Planning Commission Agenda Packet 04-10-1984IL
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTI CELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
April 10, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
Members: Jim Ridgeway, Joyce Dowling, Richard Carlson, Don Cochran,
Ed Schaffer.
7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order.
7;32 P.M. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held
March 13, 1984, and the Special Meeting Held
March 26, 1984.
7,36 P.M. 3. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Request to Allow
a Self -Service Car Wash and a Self-Sarvice Gas Station/
Convenience Store in a B-3 Zone, Applicant - Samuel
Construction.
7:51 P.M. 4. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow a Sidayard
Variance Within Five Feet of a Side Lot Lino and a
Variance Request to Allow Another Driveway Access
Within 40 Feet of an Existing Driveway, Applicant -
Boat in Webb.
8:07 P.M. 5. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow Mother
Driveway Accocs Within 40 Feet of an Existing Driveway
Access, Applicant - Dairy Queen of Monticello.
8:22 P.M. 6. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow a Now
Detached Garage to be Built up to the Front Property
Line, Applicant - Norbert Kelly, Jr.
8:37 P.M. 7. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Roqueat to Allow
Apartmonto in a Buoincaa Building in a B-4 Zone,
Applicant - Tae Hamner.
8152 P.M. 8. Public Hearing - Conditional Uao Requeat to Allow an
Outdoor Sales Lot and a Minor Auto Repair Buoinean
in a 0-3 Zone, Applicant - Eugene Kunkel.
Additional Information Stems
9:07 P.M. 1. The next tentative date for the Monticello Planning
Cammlooion will be May 8, 1984, 7:30 P.M.
9:09 P.M. 2. Adjournment.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
March 26, 1984 - 6:00 P.M.
Members Present : Don Cochran, Jim Ridgeway, Richard Carlson,
Ed Schaffer.
Members Absent: Joyce Dowling.
Staff Present: Tom Eidem, Gary Anderson, Allen Pelvit.
President Jim Ridgeway called the meeting to order at 6102 P.M.
2. Planning Commission Review of Tax Increment Financing Proposal -
Fulfillment Systems, Inc.
Tom Eidom was present to explain to Planning Commission members
the Tax Increment Financing proposal for Fulfillment Systems .
Eidcm eluded to some of the background which led to the develop-
ment of the Tax increment Financing proposal for Fulfillment
Systems. Once construction is completed, approximately 65 new
jobs will bu created within 6-18 months from completion. Within
three yearn these would be the possibility of 150 now jobs.
Commisnion membera felt it was a very worthwhile project.
Motion by Ed Schaf[ar, oeconded by Richard Carlson, to approve
thu Tax Increment Financing Plan for Fulfillmunt Systems.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by fon Cochran, uuconded by Ed Schaffer, to recess the
meeting at G,O9 P.M. Tile meeting reconvened at 6,36 P.M.
3. Public llrarincs and Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance.
A public hearing van then hold for the Ordinance Amendment M 133,
Title 10-3-9, E(2) (b). Mr. Jim Metcalf, partner in Broadway
Partners fot the new Metcalf and Iaroon building, along with
David from David's Photography and Dan Wickman of IDS, wan
present to discuss with Planning Commlaaion members any gueationo
they might have in regard to the Ordinance Amendment to the
Section undur Conditional Uses for signs which would apply to
tho signs to bo used on their building. Much discussion then
centered around certain language tertm in the Ordinance, specifically
dealing with Section iv. It was the consonsus that the "applicant"
be stricken from the Ordinance Amendment and inserted in there
"owner of the building". The stow paragraph would read, An owner
of tho building doairing any alteration of signs, sign location,
sign size, or number of eigno nhall firot submit an application
10
Special Planning Commission Minutes - 3/26/84
to the Zoning Administrator for an amended sign plan, said
application to be reviewed and acted upon by the Zoning Admini-
strator within ten (10) days of application. If the application
is denied by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant may go
before the Planning Commission at their next regularly scheduled
meeting.
Under item vii the words "for square footage allowance" shall be
inserted after "signs". The new paragraph shall road: Any sign
that is shared by or is a combination of two or more tenants shall
be considered as separate signs for square footage allowance and
shall meet the requirements thereof.
Under item viii, the words "aesthetically", "comparable", and "color"
shall be stricken from this paragraph. The new paragraph shall
reads All signs shall be consistent in design, material, shape,
and method of illumination.
With these changes made to the Ordinance Amendment #133, motion
by Don Cochran, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve the Ordinance
Amendment 0133. lotion carried unanimously.
4. Consideration of a Conditional Use Request to Allow Signs on a
Business Building with more than two Businesses in the Buildinq.
Jim Metcalf, representing Broadway Partners, was also preuont to
diecuso with Planning Commission members his Conditional Uuo Request
and/or Variance Request, if needed, to have the installation of
eight signs on their now building. Vie total aignago shall not
be more than 224 sq. ft. with the maximum square footage for one
tenant being 56 sq. ft. Duo to the possibility of eight tonantr„
the square footage maximum would la; cut down to 28 sq. ft. Much
discussion then centered around when the Ordinance would cucentially
go into affect. To Mr. Metcalf's knowledge, the Ordinance would
not take effect for approximately 30 days from Council approval.
Tom Eidom indicated that he would chock into the State Statutes
and get back to them in regard to the tires limit for an Ordinance
Amendment to become valid upon publication. Motion by Don Cochran,
ucconded by Ed Schaffer, to rocomnend to the Council to approve
the Metcalf and Larsen, Broadway Partners, Conditional Use Rocluout
to allow more than two signs to be placed on their building. Motion
carried unanimously.
Additional Information Itemn
Additional information items wore then diocunced. Reminder that
the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Monticello Planning
Commisoion would be April 10, 1984, at 7,30 P.M. Motion by Ed Schaffer,
seconded by Richard Carlson, to adjourn the meeting. The mooting
adjourned at 7,30 P.M.
Rospoctfully submitted,
Gar/ Ahaorcon, Zcning Administrator
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTIC:ELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
March 13, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
members Present: Don Cochran, Richard Carlson, Ed Schaffer.
Members Absent, Jim Ridgeway, Joyce Dowling.
Staff Presenti Gary Anderson
The meeting was called to order by Vice -President Don Cochran at
7:44 P.M.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meetin%Held February 14,
1984, and the Special Heotinq Hold March 8, 1984.
Motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Richard Carlson, to approve the
minutes of the February 14, 1984, Planning Commission Hosting.
Motion approved unanimously. Motion by Richard Carlson, seconded
by Ed Schaffer, to approve the minutas of the March 8, 1984,
Special Planning Commis, -ion Meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow Moro Sign Height than
Maximum Sign Height Allowed, Applicant - Stuart Hog Lund.
Kra. Stuart Hoglund was present to propose hot husband's request
to allow additional sign height for the proposed sign for the
proposed now 48 unit motel building. Kra. Hoglund indicated the
need for the additional height to attract metal business to their
proposed motel building. The Hoglund's property for the proposed
48 unit motel falls within 800 foot of the freeway, thoreforo,
allowing a pylon sign to be conotruetod. Planning Commiosion members
questioned as to other signs having been constructed and the sign
height variancoo that wero granted to them. Zoning Administrator
Anderson pointed out Mr. Hoglund was the initial applicant for a
sign variance on the Silver Fox Motel pylon sign, thorofore, a
maximum of GO feet in height, a variance of 28 foot, was granted.
Also there is the freeway Standard pylon sign, which is also a 60
foot maximum height sign. Also Porkina and Amoric-inn sign is
60 foot maximum height. Commission member Dan Cochran questioned
the validity of the existing sign ordinance. Zoning Administrator
Anderson countered with the sign ordinance is sot up with businesses
along tho frcoway being at the same height as the frooway only
adjacent to the freeway an a service road. Duo to tho location
of moms oxiating buildings, for instance McDonaldo, Parkins, Country
Kitchen, and having a roadway, County Road 25, which passes over
. 1 -
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/13/84
the freeway, the location of the businesses are lower
than the existing roadway which goes over the top. This, therefore,
necessitates additional height to attract freeway exposure. Motion
by Richard Carlson, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to grant a 28 -foot
variance to the existing 32 feet maximum requirement to a maximum
sign height of 60 feet. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Public Hearinq - Variance Request to Allow More than the Maximum
Width for a Driveway Access, Applicant - Pump and Meter Service.
Zoning Administrator Anderson explained on a map the proposed
development of the vacant lot next to the existing Tom Thumb
building. The proposed new access would be located in the southeast
corner of the existing vacant lot. The maximum width of the drive-
way allowed is 24 feet. The applicant is requesting a 16 -foot
variance, which would be a 40 foot wide driveway access. The
applicant proposed to use the existing Tom Thumb entrance as also
the entrance for the proposed development on the vacant lot.
Motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Richard Carlson, to approve
the driveway access width variance of 16 feet from 24 foot driveway
width to 40 foot driveway width. Motion carried unanimously.
5. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Request to Allow a Pot Shop in a
B-4 Zone, Applicant - Joel Erickson.
Joel Erickson, along with his co-partners John and Carolyn Frank,
wore present to diseuoa their plans for a proposed pot shop in the
new Metcalf and Larson building. Mr. Erickson, speaking for the
group, indicated his intentions to sell pats, puppies, kittenn,
birds, and small fish, along with the supplies that would go along
with these animals. Mr. Brad Larson, part owner in the Metcalf
and Larson building,wao also present and indicated that they have
no problems with Mr. Erickoon'u requout to have the pot shop in
their building. Any potential problems would have to be worked
out betwoen the renter, Mr. Joel Erickson, Carolyn and John Frank,
and the ownoro of the building. Metcalf and Larson. Planning
C+ommisoion memboro new no problem with this and that any problems
would deal virtually between the leases or renter and the owner.
Motion by Richard Carlson, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve the
Conditional Use Request to allow a pot shop in a B-4 Zone. Motion
carried unanimously.
6. Public Ilearinq - Variance Roquoot to Allow a 6'6" Opcn Porch and a
2' Garaeo Encroachment into the Front yard Sotback, Applicant -
Larry Kohnort.
Zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Planning Caamiooion members
MY. Kohnort's request to build a 24' x 26' attached garage to his
oxioting 24' x 36' split entry home. The proposed attached garage
- 2 -
Cal
j
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/13/84
would encroach 2 feet into the front yard setback. Mr. Kohnert would
also like to build an open porch onto his existing house. The
supporting post for the porch would encroach 6'6' into the front
yard setback. Zoning Administrator Anderson also indicated to
Planning Commission members that he had received no input or '
complaints from any of the concerned residents within the area of
the proposed property. Mr. Kohnert was also present and indicated
his plane to build the attached garage and open porch onto his
house. The reason for encroachment into the front yard setback
would take away the existing raw -like effect of the houses, the
houses being built exactly 30 feet from the existing road, which
is the required setback. lotion by Richard Carlson, seconded by
Ed Schaffer, to grant the Variance Request for a 616" open porch
encroachment and a 2 foot attached garage encroachment to the front
yard setback. Motion carried unanimously.
7. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Reauest to Allow More 7ban Five,
Includinq Family's Own Children, in Ono Foster Home, Aoolicant -
Michael Dahmen.
Mr. and Mrs. Dahmon wore present to discuss with Planning Commission
members a possible Ordinanco amendment to allow more than six
children, including family's own children, in an R-1 Zone. They
also wanted to ask, as a Conditional Use, that it be allowed in
an R-1 Zone. Zoning Administrator Anderson received a few phone
calla from concerned residonte in the areal however, no residents
wore present at tonight' is testing. Zoning Administrator Anderson
did pass some of the ccumento on to Mr. and Mro. Dahmen. Questions
raised were the following! The numbor of children to be cared fors
they indicated one would be the maximum amount they could have, one
more additional child to their five children of their own, six being
the total number in the household. 2) 7ho age of the child that
they would be taking caro ofr they indicated the ago group would
nun from 3 yearn to 11 years of ago. Zoning Administrator asked
than why they went to a private foutor care liconoing agency rather
than a governmental agency, Wright County Human Services, right
hero in Wright County. 7hoy answered they went to a private agency
over the Wright County Agency because they could got a child in the
age group which they felt they could handle, ago 3 through 11. Wright
Oounty only had available teenage children for footor caro. Zoning
Administrator asked them if they fully undorotood Rule No. 1 in the
State Licensing Guidelinou as recommended by the State Department
of Welfare. They countered that they are fully aware of all the
obligations required of them as a license applicant under Rule No. 1,
State Department of Welfare Licensing Guideline. Planning Cormmionion
momboro, seeing no objection to a family taking on looter caro of
a footer child, not holding any obligations to them as far an ro-
quiromento within the Zoning ordinance, motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded
3 —
0
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/13/84
by Richard Carlson, to amend the Ordinance in an R-1 Zone to allow 1
as a Conditional Use foster care or day care to allow more than l
five, including family's own children, in one foster care home,
with the following condition, 1) That the applicant follow the
State Department of Welfare's Licensing Guideline in regard to
Rule No. 1. Motion carried unanimously. Motion was then
entertained by Richard Carlson, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve
the Conditional Tae Request to allow more than five children, including
one's own, in a foster care home. Motion carried unanimously.
Additional Information Items
Additional information items were then presented.
rominder that the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning
Commission Special Meeting will be hold on March 26, 1984, at
6100 P.M. A motion was then entertained from Planning Commission
member Richard Carlson, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve the
next regularly scheduled Monticello Planning Commission meeting
be on April 10, 1984, at 7330 P.M.
Motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Richard Carlson, to adjourn
the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9343 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Gary ')illliO LBO
Zoning Administrator
J
Planning Commission Agenda - 0/10/86
3. Public Hearin - Conditional Use Request to Allow a Self -Service
Car Wash and a Self -Service Gas Station/Convenience Store in a B-3
Zone, Applicant - Samuel Construction. (G.A.)
A. REPER£NCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Sam Peraro, owner of Samuel Construction, is proposing to build
a self-service gas station/convenience store and a self-service
car wash out an South Highway 25 between Tho Glass Hut and Monticello -
Big Lake Veterinary Clinic. The motor fuel station/convenience
store is only allowed as a Conditional Use in a B-3 Zane. Mr.
Peraro received a copy of the conditions to a Conditional Use to
the motor fuel station/convenience store Conditional Use, which
listed 18 separate conditions that have to be met. In reviewing
Mr. Peraro's plans, they do address all of the 18 conditions with
the exception of not meeting the total number of parking spaces
required as per Ordinance. Mr. Peraro indicated he interpreted
the Ordinance as the total number of parking spaces for the motor
fuel station/convenience store being four parking spaces, as
they are two separate entities combined. pour parking spaces
are needed for the self-service motor fuel station and four
additional spaces are needed for the convenience storo, one per
200 sq. ft. with 900 sq. ft. being allowed for the convenience
store. The enclosed site plan will show four additional parking
spaces which I have drawn in on his proposed site plan. As of
the writing of this supplement, I have not received a sign plan
for the proposed signs on the building and/or pylon sign. These
are forthcoming and will be addressed at a later time. Mr. Poraro
indicated that the signs would be in conformance with the Monticello
Sign Ordinance. Mr. Peraro in also roquooting a Conditional Use
to be allowed to build adjacent to tho motor fuel station/convonionce
store an 8 -bay self-service car wash. Car wanhos aro only allowed
as a Conditional Use in a B-3 Zone. Mr. Poraro has mot all of the
12 conditions attached to the Conditional Uoo for solf-sorvico
car washos. With the site plan forthcoming on tho pylon sign
attached to thia portion of the building, Mr. Poraro indicated that
he would be in conformance with the Monticello Sign Ordinance.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONSi
1. Approve the Conditional Use Roquoot to allow a Golf-oervico
motor fuel otation/convonionco atom and a self-service car
wash in a B-3 Zona.
2. Dony the Oonditional Uoo Roquoot to allow a oolf-aarvica
motor fuel station/convenionco store and a self-service car
wash in a B-3 Sono.
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/84
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Requests
to allow a self-service motor fuel station/convenience store
and a self-service car wash in a B-3 Zone. Mr. Peraro meets
all of the conditions of the Conditional Use Requests.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the proposed location of the proposed self-service motor
fuel station/convenience store and self-service car wash; copy
of the proposed site plan for the self-service motor fuel station/
convenience store and self-service car wash.
- 2 -
p :W
mob
Conditional Use NsquPat t4 a, mat aarvtra IAO ,
sotyr tucl at atlon/convanteaae storm nd a Nll
sarvl-,.o car wash In a *1 iQgt. -•
r t &"Lasl construction.,
yi
i
I-
0
A4p W,..v rWw. M . "
�3
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/84
4. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow a Sideyard Variance
v Within 5 Feet of a Side Lot Line and a Variance Request to
Allow Another Driveway Access Within 40 Feet of an Existinq
Driveway, Applicant - Best in Webb. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Best in Webb Offset Printing Firm, located in the Oakwood Industrial
Park, is before you with two Variance Requests. They would like to
build a warehouse directly south of their existing building and
the existing addition which they just put on last fall. The proposed
warehouse would be a 50' wide x 140' long cold storage warehouse for
storage of their paper products. Due to the size of their property
and the setback on their current building on their property, with
the proposed expansion of a cold storage warehouse the building would
come within 5' of the side lot line. The current property owner just
south of Best in Webb is SMA Elevator, and they have no objection
to Best in Webb's Variance Request to allow placement of the cold
storage warehouse building within 5' of the side property lot line.
no City staff, however, does see a couple potential problems with
this. They may seem minor at the time, but we would like to have
them addressed at the public hearing. The south end of the proposed
warehouse near the side property line does currently have a gentle
swale ditch for water runoff along the side property line. If the
building wore constructed, it would have to be constructed so as to
allow for concrete culvert or steel culvert pipe to be put in to allow
water to flow past the proposed now building. One other itom we would
like to address is that the general concept of industrial parks is to
allow plenty of room for buildings to be placed on the size of the
lots. Due to Uhc rapid growth of this company, they probably even
yet this year would like to expand onto their existing addition which
was put on last fall and also possibly an addition onto this proposed
warehouse yet this year. With even expanding with the proposed addition
going northward with another building would create a U-shaped building
when they aro finished. Thio, however, does not have any direct effect
oil the Variance 1<equest but does have some effect on the overall plan
for this company on their proposed building site. In the general
concept plan of industrial parks, we coo plenty of room around each
side of the buildings oe,t on industrial park loto. In this case, however,
we aro seeing building additiono and separate buildings being placed
on tho lot with very little room, if any, around them.
Thu second Variance Requost would be establishing another driveway
access into tlhe proposed warehouse building. Placement of this now
driveway accoss would be within 25' of an existing driveway access.
Ordinance allows driveway plaeomento within 40' minimum of each other.
When the building was originally built in the industrial park, they
were granted a Variance for off-street loading. They would also be
- 3 -
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/84
asking that this Variance for off-street loading be expanded to this
new proposed warehouse building. we don't foresee any problem right
now other than the asphalt being marked up by the jack-knifing of
trucks into the loading area for the warehouse off of the street.
With future development on other lots within Oakwood Industrial
Park, we could see possible traffic flow problems developing, with
the basic concept that industrial parks allow plenty of room for
off-street loading within their own property lots.
B. ALTEMATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Variance Request to allow building placement within
5' of the side property lot line and to approve the Variance
Request to allow another driveway access within 25' of an
existing driveway access.
2. Deny the Variance Request to allow placement of a proposed
building within 5' of the sills property lot line and also
to deny the Variance Request to allow placement of a new
driveway within 25 feet of an existing driveway access.
C. STAFF RE COMMEN DATION :
City staff recoaanends approval of the sidayard variance request to
build the proposed building within 5' of the side property lot line
and also approval of the variance request to allow another
driveway to be. installed within 25' of an existing driveway access.
D. SUPPORTING DATA.
Copy of the proposed location of the new Best in Webb Warehouse
buildings site plan depicting the location of the proposed now
building on the Beat in Webb property attached letter from
Public works Director, John Simola.
41
Ile
TA r
teb
r. I • � .;,,,, � � l•��.� �� \fit\.
Variance Paqu•st
� �• i to allot. • siday
VaIlancs to with
IS' side lot lin•
Variance Paer..t
'• 1 �
allow another
1 Arlvsway access
.. t►r within 40' of an
existing Arivwar
Nat in Webb.
1
F '74'•0" 1I �. --
y
N
Ra, � O
I o b
eITUMIMOUS b
v DRIV e : 5' MAT dj
4' Gf418Me0 F001
Q k xQolo J
r 9
140'•0•'OF PROPERTY Owe
�O�pT101J
PROPOS IO WAR6WOUbe FUTURE A001TtC*J I
100' • 90' - TOOO B.R.
w — —
44 t-X15TUG 4OOITIQY
bO' . LO' • 5000 S.F. FUTURl=. APTION
0
0
`IT=IYt;. 5Y•0"= ',.0. 60.•Q,, i1i m -- �A
1 '.yKl(Mhl ibTElIT1UJ,
2.41cruy13 0o
2•MIWT NLEP' .IUYIi�j{II
2• (,OLlR.et10 2-M/.R4►WLL SM
ewe ewa � -M
GOD
a
10• SPIREA
eK1sTi/.16 OYit.OlYO GOLD FroMe
V � �• r
v � j
�•auexw � C� � \ Q ^
ave �
W .t�.
C�77 '• elruMIYOU!
yv
5 1 TE PLAN'
1"•eo'•o• �/
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: John E. Simola, Public Works Director
IM Variance Boquest from Best in Webb
DATE: April 5, 1984
As I undorstancl it, Best in Webb is requesting Variances for a proposed
building addition in the Industrial park. One Variance as I understand
it is to build within 5 feet of a lot line and build adjacent to a 10'
open drainage casement. It is my understanding that the Best in Webb
company intends to place a concrete storm sewer through this area rather
than the open Swale. I have no problem with this particular typo of
construction except that who will be responsible for maintaining this
storm sewer, as it will need poriodic cleaning and spring do -icing over
the next many years. In addition, one should consider possible damage
to the building itself if the pipe needed to be replaced or such. If
these items can be properly addresaed, I see no problems with this
Variance.
The second Variance, as I understand it, is to allow two curb cuts less
than 40' apart. Tho primary reason for this condition is so that traffic
flow in and out of individual businesses can proceed in a safe manner
without interference from traffic awing from another nearby driveway.
'thio item was placed into the Ordinanco to avoid congestion, and Variances
given should be considered carefully.
Tho next two Variances an I sea it case under Section 8F, Items 1 i 4.
They state that there shall be no oft-otroct parking within 15 foot of
any street ourPaeo and that the boulevard portion of the street right-
of-way ohall not bo used for parking. 7bo Variance allowing the Beat
in Webb company to have a loading Bock off of 7homao Park Drive will be
in direct violation of those two ooctions of the Ordinance. We aro opposed
to these types of Variances. In addition, the backing of somi-trailero
off of the otroot onto this loading dock facility has caucod same damage
to street surfaces during the hot suamor months) and allowing this typo
of congestion and private use of public property should not be allowed,
especially in an area such as the Znduotrial park where adequate spaces
aro provided to laaoen the amount of congestion and Ordinancoo are
provided so that development can occur logically and oyotomatically.
Mopoctfully,
wa
Director
Oq
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/134
5. Public Hearinq - Variance Request to Allow Mother Driveway Access
Within 40 Feet of an Existinq Driveway Access, Applicant - Dairy
Queen of Monticello. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND,
Mal Wolters is planning a proposed addition to the west side of
the existing Dairy Queen building. With the proposed addition, it
would extend out into the existing driveway entrance. Therefore,
Mr. Wolters is requesting a Variance to enclose the existing
driveway right now and install a now driveway for the new access
into the Monticello Dairy Queen. In doing so, the new driveway
will be within 40 feet of an existing driveway, therefore, needing
the variance. John Simola and myself met with Mr. Wolters at
the Dairy Queen site and talked over his proposed expansion and
the location of his new driveway. Mr. Simola indicated to me
that there would be no problem with the proposed location of his
now driveway access.
B. ALTEFOIATIVE ACTIONS,
1. Approve the Variance Request to allow an additional driveway
access to be placed within 40 foot of an existing driveway
access.
Z. Deny the Request to allow an additional driveway accoeo to be
placed within 40 foot of an existing driveway access.
C. STAPP RRCOIWNDATIONa
Staff recommends approval of the Variance Request to allow another
driveway accose to be placed within 40 feat of an oxicting driveway
accoco.
D. SUPPORTING DATA&
Ospy of the proposed location of the proposed addition to the
Dairy Queen of Monticello.
- 5 -
F �J`j,��i � • � � V
,��%1•I '(.,/�/,•tib.
pilot
NA
A • 1I
–_— - Vor1NCe-W {u•,Yt O a444 .• • i/M'–t'^ �' i r
uoUmv drsvway ,c,vxx rtthin
40' ofan *xi
t� d21 �y
0!1 ry Qwan of esljo. + '
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/84
6. Public Hearinq - Variance Request to Allow a New Detached Garaqe
V to be Built up to the Front Property Line, Applicant - Norbert Kelly, Jr. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Kelly, who lives on Front Street just north of East River Street,
is requesting to replace an existing shed with the placement of a
garage. In the placement of the garage, he would like to build
right up to the front property line just like the house is right
now, and he would like to build a detached, two -car garage. There
already is an access or a curb cut into the property for a garage
at this location. However, another existing driveway access next
to the garage would be no longer needed, and he would install the
concrete curbing in place where the current one is located next
to the house. Due to the size of the lot, I see no problem with
the placement of the garage right next to the property line.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Variance Request to allow a new detached garage to
be built up to the front property line.
2. Deny the Variance Request to allow a new detached garage to be
built up to the front property line.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff rocommundu approval of Uie Variance Requuut to allow
Mr. Molly to build a now detached garage right up to the front
property line.
D. SUPPORTING DATA.
Copy of the proposed location of the proposed garage to be built.
- 6 -
Variance Request to allow a new
w detached garage to be built up to the
'�. front property line.
Norbert Kelly, Jr.
Lf
46
+ �,;`� �,/inn .'.. � � ) � �,,`, � /`'.�•,� �! ., 1
..
... N
e
a.4k _ +�'�-c_ moi• 6 _- 2 _
ct
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/84
7. Public Hearinq - Conditional Use Request to Allow Apartments in a
Business Building in a B-4 Zone. Applicant - Tom Hammer. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Hammer purchased the former old bowling alley building to
renovate the upper floor existing apartments into ten new
apartments. In his renovation project, he has remodeled the
front part for a cafe or restaurant. The back part where the
old bowling alleys were Mr. Hammer would like to convert those
into five additional apartments. Mr. Hammer purchased the
building originally when there were two apartments in the lower
level or main floor area of this building. Mr. Hammer would
like to put in five apartments in the lower level, with one
apartment being equipped for the handicapped. Our Ordinance
specifically addresses that any apartment shall be on the lowest
level, which would be the basement area, or a higher level,
which would be the second floor area, and not to be used on
the principal floor area. However, there being two of them
thero to begin with, those two could possibly be put back in
and to be allowed as nonconforming. To allow additional
apartments would be only allowed as a Conditional Use.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve Conditional Use Request to allow apartments in a
buninens building in a B-4 Zone.
2. Deny Conditional Use Request to allow apartmcnLe in a
business building in a B-4 Zone.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff rocommands denial of Mr. Hammer's request for additional
aparimentu in his building. Mr. Yammer should be allowed to
put his two apartments back in, but not be allowed any additional
apartmento, as per Zoning Ordinarice. Even though Mr. Hammer
has spent a conuideroble amount of money in upgrading the building,
we should look at abiding to tho Ordinance. We did deny one for
Mr. Maus and Lhc Monticello Clinic building.
h. bIN1'UR'1'1W; DATA:
Copy of the proposed location of the proposed additional apartments
- 7 -
Conditional Use (request %J f. .• +', f ..
to allow apartments in a f
business building in a /� ,•`''', d 'I)
B-4 Zone. F'fj vvv
Tom Hammer. F. r •1•.�,�/� J/L ,g ' •�
rr
�.• _ J� f � — �/ �� `fid .
•
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/10/84
B. Public Hearinq - Conditional Use Request to Allow an Outdoor Sales
Lot and a Minor Auto Repair Business in a B-3 Zone, Applicant -
Euqene Kunkel. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Kunkel, part owner in Tri -Auto Sales in Buffalo, is looking
at establishing a sales lot here in Monticello. The sales lot
would be the former Dina's Other World property, utilizing part
of the existing lot for a sales lot. The outdoor sales lot
is only allowed in B-3 Zoning as a Conditional Use. Mr. Kunkel
received a copy of the conditions to the Conditional Use for
outdoor sales, and he has addressed all of the conditions.
Mr. Kunkel would also like to do light auto repair, change oil,
clean and service vehicles, and/or probably some customer vehicles,
at this facility. Minor auto repair is only allowed in a B-3
Zone only as a Conditional Use. Mr. Kunkel, in reviewing his
plana, has received a copy of the conditions which apply to
minor auto repair and has addressed all conditions in his site
plan submitted to me. Mr. Kunkel would only be leasing or
renting this from Mr. Floyd Kruse; therefore, Mr. Floyd Kruse
would aloo be a party to this and has also signed the application
for it.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Approve the Conditional Use Request to allow an outdoor sales
lot and a minor auto repair in a B-3 Zone.
2. Deny the Conditional Usc Request to allow an outdoor sales
lot and a minor auto repair in a B-3 Zone.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION,
staff rucunmendu approval of the Conditional Use Requeot to allow an
outdoor gales lot and a minor auto repair lot in the B-3 Zone with
the applicant muuting all conditions of the Conditional Uue Permit
for minor auto repair and outdoor sales Toto.
n, SITPPl1HT1 NC DATA:
Copy of the proposed location of the propoued minor auto repair
facility and outdoor salon lot facility; copy of the prop000d oile
of the now propoued minor auto repair foci 1ity and outdoor ualoo
lot.
-B-
i
I �
I
I�
Conditional use vAqueat to allor oukdoor e_ a
lot and a minorautorepair busineei in a e- i
Zono.
Eugene Kunkel \
I
ao.,
SS 61 l/ 'T T i ' � f tll / PERMIT ILMER
4GAL {
ESWIPTION LOT BLOCK ADDITION
so. fT. Of SITC AREA 50, fT, Of ARCA OCCUPIED BY WADI M
I0mKTId1.4 TO mwc8n
TH11 FORM MCCO NOT OC YICO 11NSM PLOT PLANS OMAVM TO /CAL{ ass FILCO WITH TNC ►CN0a1T APPLICATION.
11011 MCV BUILDINGS. PAOYIOC TMS FOLLOWING IMrOMMAT10Ni LOCATION OF PROPOICO CONSTAY/TIOM AND CMISTINO
INVA/VRMIMTS. SOON O
LI
O
,
so $
ITC ANO 19TOACM 011490111,010. smw CASNIRTS. FIM1 sN COMTOUq OR OIMMAOC.
•IMT PL.00R CLCVATIOMS. STR[CT. MVATIDN AND "WelktLCVATIOM. SMOv LOCATION O► wen, SCKII. DAs,
AMO CLCCTRIOAL 1CRTICC-LILACS. IMOY LOCATIOIM OF MIIIVCV PIKS. /PCCIrt TNI UM OF CACM BVILO/NO
J MFO CACM MAJOM PORTION TNtRCOI.
INOICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE EA04 GUM SOWN[ EQUALS 101.0• BY 101-0"
U _.
Ic
If" "tv 0A ON STOIIWO pMA RCI I- I u d1 dMowmalM1 M INN *OWN 11MIN 0Id DAM A0 d.go.FU M Nad0.10100
16p au" OOIaFPL lleo F/
a..0aa00gaa 1001aq g10N 1b.11M.1g0/ NAgOC/Oq NOR Ha •000g00Pgq•NN0
000*40a00aa.1010a 06610!al • IP Pl a..
(FBRIITT OSi M1'r
om A/►ITOYCO of DATC