erection of a pylon sign in excess of the
maximum height and square footage allowed, and to be allowed the place a
pylon sign within the minimum setback from a public right of way.
Applicant, Coast to Coast Store.
Council action. No action needed, as there was no appeal.
6. Variance request to allow a detached garage within the front yard set back
requirement. Applicant, Merrill Busch.
Council action. No action needed, as there was no appeal.
7. Replatting request to replat an existing lot into eight townhouse and one
area lot. Applicant, Jay Miller.
Council action. Approve as per planning Commission recommendation.
8.
A tabled conditional use request to allow more than twelve (12) apartments
in a downtown commercial building. A variance request to allow five (5)
existing apartments to remain on the first floor of a downtown commercial
building as a non-conforming use. Applicant, Gary Hammer.
Council action. No action needed as request did not come before City
Council. Applicant has put the former restaurant space up for lease or
rent.
6
Planning Minutes 8/2/88
.
Set the next tentative date of the Monticello Planning Commission.
9.
Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Dan McConnon to set the next
tentative date for September 6, 1988, 7:30 p.m.
10. Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Dan McConnon to adjourn the meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
4'f!1~
Gary Anderson,
Zoning Administrator
.
.
7