Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda Packet 08-09-1983AGENDA RD'".0LAR MEETING - M/MTICZLLO PI -INNING COMMISSION August 9, 1983 - 7:10 P.M. 0 Members: .tum Ridgeway, Don Cochran. Joyce Dowling, PA Schaffer and Richard Carlson. Tina• 7: 1 1. .,11 t c Ord, t. 7:1- .. Approval of the 14+nutei of the 14-qular Neet.nq held on July S, 1981. 7:15 3. Public Hoariny - W. J. Murphy - Front Yard setback 'variance. 7:50 1. Public Huat,nq - "onditonal Tire Rrquebt - Sign Re- location - Alocher aLtdoor Advertising. 8:05 5. Public Rearing - Variance Rrqu--ut - Wumber of Parking Spaces Required - St. INnry's Catholic Church. 8:30 6. Public !Waring - Variance Rrquebt - Proposed Now Health Club - James Powers. 8:35 7. Public Hrarinq Stdoyard Variance Request - Proposed Detached Garage - Jeff Rowan. 8:'`A B. Public Hearinq - Proposed kstendwent Request to the Ordinance to Allow Plea Markets in a 8-3 Zone. 9. Continuancu of a Required Parking Space Request - Brad [arson. Additional infot"tLon Item. 8+2'+ 1. Conditional uve Wquest - Rttnticallo Aaseatbiy of God Church. 9,35 J. 1rgr.,rd Am.u,trr•ni in fuc•.t t, th, . rdLnanee to Allow v s tNvAitional urs n +443or AUtu hapa+r .n a A-) fin,. t+' 1. Sadeyatd Vaiiant'e bequest - la,bert Saxon. 9135 B. Proposed Conditional Use N paest to Allow Two mental 6ulidinns in a 6-1 Saime. Tit• P.-,ularly t.1mmie ern Ryon, f'W t1r• PlWtnini Cet#sib4nat / it ttmtativuly •cltodul.J 1c• '.1traltrr It, 1161 - 7,10 P.y, Ad)ournment. 0 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING — MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION July 5, 1963 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Joyce Dowling, Richard Carlson, Don Cochran, and Fd Schaffer. City Staff Merbers Present: Tam Eidem, Rick Wolfsteller, Gary Anderson. The meeting of the Monticello Planning CLxmmissiOn was called to order by President Jim Ridgeway on July 5, 1983 at 7:37 P.M. 2. Approval of the Minutes. A motion was made by Don Cochran, seconded by Joyce Darling and unanimously carried to approve the minUteB of the regular meeting of June 14th, 1983. 3. Approval of the Minutes. A motion was made Joyce Dowling, seconded by Richard Carlson and approved unanimously to al:prove the minutes of the joint mooting of June 21, 1983. 4. Public Hearing - Sidoyard Variance Request for Attached Garaqa - Ricky ant Recky Ilaugoto. With Richard and Robocca Huuyeto pre:wnt, R:churd It.myet.o requested n nideyard variance to bu iId a 26 foot by 26 100t Attached garago to his home to within 12 foot of the property lut line. Iiia home Is located at 37 Fairway Drive, Cauitry Club F.,nor. Mr. Ila ugeto'n house in currently act back 36 feet frnn the went property lot Ilnc which currently moats City ordinance requirements. By adding the 26 foot by 26 foot garaqu , a variance wuuld be necessary since the wort side of the garage would be within 12 foot of the property lot line. Ordinance roquiroo a 20 foot not back on a corner lot unless a variance is requested. Abutting property owner to the west wan notified of the put+lic hearing and did not oxpreos any opposition to the variar.co tcquoot. The Planning Co®isoion mcaboro questioned Mr. Ilaugoto as to the roaoon for building the attached double car garage and Mr. Haugoto'e rouponou was that he wanted the additional room of a two car garage to otora bout his vehicles insides. The Planning Cameionion members questioned the neod for the 2 car garage when the aide yard rstback on the oast aide in 20 foot when only 10 foot is rcyuired. Mr. Mrrvin George, owner of the development, spoke up to buplort otatemento an to why the property was situated such that the houoo could be built with a single attached garago only. Planning Commission Minutes - 7/5/83 Mr. George stated that HUD requirements on the sideyard variance on the bedroom side of the house which would have been on the cast side of the house requires a 20 foot sideyard setback. The Planning Commission members also questioned,with the encroachment into the 20 foot sideyard setback on the corner lot, whether the road would be further developed or possibly widened as this may cause a hindrance to the new garage that is being built. City Administrator, Tim Eidem, stated that the Golf Course Road which is currently of rural design yet and when the road is to L:e expanded or widened, the now road would meet current City standards which would eliminate the road ditch, therefore, curb and qutvir would be installed along the new road. The Planninq Cc-nissic: members also asked Mr. George how many mor,- variances would Lr. noceasary to complete his addition, :,;n,:- tLLCre has b,en a num,ruus amount of variances requested. Mr. George uLdted that possibly two or three may I,c needed on adjacent properties like this corner lot, but with property placement of thc house and garage on the property, Mr. George hoped to keep this variance request at a minimum. Taking into consideration some of the statements that were stated above, by granting the variance request would make a definite improvement to the property, therefore,a motion was made by Don Cochran, seconded by Fd Schaffer to recommend approval of the variance request allowing the garage to be built t.ithin 12 feet of the property lot line. Voting in favor were Ridgeway, Cochran, Carlson, Dowling and Fchaffer. The motion war, carried unanimously. S. Public hlcarinq - Conditional Uce Requent - Minor Auto B,aiy Shop Repair - Patrick Townsend. Mr. Pat Townrend was present with his partner to diacuoo with Planning Commiusion members an additional item to their con- ditional use permit that they txt allowed to do major auto body repair, meaning a complete paint job could be done undar major auto hody repair. Mr. Townuend stated that he thought this wan all straightened out at tho previous meeting of April 12th, when he wan granted a ccnditional uce {ie unit to do minor auto repair. The Planninq Commission members ut.rted that during the time of Lhe converuation, no mention wan made of deinq auto body work at Llu r facility. Planning Commiusion m,•mber Jim 1•idgeway ri•qucstrd any citizen'u eoimento regardinq this item and Mr. a Mr.,. tied Topel utated there wan much eongorticn of vehicleu and blockage of traffic on the I•r'iwito lot awned by Mi. l.uiy i'laku and also the owner of the huilding which fu'. Townoimd iu rcntinq. This boinq private property, traffic through Lhe properly could actually be blocked off, but due to tho w,eage of the tiaffic through the private property, not only used for Mr. Towncend'u business but also for Mr. Joneu's huuinvi,u and other buuincauec, in the block. Mr. Jones wan also prevent tcalhido to the parking problems and congeution of traffic from Mr. Townrend'u buuinoca, stating that his cuutomero can not gut into hie property tri pick u1. thoit mcrchandiso. Tlio Planning Comminalmi memberu utated that these problems of traffic congeurion be worked out amnia all the Ir -2 planning Commission Minutes - 7/5/63 affected property owners and come to a workable solution. Mr. Townsend indicated that he does tie up traffic when he is moving vehicles in and out of his shop for repair, but that it is not only these vehicles but also potential customers and other business's customers. Mr. Townsend stated that he is willing to come up with some parking problem solution, therefore , possibly using the the open adjacent space on the west side of the property to park additional vehicles. Mr. s Kra. Topel also brought up the fact the employees of Mr. Townsend's business park their cars in the driveway, but Mr. Townsend stated that his employees park their vehicles at his home. The Planning Commission members, "king into consideration the parking problems and that they be resolved by joint coa®unication among all the affected property owners, a motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Don Cochran to approve the following conditional use request contingent upon the following conditions 1. No wrecked cars or body repair cars be parked on the west side of the building. 2. Bard surfacing for the parking on the west side Lo waived. 3. Tliat parking be allowed on the west cads and rhat unly customer cars that are finisthcd he parked there. 4. I:mployees cars and/or vehicles to be parked an Mr. Town_ vnd'.: private propotty at hie hume. 5. Conditional use be granted for minor auto repair to major auto repair to allow major auto body repair work to be clone. G. The conditions for the above 1,� fc,r one year, hencefoitl. from July S, 1983. Voting in favor were Ridgeway, Dowling, Cochran, Carlson and Sctiaffer. G. Suggested List of Rngulationa for Ordinancu Amendment to Allow Flea Markets an a Conditional Uno in a B-3 Zone - Mol Wolters. Mel Wolters wau present to discuss his flea market roquest. Ilia intention is to allow small homearicis, hited people and/or young peol:le to sell goods out of a stand or out of the back of a vehicle. Kr. Wolters indicated that numerous people have approached him in regard to ceiling small quantities of food or other items out of thu back of their vehicles on the adjact�nt lot to his property by the Dairy Queen. Kr . Wol tero stated to these people that Choy have to contact City hall for a pwrmit. Tim direction of the conversation was directed towards trannicnt merchants. U -icrip- Live information of the transient merchant action of the Monticello ','ening Ordinance wa:: explained by City hlminit.tiator, Tum Cudem, an to the fee schedule, that being a very hryh fee for a one day uau. Planuiug Commission Minutes - 7/5/83 The intended use of the high fee is to discourage transient merchants, those people from other areas coming into Monticello t- sell their goods and then leaving town within one day. we have businessmen already selling this merchandise on a day to day basis, 365 days out of the year. Mr. Wolters felt this item should came to a head either by addressing an ordinance amendment to allow flea markets or address a change in the transient merchant fee schedule. The Planning Commission membt:rs noted that they would like citizen's partici- pation or input from the citizens. A motion by Ed Schaffer, seronded by Joyce Dowling to table a request for an ordinance amendment and ask for a date for a public hearing. Members voting in favor were Schaffer, Dowling, Cochran, Carlson and Ridgeway. This motion was carried unanimously. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission of August 9th, 1983, was tentatively scheduled for the public hearing on this item. 7. Proposed Subdivision of a City Wt to Allow Construction of Two Single Family Houses - John Sandberg. Mr. John Sandberg was present to discuss the subdividing of the wester- ly 21 2/3 feet of tot 4 aril all of Lot 5, Block 7, Lower Monticello Addition. This being a simple subdiviniun of residential lot, certain ordinance requirements were to be adhered to. Mr. Sandberg indicatr.l that the front portion of the lot to be subdivided would bo approxi- mately 12,000 square feet. The second half of the roar part. of the lot Lx•inq approximately 19,500 oquaru t., t, then fir.•, i -LI, lot!: meet the minimum square foot.agc reyuirem, stn. Mt. Sind L. t., 1,:u indicated that he would 2xve-I the minimum Irent lel tcotmpl t,�- ment. Mr. Sandberg also Stated that aince the nide lot line nn thy_ oaut and the cidcyard setback roquircmcnt i!: 10 feet, he world like to place the water and sewer lines under this area for ,.rvice to the back property lot. with the front prolvrty lot being serviced frran a service stub already in the strret, Mr. Sandberg said he would be responsible for the new water and sewer service lines to the rear property lot. Also, since there is no curb cut in to service the front property lot, if a driveway entrance wore to be put in onto River Street, Mr. Sandberg would be responsible fcr the curb cut oxpenao. lie also indicated that hs cuuld enter tl.0 property through a designated street, Now Street, which terminates at the River. nr. Sandberg indicated in the pictures that wore distributed to the planning Comminsion members that there are areas along Fast River Street where homeowners are using designated City streets as drive- ways or entrances to their prcl,erty. Mr. Sandberg indicated that the present condition of the street in of serviceable use for the rear property lot and also the front property lot if the need occurred. Mr. Sandberg has no desire to blacktop this street, but ii he no did choose to do so in the future, he would he fully responsible for the exponne of any blacktopping. A motion wan made by Cochran, uuconded by Schaffer and unanimously cartierl to arp rove the propoi;ed suldiiviniun of the City lot to allow for construction of two single tamily huuncs. Membo ra voting in favor wore Hidgoway, Carlt.t,n, Schaffer, Don' ng and Oichran. Planning Commission Minutes — 7/5/83 Additional Information items. The following items were discussed as information to the Planning Commission members. 1. Conditional Use Bequest - Monticello Assembly of God Church. The Monticello Assembly of God Church called me to table their request until the next month's meeting which is August 9th, 1983. 2. Proposed Rezoning - B-3 (Highway Business) to R-3 (Residential Multi Family). Discimsion with Planning Commission M,,mbers on possible rezoning of B-3 (Highway eue.uwsr.) to an R-3 (kesi- dontial Multi Family) followed wr Lh the genural con- sensus being that the initial applicant be con- Lactod and he go through the proper procedures for requesting a public hearing . 3. Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, passed out information received from Jarea Metcalf, Metcalf and LAroon, Attorneys at law, in regard to variance requests at the May 17th, 1903 mewling for minimum parking requirements. Questions were raised by mcmbcra as to the amount of additional parking that is needed with the acquisition of the property, and Mr. Anderson was instructed to contact Mr. Metcalf andautmit thio information aL Lho next regularly achoduled meeting on August 9th, 1983. A site plan indicating the location of the proposed parking and and the number of parking apacea would be provided. 4. Vari ante request for a separate pylon sign to advertise daily specialo uubmittudby the Country Kitchen was approved by the Monticello City Council at their regular meeting on June 27, 1983. S. Sot the tertative date for the next tegularly scheduled meeting of the Planntny Ctomioston for August 9th, 1983 at 7,30 P.m. There being no further busincon, a motion aa:. made by Schaffer and npconded by Carinon and catri,�d unanimuu-ly to adjourn thv mce t r ng . :;Airy Anderson O :amino Adminir.u•ator _ 5 _ ..Z Planning Commission Agenda - 8/9/83 AGENDA SUPPLEMENT Public Nearing - W.J. Murphy- Front Yard Setback Variance. Mr. W.J. Murphy has requested a front yard setback variance to build an addition to the north of the existing Americ-Inn to within 18 feet of the front property line. The Americ-Inn is located at 118 Lauring Lane. According to the site plan enclosed with the agenda, the Americ-Inn is currently set back approximately 158 feet from the north front property lot line which currently meets City ordinance requirements. By adding on the proposed 39 unit addition to the Americ-Inn, a variance would be necessary as the north side of the motel would be within 18 feet of the front property lot line. Qrdinance requires 30 foot setback unless a variance is granted. If the variance is granted allowing the addition to be built within 18 feet of the front property line, it should probably be noted that the furtherest front portion of the proposed addition to the building would be no farther than the parking spaces that are in at Perkin's, the northeast portion of the Perkin's property. With the proposed addition, additional parking spaces would be proposed with the employeo'a parking to be at the oast side of the existing hscric-Inn building with parking on the east aide of the proposed addition to be used only for motel tenants. As you will note in the enclosed site plan, Mr. Murphy is also proposing to develop other portions of his lot also as part of his overall motel expansion project. POSSIBLE ACTICNi Consideration of approving or denying the variance request to allow the addition to the motel to be built within 18 foot of the front property line, a 12 foot variance. REFENF.NCF.Se A map depicting the location of the property, o site plan noting the location of the proposed motel addition and a photo noting the location of the properties will be presented at the Planning Comciooion meeting. E 17. 'all. Front yard variance request" to an addition to within 18, of Property line. Americ inn Motel V OVO 94 X ii4 b N ii4 b LAURING IAN& - I I 1 1 •moi. `,� I I T r-.�--- 'e i II V 1 , I , ' I I 1 W I Y 1 1 , v 1 I I Planning Con nission Agenda - 8/8/83 4. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Request - Sign Relocation - Blocher outdoor Advertising. Mr. Del Blocher has requested a conditional use permit to re- locate an outdoor advertising sign from Lot 5 to Lot 11, Thomas Park Addition. The relocated sign zddition would be in Lot 11, Thomas Park Addition. To give you some background on the signs itself, there were two existing wood structure signs located on Lots 5 and 9, Thomas Industrial Park. Since these two signs were existing before our sign ordinance was adopted, they were grandfathered in. Mr. Blocher noting that his lease was about to expire on Lot 5 had asked for a variance to relocate the sign from Lot 5, Thomas Park Addition, across the freeway to Lot 12, Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace Addition. Upon the approval of the sign relocation, the old wood sign would be replaced with a new single pole metal sign. The Planning Commission, at its May 12th meeting, denied the proposed variance request for sign relocation and an appeal was made by Mr. Blocher to the Council which at their May 26, 1981 mectingwas also denied for relocation. In July of 1982, Mr. Blocher again made a variance request to replace these two outdoor signs with a now single pole sign made of oteel. At that meeting, Mr. Blocher received approval from the Planning Commission to replace the two existing wood sign structures in Thomas Industrial Park, Lots 5 and 9, with new steel single structures that would be appropriately landscaped and of uniform sign consistent with the size of the new signs. Mr. Blocher, upon approval from the Planning Commission, did remove the old wooden sign and replaced it with a now steel sign on Lot 9, Thomao Industrial Park, but did nothing at that time with the old wooden sign located on I.ot 5, Thomas In- dustrial Park Addition. Henceforth now at our August 9th, Planning Commiusion meeting, we will be approached by Mr. Blocher with a requoat to put up the cocond additional sign in which he did originally receive a approval in the July 13th, 1982 Planning Commission meeting, only he would like to relocate the sign fres Lot 5, which was originally grantcd,to Lot 11, Thomao Park Addition. The sign would be very similar to the aamo sign that now oxioto on Lot 9, Thomau Park Addition, but only to be relocated from Lot 5, Thomau Park Addition, to Lot 11, Thomau Park Addition. Pos SIBLE ACTIa;1i Consideration of approving or donyinq the conditional uoo request to allow anoutdoor advertioing uign be located from Lot 5. Thomas Park Addition to Lot 11. Thomas Park Addition. - 2 - MR Planning Commission Agenda - 8/8/83 REFERENCES: A map depicting the location of the property, the 1981 Planning Commission meeting minutes and City Council Meeting minutes, 1982 Planning Coamission meeting minutes, and a photo noting the location of the present sign on Lot 9 and the proposed sign to be relocated on Lot 11, will be presented at the Planning Commission meeting. - 3 - �T 44 f \'� �� ate. ••,/�,•V J.� � � r ldvertisirq sign variance request/ M to relocate an existing signs ��.._ which was rNoved. •, Y Blocher Qutdoor ndvertisacg 40 94 PROM I•.O ,, iN , I •, ` �� Ti, 1. �:; :� ' ', 1, w -• .^ III Plannlnq Commission 5/12/81 S. Public Hearing - Consideration of a varianrr• - Blocker Outdor,r Advertising. NOTr: Decision of the Planning Commi^.:ion will b,- final, unlo.:s decision is appealed by 5:00 P. M_ on Monday, ::ay 18, 19B], b,,- an �an individual. Appeal must hr 1n wl i r inq,­ne ( n,! st ra ti• t he n hson:: for the appeal. If as appeal l.: L!u 1:ILy iv:uul :;hall hear the appeal on Monday, May 26, 1981, c 7:]0 P. h. in the Mont icol In City Hall. Notice of an appeal shall appear in the Monticello Timrs on Thursday, May 21, 1981. Del Blocker, of Blocker Outdoor Advertising, has m.ide an application to erect an off -premise sign (billboard) of 200 or more square feet, on Wt 12, Block 2, Iauring Hillside Terrace. This property is zoned R-3. Mr . Blocker, who now owns two signs of similar description in Thomas Park, is contemplating building a new sign as above described on Lot 12, Block 2, in lauring Hills1de Terrace, and giving the City of Monticello a letter relinquishing his "grandfather rights" to those signs in Thomas Park. This action was prompted when Mr. Blocker was notified by the people who own the property on which these signs were located in Thomas Park notif led him that the property was going to be sold and that his signs would have to be removed. Nr. Blocker's concern at this point is that he would like to continue with outdoor advertising in Monticello, and is willing to continue with outdoor advertising under whatever type of variance that might be available to him working cooperatively with the city in similar circumstances P as was granted the other sign owner rs wirhin the city at recent Planninq Commission and Council decisions that billboards would have to be removed whenever anot.het ptincipal knic wan developed on the property. At this time, Lhe now owner of thy• prolu•rty upon which the iiyn. that. Blocker will b" removing, ha!; IIOL m,d,• ,iny formal application Sun o variance to allow him to erect tv— in n•- in plaro .•I Ihot.e vllit-tt Bl esker will Ix, taking down (when 1111 k, r to k.^ loan 1•3n tvO i•jn; , whether or not Lo yivos the city ZI Irttrl —1 knln, ping I.is "grand- fnChet r'iglits" ut•w i,ign:l cannot LH rh, ctt•d l y ,inotl­r In,i jvlil11.11 In any call" without a vari.owO). IN' . Blocker' a (0e)IM; ib that it thr city would Ir• .rill incl to All— him a variance to put up thin prol ob"d now uLgn, one-" ho ruin rcmov,d thr two old uigna, that ho would sign whatever agrcenentel would lxt necoosary to allow him to "t cot that tlign. APPLICANT, Bl,wkor Outdoor Advertininq. OOWIDCHATIoN, Conjidor rocotmltend1nq approval or dental of thin variance r'equonL. Id;l'1;lu:NCCS+ A map depicting the arca whole the two aigna oro going to hL removed, and also depicting the arca of t.ho proposed now sign ant.1 a letter from lel blocker dated April 7, 1981, roqueating this variance. -4- Planning Commission 5/12/81 Also, it is a proposal to amend the Orate Building Code, as provided for in the Minnesota statutes, to provide a stricter fire prevention standard in Section 1214 of the Uniform Building Code (UBr_) which would be adopted as ttatcd, "Doors hetween the garage and the dwelling shall he self-closing." This amendment is prompted because most fires in which life is lost, happen within individual homes, and that statistics show that many of those fires which destroy a life in a home are started in a garage and thus move on into the dwelling, in many cases, because doors are left ajar and open. By adopting an amendment which would require the door to be self-closing, whenever someone left the door open it could automatically close, thus thwarting any fire which may start in the garage and ultimately move into the building. APPLICANT: City of Monticello. OONSIDERATION: Consider recommending approval or denial of these two ordinance amendments which would increase the standards required for fire safety. REFERENCES: None. V 11. Plannin-1 t'rm¢1i•.:dnn Minut,•:: - S/121ml S. Consideration of a Variancv - nlcwker Out-Wmi lu.lw•rt.i ,in,i. At the onset of this public ho irim,l, the ulfans.,thn, r,olar,llu•I the J cliange in a variance hearing process win presented :.0 that all pros it. could undorotand how it worked, and tho::e who did nt•t undvintand it could auk for a clarification. That ie, ,myon- whu was unh:,ppy will, t1he result of this variance hearing, could, within :ax days, appeal in writing this decision, and thus have a right to be beard with their variance request before this City Council at the next regular meetirnl. A representative from Blocker Outdoor /dvurtisiny was present to dis- cuss his application to erect an off-preminp tAgn (billboard of 200 or more square feet on Lot 12, Block 2, Inuring 11111stdo Terrace.) Tlhis proprrty in :toned I-1 . Blocker Outdoor Advertising, who presently own two signs of aimiliar description in Thrrman Park-, it. contemplating huildLnrl a now sign as described above on lot 12. Block 2, in tauriny Itillsida Terrace, and giving the City of Monticello a dotter rolinqui-ping his "grandfather rights' to thoso ciynn in Thomas park. 'Thin nonoil was pronptl•d when nic. Blocker was notified by thu people who own the proparty upon which the two sigm; In Thimm Park aro located, that t.hc property was quitnl to be sold and that those signs would have to be removed. Blocker O,udu?r Advertlningln concern, at thir. time, i:; that tht-y would like to cnntinito outdour advertininq in Runtl,,;.•lln, .red aro willing to continue with ovWoor advorti.iirq umlvr'.rmwvor typ,, of �e variance In available for thin to --rk cutµ tat ie,I, wLLI, tie city I" simili•lr cirnmmntancas au wav granted to lhcnc, lv . i aml t.thei sign ormutn within the city at recent Planning iAzoi n.ni .1w City Council deciolomo I hat bi 11board•, would haw• to :.I.• vol 5::.er,ev•r another ptincil•al use wan 4evoloptd on Il,„ 1 nc,•1 tip, n whi.'11 11.,• billboard w.t•, lucarott. At this tine, the sew uwner of Wit, property uIvn viii= h Cls• niynl: I.hm Blocker Ontdonr advortiuinq will Iv removing has nur trade any fvrnml application fnr a variance to sillw him to stet t. two, atgnn In plact- oP thono which Blnclur Outdoor A.Ivertining will bo t,king down (wh,•a Blocker tnlea down his two signs, whother or not hu lives a Satter in tho city rolinquiuhing his "gramitathcr rightn" new oigino can I,v erected t,1 nnother individual, lu any cies, without a varialme). A notion v:in rn„!e by MNrtic, aeca:lcJ by B1mJLu•. ami uoanlm„naly uonril A to rocowold dunial of thin varlai.ce rMlue•.1 - 4 - council Minutes - 5/26/91 5. Consideration of p Variance to Construct a Billboard - Blocher Outdoor Advo;tieing. Blocher Outdoor Advertising was requesting n variance to allow the construction of a billboard of Lot 12, Block 2, Lauring Ilillaidu Terrace, but prior to the meeting that requout was with drawn by Fir. Blocher. M 3. Public Rearing - Variance Request - Rlocher tnjtdoor Advertisinq. Mr. Del Blocher, owner of Blocher Out -loot Advertiuing, has :node a request at this time stmiLar to a request lw madam two yearn ago in which he was allowed to replace two existing billboards which not on wood structures with billloards which are on stool structures. At t1w time of his previous request, Mr. Blocher erected his new billboards -ten single pole steel structures. At this time, because of the expenoo involved in uingle pole steal structures, Mr. Blochur is requesting that he be allowed Lo replace the present bill board structures, which he terms are leas than desirable in appearance becauso of their wood structure with steel structures erected on either two or throe stool polos os opposed to a single steal polo and as opposed to the multiple pole structuroo which now exist. if thin variance is granted, it would bo. granted contingent upon Mr. Blocher agreeing to the present ordinance otating that if further development takes place on the property, it can only Lake place after the removal of the bill board structures. in diacusaing thin item with Mr. Blocher, he was in agrcetnont that should further devolopment ever take place on any of tho lots upon which hie signs are located, that hin nignu would come down In lieu of the principal or highor and botter use of that pre perty. - 2 - Planning Coomission Minutes - 7/13/82 4. Public Hearin - Variance Request - Blocher Outdoor Advartisinq. Mr Ice Everson, a representative of the Blocher outdoor Advertis- ing Company, was present to make a request that Blocher Outdoor Advertising be allowed to take down two outdoor advertising signs of 200 square feet or more (billboards) from their locations in the Thomas Industrial Park and replace those signs with single pole signs similiar to those which they developed on the north side of I-94 on the Ieuring Hillside Terrace. Approximately two years ago, the Planning Commiosion allowed Blocher Outdoor Advertising to take down two woolen structures on the north side of I-94 and replace those wooden structures with now steel, single pole structures which were landscaped. At this time, the request from the Blocher outdoor Advertising Company would be to do the same thing to the existing wooden structures on the south lido of I-94. Mr. Jim Franklin,of Pranklln Outdoor Advertising Com,mny, was present to inquire as to why Blocher nut.oluor Advertising would be allowed to remove wooden atruetures and replace them with now steel otructureo, and if so, would Blocher Outdoor Advertising be allowed to replace th000 signs with larger units than aro presently located on those cites. It wao pointed out to Mr. Franklin that at the tim, Blocher outdoor Advertising wan allowed to replace the wooden otruetureo with oteol otzucturoo that a uniform sign size ohould to w'pd on hoth now otructurco, therefore one sign was allowed to hx olihhtly increased in uize while the other woo reduced olightly In ,size. A motion wan made by John llonduo and co-ronded by Joyce Dowling and received unanimouo approval to grant t1w, variance to Blocher outdoor Advertising to roplac., the lwo oxinting wooden oign btructures In Thomao Indunt,rinl Park with new steel, ninglo polo rtrueturen which would to approl!riitely landocapod and of uniforn o.izr conaictent with the nice of the n,,w oigns which were placed on the north side of I-94 on the Lauritvj Billoide Property ap- proximately two yearn ago. Planning Commission Agenda - 8/9/83 5. Public Hearing - Variance Feguest - Number of Parking Spaces Required - St. Henry's Catholic Church. St. Henry's Catholic Church is currently in the process of accepting bids for their proposed addition to their existing church. With the complexity of the church building project, the members have decided themsolves to take on the parking lot project as a separate project. In that text they are requesting a variance from the maximum to allow less than the required amount of parking spaces. with the proposed building addition, the church would be expanding approximately 550 seats based on 22 inch seating which in our parking require- ments requires one stall per 4 seats, which in this case 138 stalls would be required. In the proposed parking lot plan they have 152 stalls to be provided. In the attached parking lot plan properties are in placement and have been accounted for in the design of the proposed parking lot. POSSIBLE ACTION. Consideration of recommending approval or denial of the variance request for less than the required amount of parking spaces for the parking lot of St. Henry's Catholic Church. REFERENCES. A map depicting the location of the property and a certificate of survey and a parking lot oito plan. A photo depicting the area to be used for parking in comparison with the amount of area used now for parking will be prooented at the August 9, 1983 mooting. -4- v Parking space variance request to allow less parking spaces tan the required amount. Church of St. Henry -/I •J``, ♦,� a Lj, + , ... � •rel. �)• \�� ,J� � ,� � �/ 'r,� "b �' MO k . •1w K • ' A ��►�ar 1,'. j I • -} }+ i r k . •1w K • ' A ��►�ar 1,'. j I • -} }+ i K Certificate Of Survey For \ St. Henry's Catholic Church ��T 7 1 �IV1 I 0 25 SO 100 ISO 11 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT Ir �� Lots 1,2,3,4, and 5 d Except that part taken for the Burlington Northern �. Railroad right—of-way. 00 Also, except the northerly 11.00 feet of Lot 5. n+ V9 d Lots 8.9, and 10 All in Block 21 TOWNSITF. OF ' MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA t _ fWe hereby ccrt.i fy that th'r is a true 1 N and correct reprenentaLion of a survey / of the boundaries of the land des - U/ cribed above and of the loch ion of dall buildings thereon, anti .,11 vinj r ble encroachments, if any, from nr Q �. on as d,,Tnd. As t yed by me�T thisday of_ f� BY�' innenota Registration No. 7419 MEYER.RONI 1,AC n <7„ ■EvISIOM5 wows uL'ii.,.io oArE Do# .N @r 800, [01 $ME Or rut N0. =ILEJ r� ` -1J aMEEr• I �-a9Z2L 1 A{�t qa ti {a a. PARKING LOT PLAN r4R 3t. HENRY'S CATMbIIC CHURCH ttk 1 rA�. ' a � � 1 � f 91CALE 111111 II . �C�.i... 0 as 50 lob.ISO qsa lfxT6teB;o c+ 22'/A=) Imr—a ?ct4S0p-i41 71 i$1a9 $bt1011 t� Arcnitocta.lne. .Cot uni.ao.i+ A.an„a Scutt"-st ,t „�eeCnl�e. M.", utol• 99ne 01.11 i.11I&A In Planning Commission Agenda - 8/9/83 6. Public Hearinq - Rear Yard Variance Request - Variance Request to Allow Less Parkin q Spaces than the Required Amount - Mr. Jim Powers. Mr. Jim Powers is proposing to build a new Health Club near Hwy 25 north.With the location of his proposed building on the existing lot, the building would encroach into the rear yard setback requirement. Mr. Powers is requesting an 18 foot variance request to build within 12 feet of the rear property lot line. This seems to be the beet possible placement of the proposed addition on the existing property allowing for future expansion in 1984 to the north of the proposed building and also allowing for the parking to the north of the existing proposed building. In the layout of the parking area for the proposed now building, according to the number of parking spaces required for this type of building, Mr. Powers would come up short the number of required spaces. At this time, Mr. Powers does have an option on tot 4, which is directly behind the Glass Hut, for additional parking space that may be required with any now expansion. Some additional parking could be designed to the southeast of the existing proposed expansion area. Preferably Mr. Powers would like to use this area for proposed parking at ouch time as so deemed with the project expansion slated in 1984. POSSIBLE ACTION, Consideration of approving or denying the variance request to allow the proposed now building to be placed within 17 feet of the roar property lot line, an 18 foot variance roqueo t. Also, consideration of approving or denying the variance request to allow loco than the required amount of parking spaces. REFERENCES. A map depicting the location of the property, the cite plan noting the location of the proposed project in relation to the property it sets on. A photo noting the location of the property to be presented at tho Planning Commission meeting. 5 \ `Ar rf . � t www �' .+�. .. 'r, •�►.� !. J Ile 16 \ r lltar Yard Variance Ncquest to fui�V � ` ., ��, • ald anew 100' by 200' Health jV M14% Club. Jaars Powers �%1. ' � •k 16 l ,. � � �s. � C� � � ...,. c1 Planning Commission Agenda - 8/9/83 7. Public Hearing - Sideyard Variance Request - Proposed Detached Garage - Jeff Rowan. Mr. Jeff Rowan currently ams a house located on the corner lot with the driveway access to the garage located off of Linn Street, which is currently an old, single car garage located to within 3 feet of the property line, and the garage was built on the property before the existence of our zoning ordinances. Mr. Rowan is requesting a variance to allow a new garage to he built within the three feet of the sideyard lot lino, only that the garage be enlarged from the existing size to approximately 12 x 22. He would like to build a two stall garage for storage of boat and snowmobile along with his vehicle. POSSIBLE ACTIONS Consideration of approval or denial of a side yard variance request to allow the now garage to be built within three feet of the sidayard lot line. REFERENCES: A map depicting the location of the property, a site plan showing the location of the garage on the existing lot. A photo will be prcmcnted at the meeting Monday night noting the location of the garage on the property. - 6 - A J'y • ae .70 4 Sideyard variance to build a detached yaraye. Jeff Rowan A ♦ a p ' .! reZ ah ♦ a p ' .! V Planning Commission Agenda - 8/9/83 Public Bearinq - Proposed Amendment Request to the Ordinance to Allow Flea Markets in a B-3 Zone . As you may recall, at our last regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on July 5, 1983, Mr. Mel Wolters was present requesting that an ordinance be allowed to have flea markets in the City of Monticello. The Planning Com- mission, at that time, took into account remarks by Mr. Wolters and also by City Staff and regulations that may be adhered to as part of a condition to allow flea markets in a B-3 zone. As of the date of the preparation of the agenda supplement, I have heard no response from the public in regard to the public hearing request for a flea market. Taking this response lightly, I will again enclose a suggested list which was supplied to you as an agenda supplement for the July 5, 1983 meeting indicating a suggested list of regulations for a proposed flea market. Taking into consideration approval or denial of this request, any regulations that are set as a condition to the conditional use request be so that all items are covered in the operation of a flea market in a B-3 zone. Particular emphasis on parking apace required, restroom facilities, sanitation facilities, property size and taking into conaidoration future expansion. POSSIBIZ ACTIONi Approval or denial of a condition uaa to allow flea markets in a B-3 zone. RFBERP.NCBS. A map depicting the poeoibla location of a flea markot in a B-3 zone. July 5, 1983 Planning Commianion agenda oupplcmcnt . - 7 . M Planning Commission Agenda - 8/9/83 9. Continuance of a Required Parking Space Request - Brad Larson. Mr. Larson's firm is negotiating the purchase of an additional residential lot adjacent to the back of their property. Con- tingent upon the purchase of this additional residential property, Mr. Larson feels they will be able to came up with additional parking spaces. In doing a little preliminary design of a parking lot with the acquisition of the adjoining residential lot, the total number of parking spaces that he could came up with would be about 17 total spaces. Mr. Larson brought in a parking lot plan drawn up by their architect for reviewal at Tuesday night's meeting. POSSIBLE ACTION: Approval or denial of a variance request for a number of parking spaces leas than the required amount. REFERENCES: A map depicting the location of the proposed addition to the existing building, aite plan of proposed parking area for the addition. A photo will be presented at the meeting depicting the location of the affected property. - 8 - I 7 Variance from ordinance Sec. 10-3-5 (H) to allow G to 8 parking ( spaces on parts of Lot 9 s lo, Block 50. Brad Larsen \ e , t � I i� � !moi ' � �`- �:�, "•. \ �. •' • •� `� I � r Mie-��� �, «�� • � a'•, ��•��• ~�