Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda 09-27-1999 (Special Meeting) . . . AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDA V, SEPTEMBER 27, 1999 5:30 p.m. Members: Dick Frie, Robbie Smith, Roy Popilek, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten Council Liaison: Clint Herbst Staff: Jeff O'Neill, Fred Patch, Steve Grittman and Lori Kraemer 1. Call to order. 2. Consideration of adding items. 3. Citizens comments. 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit within the B-3 Zoning District to allow Outdoor Sales and Display of automobiles and a Conditional Use Permit Planned Unit Development to allow the automobile sales operation to be located on two separate parcels. Applicant: Automaxx Car Stores. 6. Adjourn. . . . Special Planning Commission Agenda -09/27/99 5. Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit within the B-3 Zoning District to allow Outdoor Sales and Displav of automobiles and a Conditional Use Permit Planned Unit Development to allow the automobile sales operation to be located on two separate parcels. Applicant: Automaxx Car Stores. (NAC) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Automaxx Car Stores has applied to develop an automobile sales facility on portions of two parcels currently owned by Jay Morrell. The properties are at 1205 and 1219 Highway 25 South - the former Royal Tire building and the Glass Hut property. The operation would utilize the Royal Tire building for its inside activities, including office and some minor detailing. 'fhe lot area of the Royal Tire building would be used for customer parking and automobile display, together with the northerly portion of the Glass Hut property. The property line between the two parcels runs just 10 feet south of the Royal Tire building, resulting in the overlap of uses. The developer has asked to accommodate customer parking for the Automaxx use by providing 14 parking spaces on the east and south walls of the building. The Zoning Ordinance does not specify the required number of spaces for this type of use. Bascd upon other available data, it would appear that the fourteen spaces proposed should be adequate, assuming that no other uses will be madc of the building, such as service or parts. A condition of any PUD approval should be that the facility provide additional parking spaces in the event that the proposed fourteen spaces do not prove to be enough. There are a few issues related to the parking spaces, and the proximity of the display area. A regulation parking space requires 20 feet of depth and at least 22 feet of drive aisle to accommodate backing and turning space. Because of the siting of the display vehicles, only three of the nine spaces on the west side of building would have adequate area to pull into and out of. On the south side of the building, four of the five spaces do not have adequate backing space. The display area should be rearranged to accommodate these needs. It would also be beneficial to clearly delineate the difference between customer parking and vehicle display. Given the layout of the site, it would probably be impractical to require curbed medians separating the two areas. However, pavement markings would be a positive addition to avoid parking in the display area or vice-versa. The layout should be revised as suggested on the attached staff sketch to ensure adequate parking and circulation. The site plan shows a proposed curb line along the front and north side property lines, complying with the five foot setback. There are two areas where the curb has been discontinued. The first is at the primary site entrance along Sandberg Road. The zoning ordinance directs a maximum curb cut opening of 24 feet to control traffic flow. The proposed curb should be revised as shown in the staff sketch to comply with this standard. The second area is along Marvin Road, which is currently unimproved. The applicant is Special Planning Commission Agenda -09/27/99 . requesting flexibility under the PUD to defer curbing in this area, pending a City decision on the status of this right-of-way. Both full street construction and vacation have been discussed, and the City Council is expected to consider this issue in the near future. Given this potential change, it may be reasonable to defer this improvement until the Marvin Road status is resolved. The City has a requirement on commercial sites that one tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter be planted on the property. The PUD site contains just over 1,250 lineal feet, resulting in a requirement for 25 trees. The applicant has complied with this requirement on the proposed site plan. The remaining issue involves improvements to the Glass Hut property. The Glass Hut site includes an area of existing concrete paving, and a proposed customer parking area along the Highway 25 frontage. At just 30 feet in width (minus the 5 foot curb setback) the parking area which is proposed is too narrow to allow for effective parking and circulation. An accessible parking area for this building should be added to the site plan. Due to the setback of the building, the area along the Highway 25 frontage may provide room for a driveway, but parking will need to be located elsewhere on the site. Under the PUD, the applicant may wish to consider ajoint parking arrangement, if appropriate. It would appear the Glass Hut site would be a potential redevelopment site at some time in the future. . Finally, the applicant has indicated an expectation for 96 cars on display. With the pavement markings suggested above to protect parking and circulation, staffbclieves that organization of the display area would not require a maximum number of cars. The primary issue would be keeping them in the appropriate locations on the site, allowing for tight circulation or double stacking of vehicles, not normally permitted in standard parking lots. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Decision 1: Conditional Use Permit for Auto Sales/Display 1. Motion to recommend approval of the CUP for Auto Sales/Display, subject to the conditions in Exhibit Z, based on a finding that the use is appropriate for the zoning district and the proposed site. 2. Motion to recommend denial of the CUP, based on a finding that the use cannot be contained on the existing parcel of record. 3. Motion to table action on the CUP, subject to additional information. . Special Planning Commission Agenda -09/27/99 . Decision 2: CUP for a Planned Unit Development I. Motion to recommend approval of the PUD, based on a finding that the shared display area is a reasonable use of the parcels in this location. 2. Motion to recommend denial of the PUD, based on a finding that there is no showing that the development will further the City's planning objectives or result in a higher standard of development. 3. Motion to recommend tabling of the PUD, subject to additional information. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION . Staff recommends approval of the CUP and PUD, only on the conditions listed in Exhibit Z. If the modifications to the plan are made, the plan will comply with the general intent of the Conditional Use Provisions of the B-3 District. The use ofPUD in this case is somewhat problematic in that PUD is intended to be applied to projects which offer a higher standard of development than the basic requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. In this case, the use ofPUD is primarily a convenience to avoid resubdivision. Nonetheless, it may be that it is appropriate in this situation since PUD allows the City to flex its standards to allow reasonable use of the property, pending a future redevelopment of the area. Growth in the Monticello area, along with the reconstruction of Highway 25, may result in an future economic incentive to replace the existing buildings with higher quality commercial structures. D. SUPPORTING DATA Exhibit A - Site Location Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Staff Sketch Exhibit Z - Conditions of Approval . I I I'. HICHW~ r I J I --- . . - , . ~. -, i i I t f V') · % , . . w . . - .. .. . . . .. . t::. f. · . . . . .~ . ~ r t -l . -S~T€' _____~ Lo~{oN ---,;::-r t--, · wi cr;j ! ' ~ t f THOMAS PARK o ::0 :c: I'Tl ., J . J . .. *" .. .. - ". ... . - "" " . a: o I CHELSEA , OlJND~S s< ~ ~ ~ ROAD . I 'L EXHIBIT A · SITE L~Ci I'}~LLBE~-.E.. 5- A : ~ .... I I , III 1fII" .. 11I1" *" . _ ,. .. '"...... ...WI.. """ II" . _. .. . . . jI . . . . . I . .. .. . . : I , \ , , \ , -; I \XI \$ ~ ,70 ,< \'% . \ \ \ \ ,3 13 . , , . 1LlJtj. liS StAKeD ~, . , ... ~~~~~~"-. ''/ ~~ ...~''f''(j ., .......... .. .9 " ~ " kJ, ~~ \ , .\ , , \ , \ \ \ \ \, \ \:t \ , \ , , .\ , , \ ~, , , \ '. \ \ 8a 36 . \ \ \ \ \ \ " " \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \$ ,'AJ \ < \z . i, I . \ \ .\ \ \ \ \ , , \ \ , \ , \ \ , , .\ , , \ ,3 \ , \ \ \ . . . PUD/CUP Conditions of Approval - Automaxx Car Sales 1 . Paving and curbing constructed in all areas as delineated on site plan, with the following alterations: a. Addition of a conforming 24 foot wide curb cut at Sandberg Road. b. Addition of eonfonning parking stalls for the Glass Hut Parcel. c. Pavement markings which preserve 149' x 20' parking stalls with 24' drive aisles on the Automaxx parcel. 2. Ability to expand parking area on the Automaxx parcel if the Planning Commission finds that additional parking supply is necessary. 3. Paving and curbing along the Marvin Road frontage within twelve months ofa resolution of the status of Marvin Road by the City Council. 4. Landscaping of the parcel per site plan. 5. Recommendations of other City Staff, including the City Engineer. EXHIBIT Z 5-b