Planning Commission Agenda Packet 03-05-1991AGENDA
i
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, March 5, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Members: Dan McConnon, Richard Carlson, Richard Martie, Cindy
Lemm, Jon Bogart
7:00 pm 1. Call to order.
7:02 pm 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held
January 8, 1991.
7:04 pm 3. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held
February 5, 1991.
7:06 pm 4. Public Hearing --A simple subdivision request to
divide an existing residential lot and part of
another existing residential lot into two
residential lots. Applicant, Donald and Joan
Doran.
7:21 pm 5. Continued Public Hearing --A conditional use request
to allow used automobile/ light truck sales in a B-3
(highway business) zone. Applicant, Hoglund
Transportation/94 Services.
7:36 pm 6. Continued Public Hearing --A variance request -
allowing enlargement of a legal non -conforming
structure or use. Applicant, Hoglund
Transportation/94 Services.
7:45 pm 7. Tabled Public Hearing --Consideration of amendment
to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Section 6-3,
permitting accessory uses in an R-1, R-2, R-3, and
PEM zone by adding "sale of items including
automobiles, recreational vehicles, boats, and
other equipment. Items sold limited to three items
per property annually and limited to items owned by
property owner." Applicant, City of Monticello.
7:56 pm S. Consideration of calling a public hearing on
establishment of an ordinance amendment regulating
adult land uses.
Planning Commission Agenda
March 5, 1991
Page 2
ADDITIONAL INMRNATION ITEMS
8:05 pm 1.
Continued Public Hearing --A conditional use request
to allow used automobile/light truck sales in a B-3
(highway business) zone. Applicant, Hoglund
Transportation/94 Services. Council action: No
action required, as the request did not come before
them.
8:07 pm 2.
Continued Public Hearing --A variance request to
allow less than the minimum 4,500 square feet of
sales and display area. Applicant, Hoglund
Transportation/94 Services. Council action: No
action required, as the request did not come before
them.
8:09 pm 3.
Follow up of the workshop conducted on regulation
of adult land uses and the preparation of the
official planning study.
8:11 pm 4.
Set the next tentative date for the Monticello
Planning Commission meeting for April 2, 1991,
7:00 p.m.
8:13 pm 5. Adjournment.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING — MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 5, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Cindy Lemm, Richard Martie, Richard Carlson,
and Jon Bogart
Members Absent: Dan McConnon
Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill
1. The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairperson Cindy Leaw
at 7:02 p.m.
Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning
Commission members the January meeting minutes weren't done at
this time but would be ready for the March meeting.
Continued Public Hearing --Consideration of a conditional use
request to allow used automobile/liaht truck sales in a B-3
( hiahwav business zone. Applicant. Hoglund Transportation.
AND
3. Continued Public Hearina--A variance request allowirnq
establishment of an auto sales lot with less than the required
22,500 square feet of area; and consideration of a variance
reauest allowing enlargement of a non -conforming structure or
use. Applicant, Hoglund Transportation/94 Services.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained to Planning
Commission members and the public Jenny and Gordy Hoglund • e
conditional use and variance request to allow development of
a used car sales lot. Mr. O'Neill explained the additional
conditions which could be added to their conditional use
request as follows: (1) no more than 10 care may be parked
for sale at any one point in time; (2) four trees shall be
planted east of the two garages on the site; (3) the
conditional use permit requires common ownership of the
property containing the office space and the site of the sales
lot; (4) a culvert shall be installed under the drive leading
to the Hoglund Transportation office. Said culvert shall have
a minimum diameter of 15 inches. (5) the drive area in front
of the bus storage facility shall be paved per attached site
plan by October 15, 1992.
Vice Chairperson Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing.
Gordy and Jenny Hoglund explained to Planning Commission
members and the public the operation of Hoglund Transportation
Page 1
0
Planning Commission Minutes - 2/5/91
since it was originally owned by Gordy's father and mother,
Stuart and Arlene Hoglund, and operated as an international
dealership also selling Thomas bodies. The proposed sales lot
is proposed to be used for the sale of vehicles that' are
repaired in their shop. To keep people employed year-round,
the Hoglund's purchased damaged vehicles which are brought
back to their shop, repaired, and put onto this proposed sales
lot for sale to the public.
Vice Chairperson Cindy Lemm then closed the public hearing.
Discussion amongst the Planning Commission members centered
around that they are sympathetic to the Hoglund's request
fully realizing that the spirit of the ordinance would be met
as the property was developed. The problem is that granting
the variance would set a precedent. Therefore, they look for
additional recommendations from the planner on a method for
allowing the development to occur without setting a precedent.
Motion was made by Richard Carlson, seconded by Jon Bogart, to
table the conditional use and variance requests. Motion
carried unanimously with Dan McConnon absent.
Conduct workshop on regulation of adult land uses and begin
preparation of official planning studv.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, outlined the purpose of
the workshop. O'Neill noted that regulation of adult land
uses can only occur after careful examination of studies
completed by other communities and only after careful
application to the city of Monticello. He went on to note
that the major objective of this meeting is to review studies
conducted by other communities and determine if some of the
findings might apply to the city of Monticello.
The first item reviewed was (a) review report of the Attorney
General's Working Group on the Regulation of Sexually Oriented
Businesses. The next item reviewed was (b) review studies
conducted by other municipalities on the impact of adult land
uses on adjoining land values; (1) City of Champlin, and (2)
City of Rochester. The third item was (c) examine existing
land use patterns and establish plans for locating and
regulating adult land uses; (1) zoning ordinance amendments
(land use district map amendments and zoning ordinance
amendments), (2) public nuisance/obscenity law development,
and (3) licensing requirements. Planning Commission
determined that the potential harm to commercial and
Page 2
0
Planning Commission Minutes - 2/5/91
residential neighborhoods resulting from development of adult
land uses as demonstrated in a number of studies is sufficient
to justify further study. Planning Commission reviewed
potential strategies for locating adult land uses.
After discussion, it was the consensus of the Planning
Commission to obtain additional input from the City Planner.
S. Motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Jon Bogart, to
adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
I
Page 3
0
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
4. Public Hearing --A simple subdivision request to divide an
existing residential lot and part of another existinq
residential lot into two residential lots. Applicant. Donald
and Joan Doran. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Donald and Joan Doran are proposing to subdivide an existing
residential lot and part of another existing residential lot
into two lots. The proposed lot subdivision would meet the
minimum square footage requirement for a duplex, which is
12,000 square feet of land area, and would also meet the
minimum lot width, which is 80 feet of lot width on a public
right-of-way. The proposed simple subdivision of these two
lots will require a separate document recorded with 12 feet of
drainage and utility easements on the 6th Street and Maple
Street sides of the lot, a 6 -foot drainage and utility
easement on the west side of the lot to the adjoining property
owner, and a 6 -foot easement also on the north side of the lot
to adjoining property. Also, a separate document must be
recorded that states the City will not be responsible for
installation of an additional water service into the property.
Also on a separate document would be an easement needed for
the water stub which would go underneath part of a newly
proposed subdivided lot. That easement width shall be 20 feet
of easement. Also as part of this subdivision request, it
must be recorded within 30 days of the next Monticello City
Council meeting, which would be March 11, 1991.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONSt
1. Approve a simple subdivision request to subdivide an
existing residential lot and part of another existing
residential lot into two residential lots.
2. Deny a simple subdivision request to subdivide an
existing residential lot and part of another existing
residential lot into two residential lots.
3. Approve the simple subdivision request to subdivide an
existing residential lot and part of another existing
residential lot into two residential lots with the
following conditioner
a. The recording of the subdivision must occur within
30 days of the March 11, 1991, City Council meeting
date.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
b. A separate document must be recorded indicating the
drainage and utility easements, that being a 12 -
foot easement on the south and east part of the lot
and a 6 -Loot drainage and utility easement on the
north and west part of the lot.
C. A minimum 20 -foot easement must be recorded across
the southerly portion of this subdivided lot
covering the new water line that would be installed
to the property on the northern portion of this
subdivided lot. A separate document must be
recorded stating that the City is not responsible
for the installation of an additional water line to
this property off of West 6th Street.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the simple subdivision request to
subdivide an existing residential lot and part of another
existing residential lot into two residential lots with the
conditions as listed above in alternative i3.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed simple subdivieion; Copy
of the site plan for the simple subdivision.
A simple subdivision request to subdivide an existing
residential lot and part of another existing residential lot
10
Into \� into two residential lots. Location is Block 10, Fast 16.5 feet
of Lot 4 and all Lot 5, Original Plat Addition in the
city of Monticello.
\ Applicant: Donald and Joan Doran
,
„ 11 t.1. ^, 1 n I. •I/'4�/J7��,j/�/� ��t��[�['J�//j�/�/J ''Y%_; . � q � , .
✓t� • ��. SCI �J �O ��///n'»SJ� _
} 0 c
�. ;
CA-
I. •� - w 4 I. _�.
\� � I U/
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
5. Continued Public Hearinq--Consideration of a conditional use
request to allow used automobile/light truck sales in a B-3
(highway business) sone. Applicant, Hoqlund Transportation.
AND
6. Continued Public Hearing --A variance request allowinq
enlarqement of a legal non -conforming structure or use.
A�olicant, Hoglund Transportation. (J. O.) `5 C�FoIAA , 'I J5p
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: V y b (, sI.0 d i�
ce'd' Ckn.4 '
At the January meeting of the Ple ing Commission, the
Planning Commission continued the mat er and requested that
City staff investigate methods b which the proposed
enlargement of the non -conforming use' could be accomplished
without setting a negative precedent. Staff submits the
following report in response to Planning Commission's request.
VARIANCE REQUIRENENT CLARIFICATION
After closer review of the ordinance, it appears that the
development meets the lot size requirement of 22,500
square feet. This lot size minimum applies to the size
of the parcel on which the sales lot is located and Is
not intended to be the minimum size requirement for the
actual automobile sales area.
One of the conditions regulating sale of new and used
automobiles requires 6,500 square feet of sales and
display area excluding areas used for maintenance and
repair. According to City Planner John Uban, the main
structure and office area used exclusively for
transportation related services and also used in
conjunction with the auto sales activity meets the spirit
of this minimum sales and display area requirement=
therefore, no variance is required. He also noted that
the small block buildings behind the auto sales area may
confuse car buyers and give the impression of being the
sales office.
It appears that no variance is needed to any of the
requirements that are associated specifically with the
conditional use permit. On the other hand, a variance
continues to be necessary to allow enlargement of a non-
conforming use. Planning Commission was duly concerned
about the potential precedont created by allowing the
expansion and enlargement of a non -conforming use without
the use complying with the ordinance or without a plan
for future compliance. It was the Planning Commission's
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
concern that to grant the variance allowing expansion of
a nonconforming use would create a poor precedent. At
the same time, the Planning Commission did not feel
comfortable with a flat denial of the request. Staff was
directed to develop a method for potentially allowing the
development to occur without setting a bad precedent.
Unfortunately, according to the City Planner and
according to the City Attorney, there is no way to
prevent a precedent created by allowing the expansion to
occur without compliance or without a specific plan for
compliance with the ordinance.
I informed Gordy Hogland of this problem, and he noted
that he would be willing to participate in an agreement
which outlined general goals for improving the property.
In this agreement, he did not wish to identify specific
timetables or designate specific parking and drive areas
to be paved. This is because he does not wish to pave
certain areas if such areae will become used for another
purpose in the future. I mentioned to him that the
Planning Commission may accept this agreement in
principle to bring the site up to code. On the other
hand, according to the City Attorney, this general
agreement or letter of intent is not sufficient, and a
specific timetable outlining specific areas to be
improved needs to be developed in order to eliminate the
need for the variance.
SITE PLAN REVIEW (no new info.)
The site plan presented calls for development of a sales lot
in front of an existing garage. The lot would have the
capacity to store approximately ten care. The lot is to be
designed to City standards, including use of curb and
bituminous paving. The curb line will be set back a minimum
of 10 foot from the Comfort Inn parking/drive curb line. The
plan also calls for reservation of two customer parking spaces
associated with auto sales.
Four trees will be planted along the eastern perimeter of the
site near the sales lot per the attached site plan.
In addition, Hoglund will be installing a culvert under the
drive that leads to the Hoglund offices. Installation of the
culvert will eliminate the potential of flooding of the
parking area and will allow water originating to the east of
the site to be conveyed along the ditch right-of-way to a
private drainage owalo located along the western boundary of
the Hoglund property. This drainage Swale convoys water
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
directly to the freeway ditch. In addition to providing the
culvert, Hoglund has agreed to provide the City with storm
water easement over the private drainage Swale mentioned
above.
Some changes are also proposed for the existing site to bring
it into closer compliance with the ordinance. The drive area
in front of the existing bus storage area at the east side of
the site will be paved. See the site plan for detail.
Hoglund proposes to pave this area in 1992.
In sum, Planning Commission appears supportive of the proposal
with conditions noted under alternative #1; however, there Is
hesitation to approve the plan without a plan for reducing or
eliminating existing non -conforming areas. The existing site
plan is not consistent with the City ordinance as follows :
1. There is sufficient parking area for all full and
part-time employees; hos+ever, much of the parking
area is used for outside bus storage. Some drive
areas are not paved and do not have curb systems.
The existing landscaping includes numerous trees
located in one general area. Technically, it
appears that there are a surficient number of trees
on the site; however, they are all located in one
or two areas and may not sufficiently satisfy the
intent of the ordinance .
Following are excerpts from the ordinance relating to the
variance that is needed that applyt
3-1s NON -CONFORMING BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, AND USESr
(A] PURPOSE1 It is th0 purpose of this Section to
provide for the n3gul ation of non -conforming
buildings, structures, and uses and to specify
those requirements, circumstances, and
conditions under which non -conforming
buildings, structures, and uses will be
operated and maintained. The zoning ordinance
establishes separate distrLcts, each of which
is an appropriate area for the location of
uses which are permitted in that district. It
is neceseary ars4 consistent with the
establishment of tbese districts that non—
conforming buildings structures, and uses not
be permitted to coiltlrsue without restriction.
F'urt'hermore, it as thes intent of thle section
that all non-conlosa;ing uses shall ae
eventuafly brouaht imo conformity.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
(B) Any structure or use lawfully existing upon
the effective date of this ordinance shall not
be enlarged but may be continued at the size
and in the manner of operation existing upon
such date except as hereinafter specified or
subsequently amended.
Planning Commission needs to determine to what extent it
wishes to hold fast to the stated goal of bringing all non-
conforming uses into conformity. According to the City
Planner and the City Attorney, there is no bona fide grounds
for a variance in this case, and allowing enlargement without
compliance to existing codes or without a plan for compliance
over time will create a poor precedent.
Hoglund has indicated that he is willing to prepare a general
agreement or letter of intent to make improvements over time.
This agreement will not sufficiently mitigate the precedent
according to the City Attorney.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Notion to approve the conditional use permit allowing new
and used automobile/light truck sales and display subject
to the following conditions.
Conditional use permit subject to the following
conditions:
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
1. The enclosed principal use is a minimum of 4,500
square feet, excluding the area used for mechanical
repair and reconditioning.
2. Outside sales and display areas are fenced or
screened from view of neighboring residential uses
or an abutting "R" district in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 2 [O), of this ordinance (does
not apply because residential use is actually on
the site, not abutting "R" district).
3. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that
the light source shall not be visible from the
public right-of-way or from neighboring residences
and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (H), of this ordinance.
4. The outside sales and display area shall be hard
surfaced.
6
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
5. The outside sales and display area does not utilize
parking spaces which are required for conformance
with this ordinance.
6. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of
conflict with through traffic movement; shall
comply with Chapter 3, Section 5, of this ordinance
(parking design requirements); and shall be subject
to the approval of the City Engineer (curbing must
be installed).
7. There to a minimum lot area of twenty-two thousand
five hundred (24,500) square feet and minimum lot
dimensions of one hundred fifty (150) feet by one
hundred thirty (130) feet.
8. A drainage system subject to the approval of the
City Engineer shall be installed.
9. All signing shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 9, of this ordinance.
10. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
ADDED CONDITIONS SUGGESTED BY STA"
11 . No more than ten cars may be parked for sale at any
one point in time.
12. Four trees shall be planted east of the two garages
on the site.
13. The conditional use permit requires common
ownership of the property containing the office
space and the Bite of the sales lot.
14. A culvert shall be installed under the drive
leading to the Hoglund Transportation office. Said
culvert shall have a minimum diameter of 15 inches.
15. The drive area in front of the bus storage facility
shall be paved per the attached site plan by
October 15, 1994.
Under this alternative, the development would be allowed
to occur. This alternative assumes that Hoglund is
willing to enter into an agreement outlining specific
action to be take over time to bring the existing site up
to code. This alternative will not establish any
negative precedents so long as the agreement is in place.
7
{ Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
2. Notion to deny said conditional use permit variance
requests based on the finding that:
If Hoglund is not willing to establish a specific plan
for bringing the existing site up to code, then this
alternative should be selected. The reasoning for this
alternative could be stated as follows.
1. Approval of the conditional use permit would impair
the intent of the regulations governing expansion
of lawful non -conforming uses. No hardship exists
with regards to the variance request= therefore,
the request must be denied.
If the applicant is unwilling to agree to
correcting items and if the Planning Commission
views the precedent set with concern, then this
alternative should be selected. Under this
alternative, the applicant would not be able to
develop at this site in the manner proposed.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Attorney has recommended denial of the variance and
associated conditional use permit until a binding agreement
can be arrived at that addresses the existing areas of
nonconformity. To do otherwise would create a precedent that
would allow other legal or "grandfathered" non -conforming uses
to expand without first complying with the zoning ordinance.
It does not look like such an agreement will be in place by
meeting time. Planning Commission may wish to grant an
approval subject to development of an agreement that satisfies
the City Attorney.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
See site plan submitted with previous agenda.
0
* M1
CrosshatchOWOved TraW A \
Solid Beck-paved AreasIpavedWb
RedWOW Paved Areas
L
IN, �ti • ' @
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
7. Tabled Public Hearing --Consideration of amendment to the
Monticello Sonina Ordinance, Section 6-3, Dermittina accessory
uses in an R-1, R-2, R-3, and PSM sone by adding "sale of
Items including automobiles, recreational vehicles, boats, and
other eauipment. Items sold limited to three items per
property annually and limited to items owned by property
owner." Applicant. City of Monticello. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the public hearing held in January regarding this item,
Planning Commission continued the public hearing and directed
staff to contact property owners that are known to frequently
use their residential property to display items for sale.
Planning Commission wanted property owner comments on a
proposed ordinance further defining and regulating use of
residential land for such purposes. Nine property owners have
been notified of the meeting. Their names and addresses are
attached.
The following agenda supplement is simply a copy of the
January supplement.
9
Letters sent to following owners:
Bob and Val Somerville
213 East River Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Linn Jensen
319 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Ann Lindberg
99081 - 107th Ave. N.
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Timothy Witchen
612 West 5th Street
PO Box 744
Monticello, MN 55362
Leslie i.arson
Rural Route 4, Box 186
Monticello, MN 55362
Julia Finley
408 S. Kline St.
Aberdeen, SD 57401
Douglas and Justin Dahlheimer
925 East Broadway
Monticello, NN 55362
Helen Wulf
1001 Hart Boulevard
Monticello, MN 55362
Gene Jestue
548 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
0
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/8/91
<. 8. Public Hearing --Consideration of amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance, Section 6-3, permittinq accessory uses in an
R-1, R -2t R-3, and PZM zone by adding "sale of items includinq
automobiles, recreational vehicles, boats, and other
equipment. Items sold limited to three items per property
annually and limited to items owned by property owner."
Applicant. City of Monticello. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Planning Commission is asked to consider establishing an
amendment that limits the ability of property owners to
utilize residential property as an "open sales lot." This
request stems from complaints that certain residential
property areas are being used for commercial purposes as open
sales lots, thereby diminishing the residential character of
the neighborhood. The articles "for sale" on such residential
properties include vehicles, boats, lawn mowers, and other
items. Open sales for strictly commercial purposes on
residential property is not allowed and should be confined to
the business zones.
At this time, there are five sites where the problem appears
to be occurring. They are located at the following addresses:
213 East River Street, 409 East Broadway, 825 East Broadway,
925 East Broadway, and 1001 Hart Boulevard.
The purpose of this amendment is to specify what type and how
many items may be sold from residential property. Any sales
above and beyond what is noted would be considered use of the
property for commercial purposes and, therefore, a violation
of ordinance. Following is the section of the ordinance to be
amended with the actual amendment underlined.
CHAPTER 6
"R-1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
6-3: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted
accessory uses in an "R-1" district:
[A) Private garages, parking spaces, and car ports for
licensed and operable passenger cars and trucks not
to exceed a groes capacity of nine thousand (9,000)
pounds as regulated by Chapter 3, Section 5, of
this ordinance. Private garages are intended for
use to share the private passenger vehicles of the
family or families resident upon the premises, and
in which no business, service, or Industry is
carried on. Such space can be rented to non-
residents of the property for private passenger
vehicles and/or non-commercial vehicles, trailers,
or equlpmont if sufficient off-street parking In
full compliance with this ordinance is provided
12
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/8/91
elsewhere on the property. Such garage shall not
be used for the storage of more than one (1)
commercial vehicle owned or operated by a resident
per dwelling unit.
[B) Recreational vehicles and equipment.
[C) Home occupations.
[D] Non-commercial greenhouses and conservatories.
(E] Swimming pool, tennis courts, and other
recreational facilities which are operated for the
enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the
principal use and their guests.
(F] Tool houses, sheds, and similar buildings for
storage of domestic supplies and non-commercial
recreational equipment.
(G] Boarding or renting of rooms to not more than one
(1) person.
(H] Limited open sales: Allowing sale on a limite.
basis of items accessory to private residential use
of land including but not limited to, automobiles.
recreation vehicles, lawn and qarden eauipment,
boats, and other eguloment. Accessory use of
property as a limited open sales lot shall conform
to the following requirements:
G
1. No more than a total of five items Dor site
l�h may be advertised for sale Der veer.
Z. No more than one item can be disolaved for
sale at anv one time.
3. Individual items may not be diaDlaved for sale
for more than 30 dave Der veer.
6. Items sold are limited to articles owned by
individuals that make their primary residence
at the limited open sales site.
9. Sale items may not be Dlaced on a Dublic
richt-of -way.
6. one sign not exceeding two sauare feet in area
advertising sale item is allowed without
permit. Said elfin must be placed within o.
attached to eels Item and shall not be free-
standing.
13
1
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/8/91
Enforcement of this ordinance would require that City staff
maintain a record of sale activities at residential sites based on
casual observation. Staff would make a point to notify property
owners in advance of the open sales limitations.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to adopt proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance
establishing limited open sales as an accessory use in
residential zones.
Under this alternative, the Planning Commission would adopt
the amendment based on the finding that sales activity allowed
on private residential property needs to be regulated in order
to properly protect the character of residential areas. The
proposed amendment will contribute to the ability of the City
to regulate such sales; therefore, the ordinance amendment
should be approved.
If this alternative is selected, City staff will begin to
document sale activity on private residential property and
will notify those property owners that commonly use their
property as a sales site of the new limitations.
Notion to deny adoption of proposed amendment to the zoning
ordinance.
If Planning Commission does not agree that a present or future
problem exists with regards to this issue, or if the amendment
does not clearly address the issue, this alternative should be
selected.
It should be noted that none of the property owners that use
their residential property as sales lots were individually
notified of the proposed ordinance amendment. A case could be
made for continuing this item until property owners affected
are notified.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Planning Commission select alternative tl.
There are many homes in residential zones along highly traveled
routes. This ordinance would eliminate the temptation of using
these residential properties as sales lot, thereby protecting the
residential value of adjoining properties. It seems to make sense
to take action to limit a mild problem that will not likely go
away.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
S. Consideration of callina a public hearing on establishment of
an ordinance amendment reaulatina adult land uses. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, the
constitutional issues pertaining to regulation of adult land
uses was discussed, and a number of planning studies completed
by other communities were reviewed. A review of the evidence
discovered by other communities regarding the impact of adult
land uses led to a discussion of potential need to regulate
the placement of adult land uses. After reviewing the zoning
map, Planning Commission requested that City staff discuss the
issue with the City Planner and report back.
In response to the Planning Commission's request, I met with
the planner and have developed a potential method for
regulating placement of adult land uses.
Adult land uses would be allowed as a conditional use in I-2
zones and must be located at least 800 feet from the following
land uses:
—Any public or private recreation area
—Churches
—Day care facility
—School property
—Establishment where liquor is sold
—Land used or zoned for residential use
—Land designated for residential use in the comprehensive
plan of the City
—Other?
According to the proposal above, adult land uses could occur
in two areas within the community. These areas are noted on
the attached maps.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion calling for a public hearing on establishment of
an ordinance amendment regulating adult land uses, public
hearing to be conducted at the April meeting of the
Planning Commission.
Under this alternative, the Planning Commission finds
that there is sufficient evidence to Justify further
study and it is appropriate at this time to call for a
public hearing on establishment of an ordinance amendment
regulating adult land uses. In addition, Planning
10
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/91
Commission is asked to comment on the proposed strategy
for regulating placement of the adult land uses. If this
alternative is selected, City staff will complete the
planning study and generate a resolution outlining
potential findings. In addition, a proposed ordinance
amendment will be presented.
Z. Notion to terminate further study of the issue.
If the Planning Commission does not believe the evidence
is sufficient to support a finding that adult land uses
should be regulated, then this option should be selected.
C. STAFF RECONNENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 01. It is our view that the
evidence of potential harm to neighborhoods may be sufficient
to support a finding that adult land uses deserve regulation.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Naps outlining areas where adult land uses would be allowed to
be located as a conditional use.
it]
;Cqt)o
PZ-M
NO. 94
- % S - — -- . - -- I - . -� 7-
t '01
133
R3