Loading...
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.