Planning Commission Agenda Packet 11-10-1981AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
November 10, 1981 - 7:30 P.M.
Chairman: Jim Ridgeway
Members: John Bondhus, Bill Burke, Loren Klein, Dick Martie,
Ed Schaffer.
1. Approval of Minutes of the meeting�yld on September 29, 1981.
i 6%.' S5
2. Public Hearing - Var ante Request - Harry Stanius.
3. Public Hearing - Variance - Jim McCune.
4. Public Hearing - Rezoning Application - Dave Kranz.
5. Public Hearing - Variance Requests - David Kranz.
Unfinished Business
New Business
1. Discussion of the Minimum Square Footage Requirements for
Homes.
2. Proposed ordinance changoo.
Meeting Reminder - S Odes'. W"j 11,418' aeo c
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission
will be December 8, 1981.
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/10/1981
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
>f
1. Approval of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting hold on
September 29, 1981. UJ
2. Public Hearinq - Variance Request - Harry Stanius.
Harry Stanius, doing business as a Photo Hut and also doing business
as the Camera Shop in St. Cloud, has made an application for a variance
to be able to construct a structure in the Monticello Mall parking lot
for the purpose of selling photo finishing and related items from that
building. That Wilding, if erected, would be similar to the other
����
Photo Hut buildings which you see in similar locations in various areas
J
\�
of the State. Since the building would be so very small and is proposed
/
to be located on the existing parking lot, which for the most part seems
V
to have more than adequate parking, Mr. Stanius nas requested that he be
allowed to develop that Photo Hut building without being required to
install additional parking or having to comply with the landscaping re-
quirements or having to develop more parking area.
Basically, as shown on a copy of the enclosed photograph, the proposed
small building would be located just to the right of the entrance to
the Mall area off from walnut Street at the point where it crosses
7th Street. Electricity would be the only utility which would be
required within the building.
According to the existing ordinancou, if Mr. Stanius were to place thin
small Photo Hut within the "Mall" area of the Monticello Mall, he would
not be required to comply with any further landscaping or parking lot
requirements. I mentioned thio oo that you might take it into conaid-
ora tion when possibly eonaidnring requiring Photo Hut Lo moot the land-
scaping parking lot requirements if the Photo Hut building were placed
outside the "Mall" area of the building,
APPLICANT: Harry Stanius.
CONSIDERATION: Consider recommending approval or denial of thio vari-
ance roqueat.
REFERENCES: An encl000d photograph showing the Mall area and aloo the
area of the Mall parking lot where thio [mall Wilding is proposed to
be erected.
t�l�
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/10/81
3. Public Hearin - Variance - Jim McCune. O�
Mr. s Mrs. McCune have made an application for a variance to build a
garage within 4 feet of the side yard property line, where ordinances
require a 10 foot set back. The property is described as follows:
Part of Lot 5, Block 1, Manhattan Lots. This property is zoned R-1.
The MCCunes presently have a single garage attached to their home,
but would like to make that garage into a family/living room and
build a new 24 X 26 foot garage on the northwest side of their hose.
This garage would come within 4 feet of the Virgil Michaelis property.
Mr. Michaelis has been advised of this variance request and although
he has not sent a letter stating such, Mrs. McCune has indicated that
one would be taming from Mr. Michaelis stating that he has no objection
to this 4 foot set Lack request.
Mrs. McCune will be bringing a copy of her plot plan and a letter from
Mr. Michaelis to the meeting on Tuesday night so that you might better
see what her proposal would be.
APPLICANT: Jan and Jim McCune.
CONSIDERATION: Considering recommending approval or denial of this
set back variance request.
REFERENCES: An enclosed map depicting the area of the property.
- 2 -
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/10/81
4. Public Hearinq - Rezoninq Application - Dave Kranz.
David Kranz, owner of the Monticello Printing, has made an application
to rezone the southerly 100 feet of Lot 1 and the southerly 100 feet
of the westerly 10 feet of Lot 2, Block D of the original plat of the
City of Monticello from R -B (residential/lusiness) to B-4 (regional
business). His request, if granted, would then allow for the develop-
ment of a printing business of 6 or less persons in a B-4 zone.
According to Monticello ordinances, a small printing business consisting
of 6 or less persons would be allowed in a B-4 zone, but would not be
allowed in the existing R -B zone.
Contingent upon the Planning Commission recommending approval or denial
of this rezoning request, Mr. Kranz would chose to further pursue a
variance (as will be discussed in Item U5) to further
develop this property if the property becomes B-4.
APPLICANT: David Kranz doing business as Monticello Printing.
CONSIDERATIONt Consider recom�ending approval or denial of this rezoning
request. �uL
REFERENCES: An enclosed toning map showing the proposed location where
the rezoning change might take place.
- 3 -
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/10/81
5. Public Hearinq - Variance Requests - David Kranz.
As previously stated in Item q4, contingent upon rezoning being granted
from R -B to B-4, Mr. Kranz will develop a new printing establishment
in the former Harry Swanberg residence.
An enclosed plot plan of the existing property is shown in the supple-
mental materials. Mr. Kranz is proposing to build a 17 foot x 34 foot
addition unto the west side of the existing structure and develop a
new entrance into the structure. Also, Mr. Kranz is proposing a
parking lot on the south end of the property which would accommodate
the required number of parking spaces for the business which he is
proposing to develop. Some variance requests have been made in reqard
to this property which include:
4T P�fw.h' l".+a
- That a curb barrier be allowed to be developedAwithin 5 feet of
the south and west property linea. (Present Monticello ordinances
require that curb barriers in a B-4 zone be no closer than 5 feet
to property lines)
- To be able to develop a driveway opening or curb cut less than
40 feet from the intersection of the property lines at the south- �5I
west corner of the lot. (Due to the layout of the lot, it is not
possible to develop a parking lot with ingress and egress curb'
cut without developing one of those curb cuts; that is: the curb
cut on the west side, less than 40 feet from the intersection of
the property lines as is specified by Monticello ordinance).
- Hr. Kranz may possibly be asking to be allowed to develop leas
than the required amount of landscaping, that fat $1500 or la
of the development cost, whichever is greater. (In this case,
$1500 would be the applicable amount).
As stated previously in Item N4, this property is proposed for rezoning
from R -B to B-4. This property is located on the southerly 100 feet
of Lot 1 and the southerly 100 foot of the westerly 10 feet of Lot Z,
Block D, of the original plat of the City of Monticello.
APPLICANT, David Kranz
CONSIDERATION, Consider granting or denying any or all of these variance
requests.
RUF:RENC'ES, An enclosed map nhowing the location of the property heroin
concerned and a plot plan of the property showing the possible future
development.
- 4 -
Planning Commission Agenda - 11/10/81
New Business
1. Discussion of the Minimum Square Footaqe Requirements for Homes.
Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to this office from the Farmers
Home Administration requesting that Monticello possibly consider
a special zoning district for homes of 1,000 square feet. As
stated in the letter, if homes of less than 1,000 square feet were
allowed, it is possible that those homes could be developed with
garages which would provide some storage, which is of concern when
a home is developed of less than 1,000 square feet. Also, because
5 of todays economic conditions, it is many times difficult for first
E Ab home buyers to obtain a home as large as 1,000 square feet and to
2 ` be able to afford the mortgage payments on the same even if financ-
ing is available. If homes of smaller square footages were allowed,
possibly in special zoning districts such as for example, R-lA, it
.0• might be better possibly, for first home buyers to make the type of
�f mortgage payments which would be required of them.
This item is being placed under "Now Business" at the request of
the Farmers Home Administration, the Federal Housing Administration,
and a group of several contractors whom,most likely, will be presented
at the meeting just to answer any questions that you might have
about this request or to partake in any discussion which you might
want to have about this request.
2. There is enclosed a copy of several proposed ordinance changes
which are being made by the staff, and also there will be, moat
likely, acne ordinance changes which the Planning Commission
members may want to bring up for discussion and consideration.
Although no action can be taken on these itemn, but because of the
short mooting, this may be a good time to bring these items up
for diacuosion and possibly consider totting a hearing date at
acme time in the future.
Meeting Remindar
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission
will ho December 8, 1981.
-s-
SPECIAL MEETING - N.ONTICELIA PLANNING COMMISSION
'ILesday, September 29, 1991 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, John Bondhus, Bill Burk.--, tnren Klein.
^ EdSchaffer.
Members Absent: Dick martie.
1. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting on September B, 1981.
A motion was made by Bill Burke, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unani-
mously carried to approve the minutes of the last regular meeting
held on September 8, 1981.
2. Public Hearing - Variance - Don Lundquist.
Don Lundquist, who owns Lot 6, Block 1, Hoglund Addition, made an
application for a variance to allow him to build a solarium on the
front of his house, which would be 18 feet from the front yard
property line, an area where ordinances require a 30 foot set back
from the property line. This property is zoned R-1.
Mr. Lundquist's request for an 18 foot front yard net hick was that
he might be able to build a 12 foot wide and 18 foot solarium on the
front of his house. Mr. t+tndquistpresented a petition from his
neighbors containing their signatures stating tl,ey had no opposition
to I...s request for a variance to build a solarium.
There was no puhlic comment made either pro or con on thin i^sue.
Unantmoun approval was given to a motion made by Fd SClwnf.fLr ami
seconded by John nondhuo to grant this variance.
3. Public. hearing - Variance - Monticello Nord, Inc.
At the rogular mneting of the Monticello City Council on tlovemlx•r 7,
1977, a motion was mule and carried to approve a varian,-e, reyu•;t
for the curbing around the majority of the automot-ile Galt•:; lot at
Monticello ford at its new lncation on the southwest corner of 1-94
and fly 25 for two yearn, or until November 7, 1979. Howr!vor, sine,.
a:taltvncy of tho' Ititildimj did not take place until OcLnbt•t• of 11)78,
it wan therehy considered that the variance would la exLwnd,_d fot
two yearn, or until October of 1900.
At thin meeting, Mr. Larry Flake, president of Minticellu Fnrd, wa-.
present and requented thtt he not be required to ]-lace that curhimt
for which he was granted a two year variance. Hit rt:(uest was tl.tl
he lx- granted a permanent variance for the elimination of tlat curl)
barrier which won not originally put in place. Also, at thin time,
Mr. !'lake roqueeted a variance to Iw allowed to maint.tin a vehiele
dicplay arca on the grauo to the north ut the gara.ic building acrun:
the drivoway.
- 1 -
Planning Commission minutes - 9/29/01
His request was based on his feeling that the grass enhance: the
appearance of the trucks and/or vehicles which are displayed
there. His request was that he not be required to place hard
surface or curbing around that proposed display area. Further,
Mr. Flake requested that on the south side of his property where
his variance request for the elimination of curbing was made,
that he be allowed to develop an over flow car display area so
that when he receives more cars from the manufar.turer than he has
area to place them, that he night be allowed to u::e that as an
over flow area.
After discussing the variance request with Mr. Flake arid also dis—
cussing possible alternates, a motion was made by FA Schaffer and
seconded by Bill Burke and carried unanimously to grant the following
variance.
1. That Mr. Flake be allowed to eliminate the curb barrier
pormanently on the south and west sides of the existing
hard surfaced area.
2. That Mr. Flake be allowed to develop the graosed area to
the north of the existing building for a vehicle display
area with no customer parking allowed in that area.
3. That Kr. Flake be allowed to develop the area to the south
of the existing hard surfaced area as an uvcr flow vehlcty �i
display area with no customer parking allowed.
0. That in lighL of granting the variance for the curbing an
the mouth and west aides of the hard aurfacod Area, curt
in the future, should the area to the wool. of the Menticellu
Ford be developed, that consideration for drainage such as
was discussed in the letter Erma the City engineer to the
city administrator dated Scptecnbar 27, 1977, la taken into
eonaideration for providing for proper storm water drainagv
from the area of Monticello Ford.
d. 9imule Subdivision RocTuoot - Darwin and Shirlov Straw.
Darwin and Shirley Straw, uwner,a of tho mater] y 69 fcot of vacat —I
Elu Street between River Street and the Mianicuippi river and u,t '
and the cantorly 66 feet of fat 6. Block 60. whicl, iu coned N-2, hvr
madn a roquoct for a simple subdivision to divido that lropercy i ntu
two equal lots. The total frontage of that prolmrty on hivor 3trvu
amounts to alycoxlmotely 135 feet. The Straws propocad to make L•40
equal lots of approximately 67h feet each. Those two newly creat..)
Iota would to loon than tho 90 foot frontago requirement, as reru ij,A
by the prewut nubdivinion ordinance, however, it wul,l he 15 fe,-t
more in width than the property which is loeate,t in that nrno of thni
original p3at of the community. That original plat width woo 66 tont.
J.
MIC
Planning Commission Minutes - 9/29/81
Presently, there is a dwelling located on the vacated Elm Street
portion of the lot, but there is no dwelling on the portion of the
lot which is comprised of Lot 5 and the east 66 feet of Lot 6, of
Block 60. Since this was a simple subdivision request, that is;
making two lots out of one, it was not necessary to go through the
entire subdivision process to make these two lots.
Mr. Straw indicated that if this proposal was granted, that he would
most likely remove the existing older home on the vacated Elm Streut
portion of the property and would then build two new homes, one on
each of the two newly created lots. A motion was made by Ed Schaffer
and seconded by Bill Burke, and unanimously pas<ed to recommend approval
of this simple subdivision contingent upon the Straws providing the
city a certificate of survey showing that the existing dwelling on
the vacated portion of Elm Street would be ten or more feet from the
newly created property line. If that distance between the existing
house and the newly created property line were less than 10 feet,
then the Straws would be required to come back to the city for approval
of this subdivision request and go through the public hearing variance
process which would be necessary for a loss than 10 foot variance set
back.
5. Some discussion took place regarding the review of the ordinances and
updatinq of the ordinances, etc.
It was decided that the city staff would present the Planning Commission
with sonm recommendations for consideration of the existing ordinances
prior to the meeting in November, to givo the Planning Commission scmu:
time to review those considerations and to possibly find arean which
thoy felt themcolvoo needed nome discusoion.
Fasting A rncd.
D. els
Zoning Adminiotrator
- 3 -
,. , •.i, {, VARIANCE APPLICATION - To
• a gaxage witt.in 4 feet of
side^ard rrojerty line.
+. Jan 6 Jim McCune-
`; � •�� 1 1 • 1 . w•�` .` _"fir:-.
J �
�,•� / VARIANCE APPLICATION - To rezone
t, L: vclvp a printing
hu _:inrss.
+-
-� ti _
David Kranz
M% to
� �� � '', •• ����' , • � • � T y �` � /' ' •" :`. E � L
WMA
\ � ..4 �! . • �'rr ` ,.� .� \'� � .. � Vim` . �
,e-- tj ---'f
Im
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION
252 Federal Bldg., U.S. Courthouse
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1478
Monticello Planning & Zoning Commission 10-30-31
Rt. 4, Box 83A
City Hall
Monticello, NN 55362
1ttention: Loren Klein
Re: MN FrMA comments for presentation
at the public meeting on 11-10-81
7:30 p.m.
Dear Mr. Klein
He appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Monticello house size require-
ments. Our Agency, as you know, has the important function to help qualified
low and moderate income persons obtain modest, safe, healthful, and energy
efficient housing. Considering the present interest rates and tight money
situation, it is safe to say that if we are unable to make loans to these
people, they will be unable to obtain the housing they need.
In order for loan applicants to be more able to repay their loans , house
construction costs must be held to a minimum. House size is the major factor
influencing cost. The deletion of basements and/or garages are also being
considered to further reduce cost after size has been reduced to a minimum.
In contrast, quality of construction and energy efficiency must not be re-
duced.
Our Buffalo County Office reports that in a few instances, a sural l family
edlose housing needs can be met with a 24'x36' two bedroom rambler have been
unable to build in Monticello because of the 1000 sq.ft. minimum in your town.
The housing needs of a family needing three bedrooms can adequately be met
by a 24'x40' rambler. This house would also not meet your size requirements.
Concerning spl it entry designs, we understand that your present guidelines
require the upper floor to be 6' or more above grade in order to qualify as
a two story house. Since we understand that 24'x32' split entries are being
built, this 6' requirement may not have been enforced.
As explained in somewhat more detail in the May 21, 1981 letter to you, our
slab on grade and crawl space houses will generally meet your size reyuire-
rlents and can be built at a modest cost. if the 1000 sq.ft, minimum remains,
the slab on grade or crawl space wi 11 become our only acceptable alternative
for one level houses in Monticello.
Iri.�r. '.h.•r, �, „r. .. 1'.�.,1. .... .. 'Irr ��.� .rr.�l, r�..•. l a..hq I.
-2 -
In order to reduce increasing site costs, twin -homes, townhouses, and
other zero lot line types of homes are being developed. According to
various reports in "Professional Builder" magazine, house size is on its
way down. This should be no surprise when one looks at the housing
trends in other highly developed countries which have had high interest
and energy costs for several years. We believe the demand for the smaller
house will increase just as the demand for larger homes will decrease.
Large energy -wasteful houses may become difficult to sell just as large
inefficient automobiles appear to be today.
We hope you will consider the above comments and reduce your size guide-
lines.
Enclosed is a copy of our present size guidelines which will no doubt be
reduced further in the future. We hope to be able to continue helping
low and moderate income people in Monticello by financing their home needs.
Sincerely,
RUSS BJORHUS
State Director
By: Allen F. Wanquist
Chief, Rural Housing
Enc.
A. NEW CONSTRUCTIONi
FmHA policy on house selection is based upon the theory of
providing safe, healthful, energy-efficient, modest
housing which will meet the present needs of low or
moderate income people. Wo do not wish to dictate exact
styles and floor plans of houses. However, any proposal
which does not comply with the following size guidelines
must be approved by the District Director on an individual
case baste.
1. Two Bedroom Houses: (Small Family)
a. Ranch with basement.................864 Sq. Ft.
b. Ranch on crawl space or slab....... 1008 Sq. Ft.
c. Split foyer, split level, ranch
with walkout, or raised ranch....... 760 Sq. Ft.
2. Three Bedroom Houses& (Average Family)
a. Ranch with basement................1056 Sq. Ft.
b. Ranch on crawl space or slab....... 1152 Sq. Ft.
c. Split foyer, split level, ranch
with walkout, or raised ranch with
third bedroom finished in lower
level...............................816 Sq. Ft.
]. Four Bedroom Houses& (Large Family)
a. Split foyer, split level, ranch with
walkout, or raised ranch with two
additional bedrooms and 1/I bath
finished in the lower level......... 864 Sq. Ft.