Planning Commission Minutes 07-05-1989
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
~ Wednesday, July 5, 1989 - 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. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at
7:30 p.m.
2. Approval of minutes.
Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Cindy Lemm, to approve the minutes
of the regular meeting held June 6, 1989, with the following change:
Under item #4, after "Dan McConnon absent", it should read "and Cindy
Lemm abstaining."
3.
Public Hearing - A variance request to allow a deck to be constructed
within the side yard setback requirement. Applicant, Michael and Dixie
Talbott.
~
Mr. Michael Talbott was present to explain to Planning commission members
his variance request to be allowed to construct a deck addition onto his
house. Mr. Talbott explained that the reason for the variance request is
to allow some character to his proposed deck and to allow for the
swinging door to open onto the proposed deck, that being his rationale
for the variance request. Also within the l2-foot width that Mr. Talbott
is proposing would allow him to place chairs and tables on there and
still have room to maneuver around them.
Chairperson Richard Carlson then closed the public hearing and opened the
meeting for input from the planning Commission members. Questions raised
by the planning Commission members were, why couldn't he construct it on
any other portion of the house if it could not be constructed to the rear
of the house, and why a smaller deck could not have been constructed to
be within the setback requirements.
With no further input from the Planning Commission members, motion was
made by Dan McConnon, seconded by Cindy Lemm, to deny the variance
request to allow a deck to be constructed within the side yard setback
requirement. Reason for denial: There is no unique situation created
with the land to warrant a variance; there is no financial hardship
created by the proposed variance; and there are feasible ways to
construct a deck without needing any variances. Motion carried
unanilOOusly.
~
...._,
1
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 7/5/89
4.
A variance request to allow a canopy to be constructed within the front
yard setback requirement. Applicant, Monticello American Legion
Post #260.
American Legion Post #260 is proposing to construct a vinyl covered
canopy addition within the side yard setback requirement. The proposed
canopy would serve as a weather-type shelter for the handicapped people
entering and exiting from their building. The proposed canopy would be
constructed up to within one foot of the side property line.
with no further input from the public, Chairperson Richard Carlson then
closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for discussion amongst
the Planning Commission members. Questions raised by the Planning
Commission members were that they didn't feel there would be any
obstruction of view from the public right-of-way; and with the
handicapped people which utilize this as the front entrance, even though
it is within the side yard setback requirement, they felt it would be
beneficial to the handicapped people or disabled people which would be
utilizing this entrance into the building.
With no further input from the Planning Commission members, motion was
made by Mori Malone, seconded by Dan McConnon, to approve the variance
request to allow a canopy to be constructed within the front yard setback
requirement. Voting in favor: Richard Carlson, Richard Martie, Mori
Malone, Dan McConnon. Opposed: Cindy Lemm. Reason for approval:
Because of the unique situation of this building being situated on a
corner lot, it would serve as a protective covering for the handicapped
or disabled people using this entrance to the building, and there would
be no visual obscurity with vehicles at the intersection of West Third
Street and Elm Street.
The meeting then recessed at 8:09 p.m. for the planning Commission
members, members of the public, and City staff to walk over to the Fair's
Garden Center site to look at the proposed variance and conditional use
requests.
The Planning Commission meeting was reconvened at 8:44 p.m. to consider
the following:
5.
A variance request to parking and driveway area curb requirements. A
variance request pertaining to hard surface requirement in driveway
areas. A variance request pertaining to off-street parking requirement
of 25 stalls. Applicant requests a variance of 8 stalls. A variance
request pertaining to screening of storage areas from the public
right-of-way. Applicant, Fair's Garden Center.
planning Commission members chose to look at each area of the site and
consider the variances separately. Even though there may be a variance
for the same thing in another portion of the lot, they chose to only deal
with portions of the site one at a time, and they are as follows:
2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 7/5/89
A. A variance request on the total number of parking spaces required,
which would have been a total of 25 parking spaces required. City
staff was recommending a total of 17 total spaces.
I
Motion was made by Dan Mcconnon, seconded by Cindy Lemm, to approve
the variance request to allow a variance of 8 stalls 'from the minimum
requirement of 25 total parking space stalls, of which the applicant
will be required to install 4 additional stalls for a total of 17
total spaces. Motion carried unanimously. Applicant has 30 days to
stripe the parking lot for these 4 additional parking spaces. Reason
for granting the variance: Due to the nature of the business, people
stopping in, getting their merchandise and leaving, and the length of
time that the customers stay to patronize this business, the
Commission members felt that the 17 spaces would be sufficient for
off-street parking spaces at this time.
B.
Consideration of no concrete curbing around the perimeter of the 4
additional parking spaces, which would be needed to create the 17
total spaces for which the previous variance request was approved.
Motion was made by Cindy Lemm, seconded by Dan MCConnon, to approve
the variance request to allow no curbing on the east and west portion
of the 4-stall parking lot. As a condition to the no curbing
requirement, the applicant is to remove the existing blacktop from
this area and install a S-foot green area in the 36 lineal foot area
in front of these 4 parking stalls. The applicant is also to install
this by September 1, 1989. Motion carried unanimously.
C.
proposed area marked in yellow on the enclosed site plan in which the
applicant is proposing to put a type of surface called a red
lime stone surface rather than a hard surface material, blacktop or
concrete.
Motion was made by Cindy Lemm, seconded by Mori Malone, to approve
the variance request to allow no hard surfacing of the area marked in
yellow to be the area north of the proposed 32'xlS' sales lot, the
northerly 20-foot area lying north of the proposed 32'x15' sales area
lot, and also lying north of the l7'x76' existing rock bins, and also
the 20-foot driveway portion which runs north and south and then
turns easterly and then turns northerly up to the proposed 20'x20'
residents parking area. This area is to receive a minimum of a
3-inch to S-inch surface of red limestone. The condition with this
is the applicant is to keep the area described above and marked in
yellow on the enclosed site plan in a neat and driveable condition,
that being any potholes or areas that are disturbed have to be filled
in and reshaped to retain the minimum 3-inch to 5-inch thickness of
this red limestone material. Also as part of the motion, the 20-foot
north/south driveway strip starting from the southerly entrance at
the 20-foot driveway entrance, continuing northerly up to in line
with the northeasterly portion of the cement slab in front of the
rock bins, is to receive a minimum of a 2-inch bituminous hard
surfaced material within 3 years from the lOth of July. The motion
carried unanimously. The applicant is to install the red limestone
driving surface within 30 days from tonight's meeting date, July 5,
1989.
3
planning commission Minutes - 7/5/89
.
D. This item dealt with the curbing which would surround the area as
described in letter C. This area was to receive no curbing.
Motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Dan McConnon, to allow
no curbing in the area as described in letter c. Motion carried
unanimously.
E. This item dealt with the hard surfacing of the area as outlined in
red on the proposed site plan.
Motion was made by Dan McConnon, seconded by Richard Martie, to
install a minimum 2-inch bituminous hard surface in the area as
outlined on the enclosed site plan in red. The area is described as
beginning at the south property line at the 12-foot easterly entrance
to this property extending northerly at a 12-foot driving width
intersecting with the 30'x52' area in front of the existing
20'x22-1/2' garage and in front of the 20'x30' equipment parking and
storage area. Also to receive the hard surfacing would be the
20'x20' residents parking area which is located to the northwest of
the blacktop area described above, and the 20'x30' equipment parking
and storage area. Motion carried unanimously. Applicant is to
install the hard surfacing of the area described above by
september 1, 1989.
.
F. This item dealt with the installation of concrete curbing around the
area described in letter E above.
Motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Dan McConnon, to
approve the variance request to allow no concrete curbing in the area
described on the map as marked in red and as described in item E.
Motion carried unanimously.
G. This item dealt with the installation of screening material along a
portion of the north property line and the east property line.
Motion was made by Mori Malone, seconded by cindy Lemm, to approve
the variance request to allow a portion of the east property line
beginning at the southeast corner of the property extending northerly
along the easterly property line to a point at the northwest corner
of the existing Doug pitt rental residence. This area is to receive
no landscaping or screening fence. Motion carried unanimously.
Conditions are as follows:
.
1. A minimum of a 6-foot high, 100% opaque, wood cedar fence to be
constructed beginning at the northeast corner of the greenhouse,
extending easterly along the northerly line to the northeast
corner of the lot, then extending southerly along the easterly
line to a point up to the existing lilac bushes. Also a gate and
screening of the same screening fence material, 6-foot high
cedar, 100% opaque fencing material, would be installed from the
southeast corner of the garage easterly intersecting with the
east property line. The same material would be constructed from
the northwest corner of the garage northerly intersecting with
the north property line.
4
Planning Commission Minutes - 7/5/89
.
2. The area lying southerly along the easterly property line from
the existing lilac bush to the northwest corner of the existing
Doug pitt rental residence along this easterly property line to
be installed with a 90% opaque, natural, 6-foot screening
material to be constructed of a combination of different types of
trees and high growth shrub plantings.
The applicant has until September 1, 1989, to install the screening
fence and the natural screening material in the area described above.
H. This item dealt with the area in front of the existing over-story
tree nursery stock in the front yard area of the existing owner's
house.
Motion was made by Dan McConnon, seconded by Richard Martie, to
install a split rail fence beginning at the southwest corner of the
existing over-story tree nursery sales area extending easterly along
the southerly line of the nursery sales area to a point six feet
south of the southwest corner of the existing owner's house, then
extending northerly to the southwest corner of the existing owner's
house. This fence material is to be of a cedar hand split rail
fencing material. Motion carried unanimously. The installation of
the cedar split rail fence is to be installed by September 1, 1989.
.
I. This item dealt with the area of the landscaping material lying south
of the existing rock bins or in front of the existing rock bins.
Motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Cindy Lernm, that the
east and west 17 lineal foot ends of the existing rock bins be
landscaped with the same materials as used on the entire southerly
portion of the eXisting rock bins or with a minimum fence height up
to the top of the eXisting rock bin board with a cedar lattice
material or a cedar opaque fence material. The motion carried
unanimously. The material as described above to be installed by
September 1, 1989.
6. Conditional use permit request to allow expansion of storage and sales
area associated with a landscape center in a B-4 zone.
Having heard the variance requests, a motion was made by Dan McConnon,
seconded by Richard Martie, to approve the conditional use request to
allow open and outdoor storage as an accessory use and to allow open and
outdoor sales as a principal and accessory use on the entire area of the
property owned by Fair's Garden Center with the following conditions:
1. That the gross floor area be increased to approximately 300% of the
principal use.
.
2. An escrow account be established by the City staff and presented to
the City council and to be submitted by the applicant prior to the
City Council meeting an amount equal to 1-1/2 times the dollar amount
of work needed to complete all of the landscaping, screening,
concrete curbing, and hard surfacing requirements.
5
.
.
.
planning Commission Agenda - 7/5/89
3. The westerly driveway entrance be closed off with the existing sales
area material, that being the patio blocks on their palates be
located in this area to block off this driveway entrance.
Motion carried unanimously. The conditional use request to be approved
for a period of no longer than one year from today's date, July 5, 1989.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
1. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow a building addition to be
built within the side yard setback requirement. Applicant, Bondhus
Corporation. Council action: No action necessary, as the variance
request did not come before them.
2. Public Hearing - COnsideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 3-1,
Non-conforming Buildings, Structures, and uses, which would allow limited
expansion of a non-conforming residential use in a 8-4 (regional
business) zone. Applicant, City of Monticello. Council action:
Approved as per planning Commission recommendation.
3. Consideration of a previous planning Commission recommendation to rezone
Evergreens Subdivision Outlots A and B to B-3 (Highway Business).
Applicant, Kent Kjellberg. COuncil action: Approved as per planning
Commission recommendation.
4.
Tabled conditional use request to allow expansion of an open and outdoor
storage as an accessory use in a 8-4 (regional business) zone. A tabled
conditional use request to allow an expansion of an open and outdoor
sales as a principal and accessory use in a 8-4 (regional business)
Zone. Applicant, Fair's Garden Center. Council action: No action
necessary, as the conditional use request did not come before them.
5. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission members to set the next
tentative date for the Monticello planning Commission meeting for
Tuesday, August 1, 1989, 7:30 p.m.
6. Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Dan McConnon, to adjourn the
meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:09 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
...~
/,::;~-"I <") ..
Gary ders
Zoning Administrator
6