Planning Commission Agenda Packet 11-14-1984AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
November 14, 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
on October 10, 1984.
7:34 P. M. 3. Public Hearing - A Conditional Use Request to Allow
a Nursing Home in an R-9 Zone - Applicant, Monticello -Big
Lake Community Hospital District.
7:49 P. M. 4. Public Hearing - A Simple Subdivision Request of a Residential
Lot, Variance Requests for Lees than the Minimum Lot
Width and Lot Square Footage - Applicant, Harry Stokes.
8:04 P- 14. 5. Public Hearing - A Variance Request to Build a Cold
Storage Building in an R-3 Zone - Applicant, Ruff Auto
Parte.
8:24 P. M. 6. Public Hearing - A Conditional Use Request to Allow
a Detached Accessory Building in Exc000 of 1000 Square
Feet to be Built Without a Principal Use for the Vacant
Property - Applicant, Marvin Scherer. 1
8:44 P. M. 7. Public Hearing - A Requeot for a Now Residential Subdivision
Addition - Applicant, Roalty Station, Inc.
8:59 P_ M. 8. Public Hearing - A Conditional Use Request to Allow
Outdoor Soloo in a 0-3 Zone - Applicant, Monticello
Auto Salco, Inc.
9:14 P- M. 9. Conaldoration of Approval of the Final Plan Stage of
a Planned Unit Development to be Known ao Broadway Partnoro -
Applicanto, Jim Powers and Kent Kjollborg.
9:29 P.M. 10. Consideration of Approval of the Final Plat of the Subdlvioion
of a Residential Lot for 8 Tovnhouoo Unito - Applicant,
Jay Miller.
9:44 P- M. 1 1 . Conoldoratlon of Continuation of variance Roquoot for
No (lard Surface, Curb and Gutter of Parking Lot - Applicant,
Milton Oloon.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS
9:59 P. M. I. Sot the next tentative mooting date for the Monticello
Planning Commlaoion for December 11, 1984, 7:30 P.M.
10:01 P- M. 2. Adjournment.
MINUTES
V REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
October 10, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Richard Carlson, Don Cochran,
Ed Shaffer.
Members Absent: Joyce Dowling.
Staff Present: Thomas Eidem, Gary Anderson.
The meeting was called to order by President Jim Ridgeway at
7:35 P.M.
Motion by Don Cochran, seconded by Richard Carlson, to approve
the September 11, 1984, regular Planning Commission meeting
minutes. Motion carried unanimously, with Joyce Dowling absent.
3. Public Hearing - Variance Reguoot for No Curb or Gutter in a
Parking Lot - Applicant, I%I, Inc.
Mr. Tom Grua was present from IxI to propose a variance request
to allow no curb or gutter in the parking lot and the driveway and
around the parking lot and the driveway perimeters. Mr. Grue
presented the Planning Commission members a copy of the proposed
layout of the parking lot showing a berm around three sides
of the parcel, and also showing the parking lot layout with
the driveway access and driveway layout also included. Also
shown was the drainage of water from the parking lot and where
it would go. Mr. Grua also showed Planning Commiooion members
the landscaping plan proposed for their parking lot site.
Motion by Richard Carlson, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve
the variance request to allow no curb or gutter in a parking
lot and driveway and around the parking lot and driveway porimotera.
Motion carried unanimously with Joyce Dowling absent.
4. Public Iloarinq - Subdivision Rcqueot to Subdivido Existing Unplatted
Land by a Rogiotsrod land Survey - Applicant, Thomao Holthsun.
Mr. Thomas Holthauo, having not had all his piano ready for
Planning Commlocion members' review, requested that his public
hearing be extended over to the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission mooting, which would be November 14, 1984.
Motion by Richard Carlson, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve
the continuance of a public hearing to the November 14, 1904,
Planning Co®lssion mooting. Motion carried unanimously, with
Joyce Dowling absent.
Planning Commission Minutes - 10/10/84
5. Public Hearing - A Concept Stage Plan and a DeveloRment Stade
Plan Request for a Planned Unit Development - Applicants, Jim
Powers mind Kent Kjellberg.
Thomas Eidem, City Administrator, was present to present a City
staff report on the I-94 Plaza Planned Unit Development. Mr.
Eidem indicated that an informal meeting was held on Thursday,
October 4, 1984, at 10:00 A.M., to go over the plans with the
developers, Jim Powers and Kent Kjellberg; the Consulting Planner,
John Uban from Howard Dahlgren 6 Associates; Consulting Engineer,
John Badalich from OSM 6 Associates; Monticello Planning Commission
Chairman, Jim Ridgeway; and four City staff personnel, City
Administrator, Thomas Eidem; Finance Director, Rie—k Wolfsteller;
Public Works Director, John Simola; Zoning Adminiotrator, Gary
Anderson, to review the Concept Stage of the Planned Unit Development
with all parties involved. The consensus of the Enacting was
that they were progressing quite wall on their Planned Unit
Development with some things needing to be documented yet onto
the drawings, which were not done at the time of the meeting,
with the general consensus that they were on schedule and that
any differences within the engineering aspect of the water,
sever, otorm sower, drainage, and grading be resolved by their
consulting engineer, Mr. Dolan, and our Consulting Engineer,
John Badalich of OSM. Mr. Eidem indicated that the legal document
prepared with conditions hen been signed by all parties involved
that allowed the transfer of a little more than 1 acre parcel
from this Planned Unit Development to Mandy'a, Inc. Mr. Eidom
indicated to Planning Commiosion members that this afternoon,
at approximately 3:30 P.M. , he had met with the developer, Jim
Powers, and Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, to go over
a final review of the Concept Stage of the Planned Unit Development.
Going over each individual punch list item with tho developer,
we have found that everything is in order that la needed for
the Concept Stage Plan of t ho Planned Unit Development approval.
The !Loma aren't all on the final draft or the herd copies,
but they are on scattered, tentative copies. We indicated to
Mr. Powers to assemble all that is needed to put onto the hard
copy form and have it ready before the next regularly scheduled
Monticello City Council meeting on October 22, 1984, occurring
that the Planning Commission would grant their approval of the
Concept Stage of the Planned Unit Development at tonight'o mout.ing.
Mr. Eidem Indicated the water piano have boon rowlewod by our
Consulting Engineer and approved by the Minneooto State Department
of Health; that the cover portion of the prop000d plane hac
boon oubmittod to PCA but haon't received their approval yet
at thio time. Mr. Badalich indicated he had soon no problem
with the piano that wore cant to PCA. it's just a matter of
time waiting for their approval. The water, sowor, and otorm
sower plans have boon reviewed by John Badalich with a couple
of small changes that need to be placed. They basically moot
his approval. Mr. Eidem indicated to expedite the progrcoa
Planning Commission Minutes - 10/10/84
v of the Planned Unit Development that we also consider the punch
list for the Development Stage of the Planned Unit Development.
In reviewing the Development Stage, we found that their plane
were found to be in order with the exception that they were
not put onto hard copy form. There were some problems that
weren't put onto the plans which were addressed by the Consulting
Engineer, John Badalich, which will be put onto the plane before
they become the final form. Planning Commission Chairman, Jim
Ridgeway, opened the meeting up for public comment. There being
no public comment, he opened it up for Planning Commission discussion.
The Planning Commission felt a little uneasy with approving
the Concept Stage of the Planned Unit Development when everything
was not onto hard copy form for them. City Administrator, Thomas
Eidem, countered that the information would all be on hard copy
form before the preparation of the City Council agenda on Wednesday,
October 17, 1984, or he would not put the item on the Council
agenda. Commission members also had some concern over the engineering
deficiencies on the storm sewer lino and the drainage and grading
plane not being complete. Administrator Thomas Eidem indicated
that the general consensus of the meeting held on October 4,
1984, was that the engineers work out their differences on the
water, sewer, storm sewer, grading, and drainage plane. He
felt comfortable that the Planning Commission members could
have, as pert of their motion, a stipulation that the stages
of development could be approved subject to the Consulting Engineer,
John Badalich, signing off that they are complete as he suggested.
Motion by Don Cochran, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve the
Concept Stage of the Planned Unit Development subject to Consulting
Engineer, John Badalich of OSM G Associates, signing off of
the engineer portion before granting final approval. Motion
carried unanimously, with Joyce Dowling absent.
Motion by Richard Carlson, ooconded by Don Cochran, to approve
the Development Stage of the Planned Unit Davelopmant oubjoct
to a oign off by Conoulting Engineer, John Badalich of OSM G
Aaaoclatos, before tinal approval. Motion carried unanimously,
with Joyco Dowling absent.
Additional Information Itama
I. Thomoo Eidom wan praoont to explain the Guido Plan portion of
the Comproheneivo Plan. Baoically what hoe boon dono by membaro
of the City otaff won to review the Guido Plan portion and alleviated
coma of the wordlncoc of the Guido Plan and put it into simple,
more conducive language. Mr. Eidom explained to Commiaoion
mombers that staff recommondcd approval of tho Guido Plan portion.
If they had any other addltiono or dolotiono they could inform
v
Planning Commission Minutes - 10/10/84
him of them tonight, and they would be incorporated into the
Plan.
Motion by Don Cochran, seconded by Richard Carlson, to approve
the Guide Plan portion of the now Comprehensive Plan. Motion
carried unanimously, with Joyce Dowling absent.
2. Discussion was then held by Commission members ae to when the
next Planning Commission meeting would be held in November.
City Administrator Eidem indicated to Commission members that
November 12 is a legal holiday and that the Council would be
meeting on Tuesday, November 13, 1984, and suggested that the
Planning Commission members meet on Wednesday, November 14,
at 7:30 P.M. Conaencus of the Planning Commission members was
to meet on Wednesday, November 14, 1984, at 7:30 P.M.
Mr. Don Cochran indicated to Planning Commission members that
he would like to have the floor to announce his pending proposed
resignation to the Mayor and Council affective November 26,
1984. He would like to resign his position from the Monticello
Planning Commiesion as of after the November 14, 1984, Planning
Commission coating. Planning Commisoion Chairman, Jim Ridgeway,
wanted to publicly thank Mr. Don Cochran for his invaluable
service to the Planning Commies ion and members and that hie
pracence will be greatly closed-
3.
losed-
3. Motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Richard Carlson, to adjourn
the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:42 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
!I /
Gary An erB n
Zoning Adminiotrator
conditional Use R
equset to allow
e nuzeing home in an t -B Zone.
Monticello -Big Lake :==Unity Rospitalq•
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
3. Public Hearing - A Conditional Use Request to Allow a Nursing Home in
a R -B Zone - Applicant, Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital Dis-
trict. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As the bond issue has passed for allowing the new nursing home to be
built, the nursing home project is only allowed as a conditional use
in a R -B zone. The nursing home will be located behind the existing
Monticello -Big Lake Hospital with the building extending to the rear
of the property on the 20 ft. intothe right-of-way of the platted
River Strect. No sewer relocation will be necessary at this time to
allow for the construction of the new nursing home.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve a conditional use request to allow the nursing home in an
R -B Zone.
2. Deny the conditional use request to allow the nursing home in an
R -B Zone.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION&
�- The staff recommends approval of the conditional use request to allow
the nursing home in an R -D Zone. The nursing home is compatible with
the existing property surrounding it and will blend in quite well.
D. SUPPORTING DATA&
A copy of the location of the proposed oito plan of the now Monticello -
Big Lako Nuroing Homo.
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
4. Public (fearing - Simple Subdivision Request of a Residential Lot,
Variance Requests for Less than the Minimum Lot Width and Lot Square
Footage - Applicant, Harry Stokes. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
Enclosed, you will find a copy of a Certificate of Survey on Mr. Harry
Stoke's property. Mr. Stoke's property currently faces west Broadway
and is at the corner of West Broadway and Vine Street. He currently
ownes Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Block 47. These lots are the smaller lots
which were originally platted and have only 33 feet of frontage and 165
feet of depth. Mr. Stokes would like to divide the property, the back
72 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4. After looking at the sketch plan, we
will have to determine which to consider, if the rear of his house is the
rear yard or the side yard with the newly proposed subdivision of the
lots. If we were to consider it the rear yard setback on his house, the
existing house would not be in conformance with the newly created sub-
division lot line. If we considered it a side yard setback from the
side of the house, it would meet the minimum side yard setback required
which is ten (10) feet. The lot, as proposed to be replotted,
shows only 72 feet of frontage on Vine Street and the minimum we
allow is 80 feet. It also has less depth than the total amount that is
usually seen in a residential lot depth. As proposed, the building will
not meet the minimum amount of lot square footage in an R-2 zone which
is 10,000 square fc-t. The lot subdivision jnly shows 9,504 feet or
494 feet short. A possible suggestion to the subdivision plat is that
he would have to conform with the minimum lot frontage required, 80 feet,
and that would leave him just about 11 feat (10.9 feet) from the rear of
his house to the newly created property line. In doing so, it would
make the front of the lot moot the conformance of the City ordinance, the
80 feet of frontage. In doing so, you may want to increase the aide yard
setback in an R-2 zone which is currently 10 feet. The increase would
be on the weot side of the proposed platted lot which is the lot line
closest to the house. By doing GO, the closest the houuo could he act
on the lot next to the existing house would be 30.9 foot on a side yard
setback. By increasing the front lineal footage to 00 foot by the
current depth of the four lotu, we would have 560 square feet in access
of the minium lot size required, 1U,000 square feet.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS1
1. To approve the simple oubdivision request. as presented and
approve the variance request for the minimum lot frontage for
less than the minimum lot frontage and the lot oquaro lootago.
2. To deny the simple subdivision request and alae to deny tho variance
ruquest for minimum lot frontage and tho lot oquaro footage.
3. To approvr Ileo simple subdivision rcqueut with the
condition that the lot frontage bo inereaoed to 80 feet and ao a con -
di U on to thio, the minimum side yard setback on t.ho south or went tido
-2-
Dlanning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
however you want to call it, is setback in between the house. The side
yard setback being 20 feet instead of the required 10 feet.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends approval of the simple subdivision request with the
following conditions that the minimum lot frontage be increased to 80
feet, thus being in conformance with the ordinance and thus not requiring
a variance request for less than minimum lot front footage and lot square
footage. Also as a condition, the minimum side yard set back on the side
facing the house be increased to 20 feet instead of the required 10 feet.
D. SUPPORTIZIC DATA:
A copy of the location of the proposed simple subdivision request.
Copy of Certificate of Survey.
f
15
�MOJT AORTR£RL 14
CORNER Of LOT 1
p�4T,
3
r
A f,
35 A MOST EASTERLY
1/ CORA'ER
of LOT 4
1 v +
v+
/��► "tool
r;
a Y
"g2 4 4
{
Mautf l��Y
a
c
L
1
J
0
n
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
5. Public Bearing - A variance Request to Build a Cold Storage Building
in an R-3 Zone - Applicant, Ruff Auto Parts. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Ron Ruff, of Ruff Auto Parts, requests to be allowed to build an
additional cold storage building approximately 50 by 100 feet to be
used for storage of automobiles and automobile parts. On September 13,
1982, the Planning Commission at that time granted a variance to Mr.
Ruff to build a cold storage building for storage of his auto parts.
The building at that time was approximately 40 by 56 feet. In the
ro-doing of the new comprehensive plan, there has been some dis-
cussion to reconsider Ruff Auto Parts as an allowable use in a
newly created zone all by itself. The discussion centered on the
fact that they are at this location and the likelihood of finding
a suitable place for them to relocate and still be feasible dollar
wise is highly unlikely. Therefore, in creating an allowable and
separate zone where they are allowed to exist under a new zoning,
they would be able to expand their facilities and thus be able to
get their stuff under cover and possibly they would clean their
place up slot more, but not saying that this is what they would do.
The staff has discussed this at great length and would probably like
to see some conditions added to their variance request should they
be granted approval at the Wednesday night meeting. Some possible
conditions being that they be requested to establish a comprehensive
plan of their overall development of their property. Another con-
dition would be that under a one, three or probably a maximum of
five year comprehensive plan, they do planting o of trees around the
entire perimeter of their property. And in time as these trees grow,
they would provide a buffer between the existing residential zones and
the newly created zone to allow them to exist where they are at. I
will be talking to Ruff's again today and give them those poosib 1 e
ouggostiono. I think they would be willing to work with the City,
should they be allowed to exist where they are at in their own
newly created zone. We aro talking about a significant amount of
money to do their overall development, but as a stage development
we could oeo many bonefite from the outcome of such a developmental
plan.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONSi
1. To approve the variance roquest to allow a cold utorago building
in an R-3 Zone.
2. To deny the variance request to allow an additional cold storage
building in a R-3 gone.
3. To approve the variance requeot to building a cold storage building
in an R-3 zone with come suggeotive conditions:
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
1. They establish an overall developmental plan of their entire
property with an approved developmental plan with a schedule
of the phase development and the time frame in which they
would occur.
Suggestive plantings of Evergreen trees or some other suitable
trees around the entire perimeter of their properties.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff really has no recommendation for this,just some possib le
suggestive comments to pass on to commission members. We do not
support no_ do we deny approval of their variance request. We offer
the following suggestive comments:
That an overall development plan be worked out with the owners
of Ruff Auto Parts. Within this developmental plan, some
suggestive items to be discussed and to be included with this
plan would be tree plantings around the entire property.
Possibly a creating a new zoning for this entire property to
allow it to exist within its own zone as a business. That
the owners tollow strictly with the developmental plan agreed
upon between them and the City.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A copy of the proposed location of the additional cold storage building.
-5-
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
�i 6. Public Hearing - A Conditional Use Request to Allow a Detached
Accessory Building in Excess of 1000 Square Feet to be Built
Without a Principal Use for the Vacant Property - Applicant,
Marvin Scherer. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Staff has put this agenda item back on for public hearing to
get a final decision once and for all. The staff had hopes
of getting through the Comprehensive Plan by this time but has
not gotten through the Zoning Ordinance section of the new Comprehensive
Plan. At our last meeting held with Mr. Scherer on November 8,
1983, the Monticello Planning Commission, along with the City
Council, indicated to Mr. Scherer that we would like to have
him wait until we get into the Ordinance section of the new
Comprehensive Plan that was to be worked on during the middle
half of 1984. We didn't make a decision one way or another
to support Mr. Scherer -s request or to deny it, but that we
would be looking at the zoning in our new Comprehensive Plan.
Staff foals that we should bring this up again and look at it
an an individual case example. Looking at the property we have,
it is a blighted property and has been for quite some time.
We would like, if at all possible, to clean up blighted areas
as long as it is within the realms of the ordinance. And it
is in the best interest of the City and also of the affected
residents within the area. Even though we may not please all
of the affected residents, it will be a compromise to clean
up a blighted area. The size of the building that Mr. Scherer
is proposing is approximately a 48 x 96 building at the maximum.
However, it may be a smaller building. The size indicated above
10 the maximum that he is currently proposing. We aro looking
at p000ibly,if it was granted to allow him to build this cold
storage garage, a list of suggestive conditions to be applied
to it. Even though you may have other conditions or may not
agree upon some of these conditions, they could be aired at the
public hearing: The building would be allowed to be sot to
the roar moot portion of the property, that being the cornor
next to the Ruff Auto property and the Bridgewater Telephone
Company property with a 5 -toot cotbock on the Oouth and vent
aides of the property; that the door entry or entries be on
the east and of the building toward the Griofnow Shoot Metal
property; the ncroening be made of a treated wood material that
would be opaque and the screening be a minimum height of 7 foot
and a maktmum height of 8 foot; that the property be mowed and
kept groomed as if it was a residential house; that there be
a blacktop surfaced or a concrete surfaced driveway from County
Road 39 into and up to the door entrance to the building; that
the maximum gate opening in the screening fonco be 15 foot and
the maximum driveway width be 12 foot. The gate must be able
to be closed, and the gate must be the same material as the
screening fence; the minimum height of tree plantings be 8 foot,
-6-
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
�1 and the tree plantings be the following: on the vest line of
the property next to the Phone Company a minimum of six trees
he planted, there be a minimum of three trees planted in front
of the property. and that there be a minimum of six trees planted
along side on the east side of the property next to the vacant
property owned by Mrs. Edna Griefnow; there will be absolutely
no outside storage whatsoever; the use of this building be only
for cold storage of automobiles and its accessories; the maximum
height of the tree plantings be 8 feet; that there also be a
landscaped area in the center of the building as shown on the
enclosed plane.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Conditional Use Request to allow a detached
accessory b,allding in excess of 1000 square feet to be built
without a principal use for the vacant property.
2. Deny the Conditional Use Request to allow a detached accessory
building in excess of 1000 square feet to be built without
a principal use for the vacant property.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff supporta o request to clean up this blighted property,
but in doing so. the support from City staff lies directly to
adhere to conditions that are attached with no deviations from
that other than suggested by Planning Commission members or
City Council, urging this an an example property only and Looking
in dealing with it as an individual blighted property. Ao you
will note in tho nits plan oncl000d Lo our ouggooted recommendation
to Planning Commloolon momboro on how we would like to neo the
property fully developed and agreed upon with ouggootivo c ommonto
accepted from Planning Commloolon meombaro.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the proposed location of the Conditional Uoo Request;
Copy of the proposed nits plan with conditiono attached to the
site plan ao shown.
-7-
Fri
-
r rE
' moi' �• /�• %. j/ :O ��
Conditional Use Request to allow i .
detached accessory building in ex ;ens t _
of 1000 square feet to be built without
principal use for the vacant
a _. 1� I R�r •/ .1{1�w
:port
vy.
in schorer_ _ _ l- ,r ® • ! ,
w
ao�{
L�..{
I ••.•b...� �.rte.
DDRCS$'' •I:^LiR4
PERMIT H;CR___/_"��-'
Lt`A` 1AfS lAlttf dq- 6 BLOCK _ADDITION
LCSCR IPTtOH LOT �^f 11 r
',G, /T. OF SITE AREA 165'A d6,V ya. k,. T. Or ARCA OCCLPICD BY BUI LDIt7�
—__---
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT
IMI( TOIL. MC[D NOT .[ V390 WCC PLOT PLANS DRAWN TO ]CAL( A.0 wILCD MITH TM( PCANIT APPLIC.TIOM.
011 M(M CNILDIMOI. PROT 10[ TN( IOLLOVIMO IMIOAT..ATIOMI LOCATION OC PROIOSCO COM]t.UCTION AMO C.ISTIHr,
i
.
,
.OV (N(Mi[. BMOM DYI lDI M6 llT( AMD .(TOACR OIN(MlIOM]. SWI CA]NCMTl, IIMIlN CONTOUR! D. D--ACC.
IA.T ILOOA CL[TAT IOM!• """ ILIIAT10M AND !(M[A CLCT.TIOM. SMDM LOCATION 01 vAlE.. SCVCH, GA].
'.MD [L[CT AICA. ld...C. LIMIT. (MOM LOCATION! 01 "'IV" 01" 1.(C " TM[ Ul[ 01 1-1null Dl „�:
.MD [AC/M�M�W\\OA POUT IOM TM[ALO/•
y INDICATE NDPTN IN CIRCLE r-RAPtI S9UARE EQUALS ISO -0" RY 16--0-
-I. I -A I--
61-0"—I.I._I...I_-..blJcal._ I_ 1 I1—I-
1/W -a IAV IA -I IM. U1DDO-ASI—W,-1—_.I'-1-1 In Ih. if-1—nrtl m"�.A w•
.•.1 P.., r.. 1., , w .I. ..• .. n •
11LM.T I�.T m pw:rM D., t7a1 u•. 1. Y c•
..................................... ...........................................................
(TOA CI Tr uCl ONLr) •..
�I
CONDITIONS TO CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST
MARVIN SCRERER
1. Building set back to within 5 feet of the south and vest
property lines in the southwest corner of your property.
2. Door entries on the east end of the building only.
3. 7 feet or 8 feet high opaque screening fence of treated
wood in the following areae:
A. From oast and west rear property linea to the north
about 60 feet.
B. From the NW corner of the building east along building
20 feet, from this point start with the fence going
north from the building 10 fact, then wast 25 feet to
meet with want line fence.
C. Starting at the NE corner of the building, north 15 feet,
then east to the east line fence.
D. A 15 -foot maximum width gate made of same material as
opaque screening fence. Cate to be closed except when
in use.
4. 15 trees, B feat in height at minimum, in the following
areae:
A. 6 along the west side of the property, maximum 30 -Loot
spacing.
B. 6 along the east aide of the property, maximum 30 -loot
spacing.
C. 3 along the front aide of the property, maximum 30 -Coot
spacing.
5. 12 -foot maximum driveway width, concrete or asphalt driveway.
Driveway to be from Colt Couroo Rood, south into tho proporty,
then run up to the east building entrance door.
6. Absolutely no outoido atorago.
7. Building uoo to for cold storage of vehicles and its acc0000rico
only.
rel
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
7. Public Hearing - A Request for a New Residential Subdivision
Addition - Applicant, Realty Station, Inc. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Ralph Munsterteiger, Realty Station, Inc., is before you with
a proposal to create a new subdivision in the former Rand property.
With the proposed land subdivision as submitted, each lot does
meet the minimum square footage required in R-3 Zoning, 8,000 square
feet. One lot shows 9,760 square feet, but they are all in
excess of the minimum square footage required for R-3 Zoning.
The existing building, the former Rand Mansion, is on the National
Historical Register; and with the general nature of the building
being the old architectural style, we should look at any proposed
development around this structure to be of similar design or
of complementary design to the existing old Rand Mansion- The
two surrounding properties, the Malone property and also the
Jameson property, are of the architectural design character
of the former Rand Mansion. One of the controls we do have
in the granting of the approval of a subdivision is in the architectural
control. What we are suggesting in that should the preliminary
plan as submitted be approved, a suggestive condition
or conditions to the approval of the preliminary plat be
that an Architectural Control Board be established, that no
building on any of these platted Iota take place until the building
plane are approved by the Architectural Control Board. within
the Architectural Control Board, they would have the authority
to grant the style and character of the house to be built on
there.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the prop000d land oubd ivioion as prooented.
2. Deny the pro poeud land aubdivi cion no preoentod.
3. Approve the land oubdivioion a o pr000ntod with the condition
that there be an Architectural Control Board ootabli ohod
to regulate architectural and characteriotic control of
the buildingo to be built on t ho rooidontial Loto I, 3,
<, 5, 6, and 7.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff rocommendo approval of the o ketch plan for the prop000d
oubdiviolon ao oubmittod with Gond itlono being that 1) there
be an Architectural Control Board ootabliahod, 2) control the
development of buildingo on the vacant Loto 1, 3, <, 5, 6, and
7 0o that they be of architectural characturiatic otylo to complement
the oxiating former Rand Manoion.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the prop000d location of tha oubdivloion plat; Copy
of the survey plan for the prop000d now eubdiviolon.
sirJ� �a-• � �..
d!r pJ � �• o
IN r !tJ/1111. !!Ii
err rfr! WE J P ,J rJ ✓/l,
� ��U� r�rrs rx arit�� tjsr r��e�"r 91n� r!s rJl�`
IPAJ p .
Aasst tow a ne.
wasidanti . 8,3
6ivisi $talion. ino
Aatity .40,
1 i � •
\ 34 64
33
33
osED LAND S�Bp�ViSIG
PROP
J! AWr,"ERN RAILWAY
jL1NGTON NORTHERN
ti ( FORMERLY GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY) p
303.5 �sOtJTNERLv R/W zryE of GREAT NORTHERN RAj wAY
117 \ ---- -
_
i0.7 30 50,
�93
� 3
t` 3
24.130 t (A
O
7',60 50 F t 'oro
� NA
O
vs
134 ..i-'� 090 $o c ,• gyp```\ _
.. 10 �-t
\ti ��
cx
Q� ��
th
�N SDUTy�RGY
0+ �k9"��A TERR/TpR �� or
'L
31.200
oh \
3~ ` 12,1310 SG.f N �,�•y
F•, \ .0000DD
�
/fie j (SN , otv
W
� 2
+fir+ •\�..\ ,��.,�` '� �,,�:
N 1
ji
t t o
jos �•• :ti
q�\ ..318.00
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
V 8. Public Hearin? - A Conditional Use Request to Allow Outdoor
Sales in a B-3 Zone - Applicant, Monticello Auto Sales, Inc. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Clarence McCarty, owner of Monticello Auto Sales, is before
you with a Conditional Use Request to allow Auto Sales in a
B-3 Zone. The site is at the former Dino -s Other World vacant
property site. Mr . McCarty would like to have a sales lot only
for his care with no building there as a principal use. His
sales office would be at his residence in the City of Monticello.
Previous to this, the Planning Commission, at an April 10, 1984,
Commission meeting , granted Mr. Eugene Kunkel a conditional
use to have an outdoor sales lot out there and also a minor
auto repair buslneas. However, there will not be a minor auto
repair in this one at all. It will be only outdoor sales.
Possible conditions would be that the surface of the lot, whether
hard surfaced, would have to be of a surface to control duet;
also that it be lighted and the lighting all be directed to
the sales lot itself; that the area be kept well groomed.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Conditional Use Request to allow outdoor sales
in a B-3 Zone.
2. Deny the Condi Lionel Use Requast to allow outdoor sales
in a B-3 Zone.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommmonds approval of the Conditional Use Request
with the following conditions: The lighting all be directed
to the sales lot; the sales lot, hard surfaced now, be used
as the area for the parking; and that there be a number of caro
to be determined by the Planning Commission members as the maximum
amount of cera he could have on thin saloo lot.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the proposed location of the Monticello Auto Sales lot.
mmmom
GY'
1
g Z
e
T-
s
1
'
Conditional Use Request to allow:
outdoor sales in a 8-1 Zone.
Monticello Auto Sales,
:ne.
,
1
g Z
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
9. Consideration of Approval of the Final Plan Stage of a Planned
Unit Development to be Known as Broadway Partnere - Applicants,
Jim Powers and Kent Kjellberg. (G.A.)
This is an informational item for the Planning Commission members
that the final approval of the Planned Unit Development for
Broadway Partnere has been in and up for the final approval
at the Council level on Tuesday night, November 13, 1984.
10. Consideration of Approval of the Final Plat of the Subdivision
of a Residential Lot for 8 Townhouse Unite - Applicant, Jay Miller. (G.A.)
This is also an informational item that the final plat was in
for City Council review of the residential lot subdivision for
8 townhouse units.
-10-
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/14/84
11. Consideration of Continuation of Variance Request for No Hard
Surface, Curb and Gutter of Parking Lot - Applicant, Milton Olson. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Milton Olson, Olson Electric, will be in requesting an extension
of his variance request to allow hard surfacing of his parking
lot with curb and gutter installed in the spring by no later
than June 10, 1985. At that time, it will be reviewed by the
Zoning Administrator. If the parking lot is not in, it will
be up for the Planning Commission to decide at their June 11,
1985, Planning Commission meeting what action they will take.
We recommend at that time that the Planning Commission have
the City Attorney take corrective action. This is only a recommendation
by City staff. The Planning Commission may choose some alternative
type of decision for this.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the extension of the variance request to allow hard
surfacing of the parking lot with curb and gutter no later
than June 10, 1985.
2. Deny the extension of the variance request to allow hard
surfacing of the parking lot with curb and gutter by no
later than June 10, 1985.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends granting Milton Olson an extension of his variance
request on the hard surfacing of his parking lot with curb and
gutter until June 10, 1985.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the latter sent to Mr. Olson on Novomber 1, 1984.
-11-
by o/ / ..Iice&
011— of 0.
City Adm ftatll
November 1, 1984
Mr. Milton Olson
209 South Main Street
St. Michael, M. 55376
P"q 19121:95.2711
Mevo 19121 33337J9
RE: Olson Elcctria Building Parking Lot. Prt of Lot A
of Lot 4 of Wsa of S.M. G Lot A of NM Of S.W. As
des Bk. Unplatted Property in the City of Monticello.
Dear Mr. Olsont
The parking lot construction completion has been discussed between
City Staff and the City Attorney, Gary Pringle.
We are recoaamanding to the Monticello Planning Commission that the
commission grant you an extension of the hardsurfacing requirement
until June 10, 1985, at which time the Zoning Administrator will
view the property to sea if the parking lot is completed. If not,
the Zoning Administrator will report to the Planning Commission
at their June 11, 1985 meeting. The Planning Commission will then
have the City Attorney take corroctive action.
This is only a City Staff recoslmendation acknowledging the statement
made by you at the October 4, 1981 Planning Commission Meeting that
you would have the parking lot hardaurfaced by October 4, 1984.
The City and you, Mr. Olson, were both acting in good faith that
the parking lot surfacing would lee completed and no other conditions
would be attached to your variance request. The Planning Commission
has the final decision.
If you have any Questions, plasms feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
cc1 Correopordonce file
Tom Eidem
John Simola
250 East Broadway s Rt 4, Box 83A 9 Monticello, MN 55362 C//)