Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda Packet 02-20-1979SEA AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONPICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 20, 1979 - 7:30 P.M. Members: James Ridgeway, Dave Bauer, Dick Martie, Ed Schaffer, Fred Topel. Loren Klein (ex -officio) A" 1. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment on Will Signs. F s' Cts' %o..,, Eca• {me JOS&A ✓ 2. Consideration of a Varian? Request for Six Wall Signs - Marn Flicker. '09, O M- - %L( . ✓ 3. Consideration of a Variance Request to Establish an Apartment in an Existing Home in a B-4 Zone - Milo Olson. 6rt0 SuO.+�r 9dn: %%.ao 0LA.4) V/4. Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Garage within 2'0" of the Property Line - Donald Smith. �1 t ( -- `-,1 A0 Oo° tSG Me- CK 8°pso,a "'o '\a%4- VS. Public Hearing on Considaration of a Subdivision of Property- m W��lia Seefeldt. D0u P� -(Ac- kA5 Nit ✓6. Consideration of a Variance Request. U Ut .'s ✓7. Approval of Minutas - January 16, 1979. f Sp.` Luc' Planning Commission - 2/20/79 AGEMA SUPPLEMENT 1. Public Hearin - Ordinance Amendment on Wall Signe. Currently, Monticello City Ordinances allow a business the option of either installing one pylon (or free-standing) sign and one wall sign, or as an alternative, two wall signs. The problem with the ordinance is that an individual or business could propose putting up a sign that is constructed on a piece of plywood that may contain several messages along with the identification of the business. A hypothetical example would be a plywood sign advertising Jones Bar and on the same plywood sign, brand ident ificat ions for Schlitz, HA s, Budweiser, Coldspring, etc. This could be construed as one sign since it's on the same plywood backdrop; however, another individual may want 'to put the words Jones Bar directly attached to the building and may want to have individual signs advertising the various brands of beer. In order to resolve this problem, enclosed is a suggested ordinance amend- ment which although quite complicated) in reading is intended to simplify the procedure. The intent of the ordinance would be to allcw a business which proposed to put up wall signs to allow up to four brand identification signs and two premise identification signs in the case where the business would apply for Option A allowing for only wall signs. Under Option B where the business would apply for the combination of pylon and wall signs, one pylon sign would be allowed along with one business identification sign and two brand identification signs. In effect, this would allow a buoincoa ouch as Flicker's TV a Appliance to utilize the front and back of their building to advertise the premise, Flicker's TV a Appliance, and still advertise two brand products ouch as Frigidairo and) Zenith. This ordinance would also pre- vent a business establishment from advartising seven or eight different branL!o using the same backdrop since this would be aesthetically unpleaoing. The ordinance then would not make any distinction between signs put up on a backdrop, such as a plywood backdrop, or signs attached directly to the building. It should be pointed out that Agenda Item 12 concerns Morn Flicker's roquoot for a variance, and although the Council may approve of the ordinance amendment so proposod, thus making trio variance requoot unnecoaoary, the Planning Commission should otill act on the variance roquoot in taco the Council does not approve of the ordinanco amendment. Since this in an ordinance amendmont , this amendment is aubjoct to a public hearing and citizens or buoincosoo mcay comment at the Planning Coamiooion'a meeting on the oubjoct. POSSIBLE ACTION; Consideration of opproval of ordinance amendment or rovi- oiono thereto. REFERENCES; Enclocsd ordinance amonc]msnt as proposed. - 1 - Planning Commission - 2/20/79 2. Consideration of a Variance Request for Six Fall Signs - Marn Flicker. Mare Flicker, of Flicker's TV S Appliance, is requesting a sign variance for his new business location on Highway 25. Monticello Ordinance presently allows only two wall signs on any one build- ing (refer to Agenda Item Y1), and Mr. Flicker would like to put up three signs on two different frontages. That is, on the east end of his building, he would like a sign which says "Flicker's TV 6 Appliance", and also a lighted sign which says "Frigidaire" and one which says "Zenith". This same configuration of signs will be repeated on the west end of the building. The square footage of these signs will fall within that which is allowed by ordinance. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of recommending approval or denial of variance request. REFERENCES: Enclosed front and rear views of new building. 3. Consideration of a Variance Request to Establish an Apartment in an Existing Home in a B-4 Zone - Milo Olson. Mr. Milo Olson of 319 E. Broadway, Lots 5 a 6, Block 5, is requesting a variance to make an apartment in the basement of his present home (zoned B-4). Residential structures not grandfathered in are not permitted in a B-4 sone without a variance. Essentially, this would become a duplex, since Mr. Olvon could choose to move himself and rent out both apartments. Mr. Olson plans to provide his off-street parking on the rear of the lot. Any work done in this project would have to meet all aspects of the building coda. At present, there have not been any objections to the proposal from anyone within 350' of the property, but objections or favorable replica could come at the time of the meeting. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of recommending approval or denial of variance request. REFERENCES, Map depicting lot location. 4. Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Garaqo within 210" of the Property Line - Donald Smith. Nr. Don Smith, of 425 Want River Street, is roquooting a variance to build a garage within 2'0" of hio cootarly property lino. This property, which in zoned R-2, is Late 1 6 10, Block 56, Monticello. Pr000ntly, there is a small garage on the site of the proposed now 24' x 26' atructuro which is right on the property lino. Mr. Smith foolo the old garage io in Quito poor condition and inadequate to moot hia nods. - 2 - Planning Commisssion - 2/20/79 A variance is necessary to erect this new garage since Monticello ordinance requires a structure to ba 10' from the sidoyard on this property. As Mr. Smith indicates in his enclosed letter, there is room in his back yard to keep the garage 10' from the property line, but it would require removal of a large oak tree . . . and would also put the structure behind their home blocking their view of the River and interfering with a deck they are proposing to build in the future. Mr. Smith plans to be present at the Planning Commission meeting and hopes to present a letter from the abutting property owner stating no objection. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of recommending approval or denial of variance request. REFERENCES: Letter and plat plan from Don Smith, picture of existing garage, and map depicting location of property. 5. Public Nearing on Consideration of a Subdivision of Property - William Seefeldt. Mr. William Seofeldt has made application to subdivide a 1.28 acre parcel off of the Electro Industries Property of approximately 6.0 acres. Legal Description: Part of the SWC of the NE's of Sec. 4, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County Minnesota. This property is Zoned I-1. If approved, Mr. Seefoldt has arranged to sell this property to the Monticello Area Alone Society for use as a meeting room (this item to be discussed in the next agenda item as a variance application). In roferonce to lot sire, the parcel (55,750 sq. ft.) is 2.7 times larger for an I-1 lot requirement which is served with sower and water, or 30,000 oquaro fast. However, since no sower or water presently serves this area, a variance would be required to install a Coptic system, since the lot sire requirement without sower and water in A acres. POSSIBLE ACTION, Consideration of recommending approval or denial of this subdivision request. REFERENCES, Enclosed map. 6. Consideration of a Variance Requaet. The Monticello area Alone Society plans to purchase the 1.28 acro parcel of property discussod in agenda item 5, if this subdivision is approved. This group of people would utilize the existing building on the property as a mooting room, and it is necessary to obtain a variance for thin use in an I-1 zone. - 3 - Planning commission - 2/20/79 The second variance they would need is from the A acre minimum requirement 1 for a septic system, since there would be only 1.28 acres available. This area is relatively undeveloped with only two other uses in the immediate area, and thus there hasn't been a strong need for city sewer. Perhaps, as the area develops further in the future, sewer would then serve that area, and the septic system on the smaller parcel would be eliminated. Additionally, since this would not be an organization which would solicit large numbers of people from the general public on a scheduled basis, they would like to be relieved of the hardsu:rfaced and curb barrier require- ments. The alano members feel that they would like to leave a natural effect in the parking area, although they would provide a specified parking area surrounded by log barriers or some similar material. They also plan to do an extensive amount of tree and shrubbery planting. Perhaps this area of parking could be considered in the same line of thought as was the parking area at the Trinity Lutheran Church parking lot. That is, similar to the country Church parking in a green area. The Alano Society has chosen this fairly remote area of the community, since they would like to conduct their activities away from the so-called "beaten path" area of the community. POSSIBLE ACPIONi Consideration of recommending approval or denial of any or all of the variance requests. REPERENCESs Encl000d map. ,y1 LEG V rio � y L WALL SIGN ORDIIMKE A 4LIIDMENT SECTION 10 -3 -9 -(E) -2-(b)-1 . . . Currently reads as follows: Option A: Under Option A, only wall signs shall be allowed. The maximum numkx�r of signs on any principal building shall be two (2) and in all cases each sign shall be placed on a separate wall (frontage). The maximum size of wall signs under Option A shall be determined by taking twenty (20) percent of the gross silhouette area of the front of the building, up to three hundred (300) square feet. Where the principal building is on a corner lot and thus faces two (2) publ is streets the size of each sign may be determined in the manner dascribed above. If however, the building has only one (1) frontage and the owner elects to erect two (2) signs, the total square footage of both signs may not exceed the maximum allowable square footage determined from the front building silhouette. For purposes of determining the gross area of the silhouette of the prin- cipal building, the silhouette shall be defined as that area within an outline drawing of the principal building as vie wed from the front lot line or from the related public street(s). PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Option A: Under Option A, only wall signs shall be allowed. The maximum number of signs on any principal building shall be six signs (four product identification signs and two premise identification signs), with only two walls allowed for the display of the signs. Each wall shall contain no more than two product identification signs and one premise identification sign. The "maximum size of wall signs shall be dotermined by taking twenty percent of the gross ailhouotte a ear of reafront of the building, up to three hundred (300) square feetvli' �r .y, feoA.R4—two pub...�o ine ve. For purposes of determining the gross arca of the ailhouetto of the prin- cipal building, the silhouette shall be definod as that area within an outline drawing of the principal building as viewed from the front lot line or from the related public street (a). SECTION 10 -3 -9 -(E) -2-(b)-2 . . . Currently re ads as follows: Option B: Under Option B, either wall signs or pylon aigno may bo utilized, or in a combination of both. Mn no case, how,wer, nhall mor. tl:an one (1) pylon sign or combination of two (2) signo bo displayed. The maximum allowable sign area for any wall shall be determined by taking tcn (10) percent of the gross silhouette area of the front of the (wilding, up to one hundred (100) cquaro foot. Tho method for determining the gror,n ailhouotte area for wall signs is ma ind 1cated under Option A. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: option B: Under Option B, either wall signs or pylon signs may be uti- lized, or a combination of both. In no caro, however, shall more than one pylon sign be allowed. Only two product identification signo and one prmiae identification sign in allowed and these wall oigna must be only on one c:eparate wall. Thd'moximum allowable siGnarea for any wall shall L,o determined by taking ten (10) percent of the gross ailhoue�tZ,�eo of, the front of the building up to one hundred (100) square fecty+ The mothor� fur determining the groan ailhouetto area for wall signs in ac indicated in 01:t ion A. .p ze Av ; 7'af9L 'xy►"Er x`[e*,ex— Res fl'am'e j3.S'w:�i� 4(x5" T -, ►� F'L0 C XERT IF k�Ay jo�S' rQoNf 1) view awwd a smith, Editor and Pue Ww fieft � �� 116 East River Street a Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Phone (612) 2953131 Feb. 14, 1979 TO: Monticello City Planning Commission Monticello City Council RE: Variance Request for Garage Construction bots 1 A 10, Block 56 FRC': Donald O. Smith We are currently planning a remcdelinq project at our 'ior-e at 425 Gest River Street ... and we'd like to include a new d cut -le gararte as part of the construction. However, to do this we are required to obtain a variance from the city since we'd 1 ike to build the garage within two feet of the easternly lot line. Actually, we'd be replacing a current structure which is vir- tually on the lot line—and is in quite poor condition. it sits adjacent to Kermit Bensen's garage of a similar size which is also on the lot line. It's my understanding that he, too, some day has plans to upgrade his garage facility and at that time may be requesting a variance. He knows of our intentions and has indicated that he's not opposed to the variance. And , if it's granted, I would pledge not to oppose a similar req vest on the adjoining pronerty. Moreover, if required by the city, we would be willing to build a firewall on the east side of this 24x26' structure. The variance is needed because a garage ten feet from the pronerty line would reouire the removal of a large oak tree...and would also put the structure behind our house, thus blocking t be view of the river and interfering with the deck we're nlannin a (see print). Z think the important thinq to remember here is that we, re not addino n new variance here (nctunlly it will be twr feet- off eetoff the line). ..and that the new carnne will be an imnrr•vement to t'ie property. Thank you for your consideration. Sincereelly, t1 bona Id O. Smit A 41 | | | = '----- ------ ^^ ' | U �J !' | � . � . f-----�----,----' -'^ • ti ` 1 1 MR IO NT COUMTly P A I R K •• t Vit; S r ..�� ��...�a:�•�i�r.o __._ .\ s BILL SEEPELDT • ti ` 1 1 MR IO NT COUMTly P A I R K •• t Vit; S r ..�� ��...�a:�•�i�r.o __._ .\ BILL SEEPELDT SUBDIVISION REWEST i CONSIDERATION OF 1 j VARIANCE REQUESTS 0 �44 c: r o r- A•c t nn-,. res a,.# 4 LAaiq a4y • Z. 7 (4141 3. /� ��t/Gp TEO y •OSI c!� 4rL 2 •• ra X01 Alec c�jJ•I►�/ Q• T.a 4.01 l /dl pAatl Iwi WJ.�iK /Iw/� � �'N D FAta.»7 c�J. FT 3e 2y S 30 Gae_q mac. r is vo' e• F T '114 Ls4z� aa.. P%A.W j t `l 'a c 6L6A Sw*P-4T �•� r 69 urDu'-0 0.4 c, l VrAo"4- D#4 ,�* rT+� `G(G op A JA-M.NA•a.4- !e 4, Pocvtoo+ oe 4 t�w•ri1a;.� ��wwr+++t psi Ree �o..•►.•i i�w•H� Paaleeors—D•.s•+1 �wrcus•r- 1 %4 .YE S • (ONS �VeeM�.•.• am IIINITES RF(:i:LAR MF.F.TI11C, - MONTICCLLO PLANNING "tMIS£ION January 16, 1979 - 7:30 F.M. Memtrt•rs Present: Jim Ridgrway, Fred Topel, I)ick Martin, Fd Schaff.r, Loren Klein (ex -officio) Mcvnbers abs(nt- Davc Bauer 1. Consideration of Appointment of Chairperson. Nomination was made by Fd Schaffer, seconded by Fred Topel and man i -,,rel. carried to appoint Jim Ridgeway as Chairperson for 1979. i. Public Hearing on Consi.leration of a Conditional Use Permit, and Consideration of Variances for Holiday Stationstores, Inc. Koliday Stationstores, Inc. has made application for a conditional use permit to build a combination gasoline station and convenience store on the easterly half of lot 2, all of Lot 3 and 4, arRl part of Lot 5, in Block 5 in Monticello. This location is just northwest of the intersection of Seventh Street with Ilig.iway 2, in Monticello, and would be situated between the Kvntacky Fried Chicken and Dairyqueen on Ilighway 25. Since the arta in question is zoned as S-3, a cotmat4ona& use permit is necessary for approval of this request. Additionally, Holiday Stationstores is applying for the following four variances, and they are as follows: A. Variance to allow two (2) thirty foot driveway openings to Seventt, Street. According to Monticello's City Ordinances, driveway openings are to be tw.•nty-tour foot, Holiday Stations in the requ+•st indicate that because of the nature of the business, the driveway opening should be largo enough to accommodate gasoline aml merrhaMise semi -trucks as well as safe I.assage for automobiles. D. Variance requests to have driveway opening nn SiLventh Rreet twerity- five feet from th. Froporty liar to the east, rather than the rsgl4re4 forty feet. According t„ the Holiday stations, Inr., it is i dlnI try to have the driv,way openinei as close as ressitar to Highway 2S an) still Itovide suffietent nettrok of twenty-five feet in urdrr to sake Meg %'Hates and egress for aubsaobileo and trucks. C. Variance request to infringe on the setback requirements toe the proposed pylon sign and the gasoline pumps. Pylnn sign is sot hack tlttaett foot from Seventh Street and ten and one-half teet from Highway :'•, and nosftlly the set tacks from both streets should he thirty feet. In aAditlea# the eetbtrk of the gasoline pumps from Seventh Street is nineteen feet and thirty feet to required. 7 Planninq Coninissior. - lilf,/7:2 \ D. Variance request to provide twelve off-street parking spaces, rather than the eighteen required by the City of Monticello. Holiday Stations, Inc. indicates the reason for this is that there is room for eight cars at the gasoline pumps, and that the requirement of parking spaces are somewhat stringent since most of the people using the convenience store will be parking right within the islands themselves, and these are not counter] as part of the parking spaces provided. Brad Steinman, with Holiday Stationstores, Inc., reviewed the variance request with the Planning Commission, and additionally indicated the following : 1. Station would be similar to Big Lake's holiday Station Store. 2. All trash would be stored inside. 3. The station would be strictly salarie-operated and the people would he hired for the most -part from the community. 4. famnediato employment would be eight individuals. 5. There would be no self-service. 6. Hours of operation would be 7100 A.N. to 11:00 P.M. A motion was made by Fred Topol, seconded by nick wartie and unanimously carried to grant the conditional use pormit. On the variance request mentioned in Item A. a motion was made by Fd Schaffer, seconded by Frei Topol and unanimously carried to approve the 30' curb -cut openings. On Variance B. a motion was made by Fred Topol, seconded by Dick Martio and unanimously carried to deny the varianco request of a 25' setback from Highway 25 for the first curb -cut opening on Seventh Street. On Variance C. a motion was made by Fred Topol, seconded by Dick Martie and unanimously carried to deny the original request, but to allow the setback request on the gasoline pumps and to allow the sign to act back the same distance from Seventh street, or 19' , and also in light of the fact of denying variance request B, a 25i' setback from Highway 25 would be allowed. On Item D. a motion was made by Dick Martie, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously earriod to approve the request to provide 12 off-street parking spaces rather than 18 spaces. On Item A. , the Planning Commission felt that becauoo of the truck traffic to the gaaolino station for deliveries and also for service, that 30' curt - cut opening was a reasonable request. On Item B., It was felt that N�cauoe Goventh street would one day he part of the collector road just Horth of I-94 in Monticello, and also bocauso of the traffic congestion in thin area, that the first curb -cut opening on Seventh Street should be a minimum of in' back from 111ghway 25. On Item C., the Planning Commission felt that rinse variance rvqueot B. was denied, that this would leave adequate roam for the pylon sign to be at least 25i' from Highway 25 and additionally, that the pylon sign should be tho osmo distance from Seventh Street, that in 11', on the gasoline pumps. On the gaoolino pump setback of 19' it was felt :W= Planning Commission - 1/16/79 this was a reasonable request since this was not the major structure on the property. On Item D., the Planning Commission felt that since there was adequate parking provided by the gasoline pumps themselves, and in large part the traffic would be utilizing this area, it was not necessary to require more than the 12 additional off-street parking spaces. It should be mentioned that no comments were received objecting to the variance or conditional use permit requests, and additionally, a letter was received from Ken Bureau, Secretary -Treasurer of Rosewood Corporation, owner of the Monticello Mall, that the variance requests were reasonable and they recommended approval of these various variance requests. 3. Public Hearing on Consideration of Rezoning Request from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to B-3 (Highway Business) for Property Owned by Olqa J. Swanson Estate, along the Nest Side of Highway 25 in Monticello. The request has been made from the personal representative of the Olga J. Swanson Estate to have a 20.16 acre parcel rezoned from R-1 to H-3. I-egal description of the parcel is as follwsa That part of Lot A of the SW% of the MA of Section 14, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota according to the plat thereof as recorded in Book 1 of Plats, Page 571 in the Office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota lying westerly of the westerly right-of-way line of Minnesota State Highway #25. Containinq 20.16 acres. Cecile Muehlbauer, with Sandberg Realty, and also a representative of the Olga J. Swanson Estate indicated that although there is no specific ure being planned for the property at this point, tentative plans are to use the property for the possibility of a health club, as an example, or possibly a motel. Me. Muohlbauor indicated that since the adjoining property was all zoned commercial in this arca, that a rezoning to B-1 of this particular parcel would be compatible. Additionally, she felt that the wetlands area, which is approximately half of the parcel, would blend in with any ultimate use of the property to provide a buffer -zone and a dogroo of quiet for the ultimate use. A motion wan made by Fd Schaffer, seconded by nick Martin and unanimously carried to approve the rezoning from R-1 to 0-3. 4. Consideration of Variance Requent of Front Yard Setback for but 7, Block 1, Sandberg'n Rivernide Addition - Mel Wolters. Mel Wolters in requesting a variance from the frontyard setback requttem-nt ,if 30', and in propooing to put a house on the above-rel,v enced let trek from tho proporty line. Purl,n Co for the rcquent in to allow adequate iota to build a houe+e itm— the rear setback in 50', which in 20' more than nnrmal setback roquitwi, sinco the rear of the lot borders Otter Creek. Accurttimi to the Clwir.,latul!, Management Act, which is required to be adopted by Lite city of Montt„ I1... any lots bordering Otter Creek require a 50' setback in the rent. Gttn-,• thin lot is on a cul do sac, the setback will not affect the al0•trtnn Planning Commission - 1/16/79 property owners, which was one of the concerns of granting a variance on a front yard. A motion was made by Dick Martie, seconded by Fred Topel and unanimously carried to approve of the variance request. 5. Consideration of A Variance for a Portion of a Commercial Establishment to be Utilized as Residential Rental Purposes - Dr. Joel Erickson. Dr. Joel Erickson is requesting a variance to put a residential unit above the Monticello -Big Lake Pet Hospital, which is located South of the I-96 interchange and Fast of Highway 25 in Monticello. Since the area in question is zoned as B-3, it is necessary to obtain a variance for this type of use since residential uses are not allowed within a commercial area. Dr. Joel Erickson appeared before the Planning Commission and indicated the primary purpose for the residential facilities would be for employees of the Monticello -Big Lake Pet Hospital. The Planning Commission felt that the variance was justified because it was making utilization of an existing facility, but did express concern with future requests of this nature. Motion was made by Dick Martie, seconded by Fd Schaffer and unanimously carried to recommend approval of the variance request. 6. Donoideration of Approval of December 19, 1978 Minutes. f A motion wao made by Fred Topel, seconded by nick Martie and unanimously carried to approve the Minutes. Motion was made by Fd Schaffer, seconded by Fred Topol and unanimously carried to adjourn. 60 �,� Gary-&r City iniotrotor GW/na -a- 0 7 %,%,117 t7l, Q G j, s,� r