Planning Commission Agenda Packet 05-02-1989I
AGENDA
REGULAR MEMNG - MONTICELLO PLANNING OD MISSION
Tuesday, May 2, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Members: Richard Carlson, Cindy Lem, Richard Martie, Mori Malone,
Dan McConnon
7:30 p.m. 1. Call to order.
7:32 p.m. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held April 4,
1989.
7:34 p.m. 3. Approval of minutes of the special meeting held April 20,
1989.
7:36 p.m. 4. Public Hearing - A preliminary plat request for a proposed
new residential subdivision plat. Applicant, west Prairie
Partners.
7:56 p.m.
S. Public Hearing - A rezoning request to rezone residential
unplatted property from R-3 (medium density residential) to
PEM (performance zone mixed). Applicant, J & R Properties.
8:16 p.m.
6. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow 1) a parking lot
to be constructed within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot line
requirements and 2) to allow a driveway curb cut to be in
excess of the 24 -foot maximum allowed. Applicant, J a K
Properties.
6:31 p.m.
7. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow a parking lot
expansion to be constructed within the 5 -foot curb barrier to
lot line requirement. Applicant, J i K Properties.
6:46 p.m.
B. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow an additional
driveway curb cut within 125 feet of street frontage.
Applicant, First National Bank.
9:01 p.m.
9. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow expansion
of an open and outdoor storage as an accessory use in a 8-4
(regional business) zone. A conditional use request to allow
an expansion of open and outdoor sales as a principal and
accessory use in a B-4 (regional business) zone. Applicant,
Pair's Carden Oenter.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS
9:31 p.m.
1. Consideration of a joint governmental unite meeting.
9:33 p.m.
2. Consideration of amendments to Section 3-91814 and 3-91E)4(c)
of the Zoning ordinance pertaining to the regulation of pylon
sign height, sign area, and the number allowed per business
along the Highway 25/I-94 corridor in the city of
Monticello. Applicant, City of Monticello. Oouncil action:
Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
Planning Commission Agenda
May 2, 1989 —
7:30 p.m.
Page 2
9:35 p.m.
3. An appeal of a variance request to allow additional pylon
sign height and sign area. Applicant, Security Financial.
Council action: Denied as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
9:37 p.m.
4. Consideration of amendments to Section 3-2(G13(b)(ii) of the
Zoning Ordinance pertaining to regulations of commercial/
industrial property landscaping. Applicant, City of
Monticello. Council action: Approved as per Planning
Commission recommendation.
9:39 p.m.
5. Consideration of preparing an amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance which would allow auto body shops as a
conditional use within a business zone. Applicant, City of
Monticello/Monticello Auto Body. Council action: Approved
as per Planning Commission recommendation with an additional
condition.
9:41 P.M.
6. A conditional use request to allow Monticello Auto Body to
operate an auto body shop at Block 2, Lot 4, Sandberg South
Addition. Applicant, Monticello Auto Body. Council action:
Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation.
9:43 p.m.
7. Consideration of a preliminary plat approval, proposed
expansion of Bast Rjellberg Mobile Boma Park, and
consideration of amendments to the City of Monticello zoning
map. Applicant, Rent Rjellberg. Council action: Approved
as per Planning Commission recommendation.
9:45 p.m.
8. Set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning
Commission meeting for June 6, 1989.
9:47 p.m.
9. Adjournment.
f
A.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Thursday, April 20, 1989 - 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: Richard Carlson, Mori Malone, Richard Martie, Dan McConnon
Members Absent: Cindy Lamm
Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at 6:38 p.m.
2. Public Hearin� - Consideration of ereeari an amendment to the
Monticello ZoningOralnance to alive autobOQy snops as a conaltional use
riitnin the &i (fiignway nusinessf zone.
Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant City Administrator, explained to Planning
Commission members the background to the possible ordinance amendment
which would allow auto body shops as a conditional use within the 9-3
(highway business) zone. Mr. O'Neill explained to Commission members
some of the information he had received while video taping some auto body
shops in the Brooklyn Park and Elk River areas. Mr. O'Neill then turned
it over to a 15 -minute video tape presentation on the auto body shops
which he had videoed in the Brooklyn Park and Elk River areas.
Much discussion then centered around condition g) "the exterior walls
facing the public right-of-way shall consist of no more than 501 met.*.-'
_ material." Much discussion was considered as to which would be the
appropriate way to define this particular condition and how it should be
addressed with a proposed conditional use request, the property having
actually two building fronts that would front on a public right-of-way.
Chairperson Richard Carlson then opened the meeting for any input from
the public. There being no input from the public, a motion was made by
Dan McCcnnon, seconded by Richard Martie, to amend the Zoning Ordinance
to include auto body repair as a conditional use in a B-3 (highway
business) zone, including but not limited to the following conditions:
a. Door opening to the service garage area must not face street
frontage.
b. Vehicle storage area limited to 301 of the floor space of the
structure housing the auto body shop.
c. All vehicles being serviced and all vehicle parts must be stored
Inside or in vehicle storage area.
d. Vehicle storage area shall be enclosed by an enclosure intended
to screen the view of the vehicles in storage from the outside.
Enclosure shall consist of a 6 -Loot high, 1001 opaque fence
designed to blend with the auto body shop structure and
consisting of materials treated to resist discoloration.
e. The floor of the vehicle storage area shall consist of asphalt
paving.
f. No work on vehicles or vehicle parts shall be conducted outside
the confines of the auto body shop.
1:I
Special Planning Commission Minutes - 4/20/89
g. The advertising wall facing the public right-of-way shall consist
of no more than 50% metal material.
h. The secondary or non -advertising wall facing a public
right-of-way shall utilize a cm bination of colors or materials
to break up the monotony of a single color flat surface.
i. The development shall conform to the minimum parking and
landscaping requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
j.
No conditional use permit shall be granted for an auto body shop
within 600 feet of a residential or PZM (performance zone mixed)
zone existing at the time the conditional use permit is granted.
Motion carried unanimously with Cindy Le= absent.
Motion was based on the finding that the amendment is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan and the amendment, and concurrent conditions
result in the auto body shop activity being compatible with the
character of the surrounding area.
3. Reconvene Public Hearing- Oonsider irant" conditional use Permit to
Monticello Autog800ayy wnig 3'icn would aiiow an auto Doay snoP tOoperate at
IZE I, Mock 2, �andbeoutn MaHion. Appiicant, Wi ticello iCuto
F-JyG
Motion was made by Mori Malone, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve
the conditional use request to allow an auto body shop to operate at
Lot 4, Block 2, Sandberg South Addition. Motion carried unanimously with
Cindy Lem absent and Richard Carlson abstaining.
4. Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Dan McConnon, to adjourn the
meeting. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously
with Cindy Lemm absent.
Respectfully submitted,
4W A
Gary "reon
Zoning Administrator
P
0
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
v 4. Public Hearing - A preliminarylat re nest fora proposed new
residential subdivision plat. Applicant, hest Prairie Partners. 0.0.)
A. REFERENCE MID BACKGROUND:
West Prairie Partners requests that Planning Commission consider
providing preliminary approval of the preliminary plat of Prairie Nest.
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission provide preliminary
approval of this plat. Following is a narrative review of the site plan
which is intended to supplement the drawing prepared for your review.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
Planning Commission is familiar with this particular site, as it was
recently reviewed as part of a request for rezoning from R-2 to R-3. As
you recall, the zoning in this area retained its R-2 natures and
subsequent to that decision, the developers have developed a site plan
that is consistent with the R-2 (medium density residential) use. The
nature of this particular development is more R-1 in natures however,
this development character is not inconsistent with the R-2 zoning.
The proposed platted area encompasses 2.5 acres and calls for the
creation of a cul-de-sac and seven Iota. To the north of the development
area is Wright County Highway 751 to the south is the Burlington Northern
Railroad trackes to the east is Monticello School District property; to
the west is the property owned by Daniel Reeds and further west is Gille
and Katzmarek.
Each lot created with this Subdivision was reviewed in terms of setback
and minimum square foot area, and each complies with the Zoning
Ordinance. You will notice that Lot 5 has a long and slender access to
the cul-de-sac. This particular design, though not ideal, is within the
requirements of the ordinance. The long, slender access to the
cul-de-sac is 32 feet at its narrowest point, which provides plenty of
room for a driveway and snow storage area.
ENGINEERING ISSUES
Engineering data has not been filed prior to consideration of this
preliminary plat. It is the view of staff that in this situation, Such
information is not deemed necessary prior to preliminary plat approval,
as it appears evident that this area can be served by sewer, water, and
storm water drainage service. it should be noted, however, that final
plat approval will be contingent upon the positive recommendation of the
City Engineer.
PARR DEDICATION
It appears evident that the developer desires to make a cash payment in
lieu of a dedication of land for park purposes. As you know, the
developer is required to pay 10 percent of the raw value of the
subdivided area in lieu of dedication of 10 percent of the lend area.
ME
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
A cash payment makes more sense in light of the fact that there is
limited land area on which to develop a park on this site, and there is
semi-public park land available on the school district grounds. Staff,
therefore, supporta the concept of a cash payment in lieu of land.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of Prairie Meat.
2. Motion to recommend denial of the preliminary plat of Prairie West.
3. Motion to table item pending gathering of additional data.
C. STAPP RBCOMMUMATION:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat of Prairie West. The
proposed subdivision is a very positive addition to that area and is
highly compatible with the golf course and Pinewood Elementary School
environment. The presence of this development will serve in the long run
to increase the value of the adjoining property and provide continued
momentum toward eventual redevelopment of the blighted properties to the
west.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Proposed preliminary plat of Prairie Meets tocation map provided on
proposed plat map. Section of Comprehensive Plan pertaining to
subdivision policies.
-2-
k
c
A preliminary plat Cell
now residential spbdiv
rest Prairie Partners.
a proposed
�A
A
�— COMPRMOSIVE PLAN &I -E T
eo SUBDIVIST04 POLICIES
S
All subdivisions should conform to the Comprehensive plan (land
�d use, transportation, and community facilities) of the community.
2. All land developments should be controlled in a logical and
practical way through the planning process so as to gradually
develop the land utilising its advantages yet being sensitive to
(f existing natural features worth saving for the future.
3. Emphasis shall be given to contiguous development accentuating
the homogenous nature of the community rather than a patchwork
AAof localized and unrelated projects, and discourage the
extension of public utilities to this non-contiguous
development, thereby discouraging •leap frog' development.
a. All subdivisions, no matter how small, should be planned in such
a manner as to allow proper subdivision of surrounding land at a
Pt ,` pfuture dates a preliminary plan for the potential subdivision of
:� Stj the surrounding sites should be prepared regardless of ownership
Pot' tt'jnvolved to assure that the smaller subdivision will not
p� conflict with future development potential. where a subdivision
is surrounded by previously platted land, said subdivision
should be *related to the existing conditions.
S. land platted into larger lots should be so planned and developed
N� as to permit proper re -subdivision in the future even in
N situations where further re -subdivision may not appear likely.
6. The subdivision regulations should contain adequate provisions
for deviation from the strict application of the regulations to
N allow reasonable flexibility and imaginative site design within
the intent and purpose of zoning and subdivision regulations.
7. All lots should abut on a public street) access via private
N� streets or easements should not be permitted except where
absolutely essential to the enjoyment of property rights.
8 Street names should be in. accordance with a uniform street
N naming and numbering system adopted by the City.
9. All lots and streets should be arranged so as to avoid
,pV inefficient land shapes (such as triangle) and sizes (such as
CO' j very narrow outlots) .
10. All subdivision proposals should be completel that is, they
Voiehould have paved streets, curb and quitter, all utilities, and
loot public areas such as parks and playgrounds.
11. overhead utility lines dnd poles should not be permitted. All
�rtutilities should be placed underground and should be along tear
Carl of side lot lines when feasible.
12. Subdivisions should be physically develored in full, urban
density areas should be provided sanitary sewer, paved streets,
curb and utter,Lublic water and other improvements deemed a l necessary. p
13. In the case of small subdivisions or multiple ownerships, the
complete subdividers or developers may not be required to
install complete facilities provided it is demonstrated that
this is clearly not feasible or practicable. Prior to final
approval of all subdivisions, however, it shall be determined
what improvements may be added by the community. When
substantially developed, full facilities (sanitary sewer, public
water, paved streets, etc.) should be added through action
initiated by the community and assessed against the benefited
properties.
14. Future subdivisions, whether residential, commercial, or
industrial, shall be required to set aside public green space
C (perks, playgrounds, etc.) or cash in lieu of land for public
recreation in accordance with a uniform set of standards.
.43.
o
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
5. Public Rearing - A rezoninrequest to rezone residential unplatted
property from -R-3 I -3 (medium al,i residential) to PZM (pertormance zone
mixed). Applicant, J a R Properties. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACRCRWhID:
J b A Properties, represented by Jim and Ren Maus, requests that a parcel
of land directly east of the Maus Poods store be rezoned from R-3 to PZM
zoning. Staff has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and reviewed the
Zoning Ordinance and is recommending that Planning Commission approve
this request. Planning Commission is asked to, as always, review this
proposed amendment in accordance with Chapter 22 of the Zoning ordinance,
which requires that the Planning Commission consider possible adverse
impact created by the proposed amendment. Planning Commission judgement
regarding adverse impact shall be based upon, but not limited to, the
following factors:
1. Relationship to municipal Comprehensive Plan.
2. Geographic area involved.
3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in
which it is proposed.
1. The character of the surrounding area.
5. The demonatrated need for such use.
Prior to the analysis of potential adverse impact to presented, staff
presents a brief review of the proposal, and also provided is a site plan
review.
PROPOSAL
The proposal to rezone this property from R-3 to PZM provides the land
owner with flexibility in developing this area as either residential R-3
usage or commercial/retell usage. There are also a number of other uses
allowed in the PZM zone as outlined in the attached pertinent sections of
the Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of the "PZ" or performance zoning
district is to allow for development flexibility and special design
control within sensitive areas of the city due to environmental or
physical limitations. The performance toning district also attempte to
create a reasonable balance between the interest of the property owner in
freely developing hie propertyr and at the same time, protect the
interest of surrounding properties. Please refer to the attached
sections of the Zoning Ordinance for more information regarding the
purpose of the "PZ" zoning district. Essentially, the reason for the
rezoning is to provide J i R Properties the flexibility of developing a
retail facility complementary to the present Maus Pooda store. Such a
development could also be combined with a multi -family development under
the PZM zoning. Please note that at this time, the applicants have
provided a verbal report on their goals for the development area and have
not at this time solidified plane on paper. Ren and Jim Maus will be
present at the meeting to discuss this matter further with the Planning
Commission.
-3-
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
SITE PLAN REVIEW
Following is a brief review of the site and surrounding area. The site
itself has an awkward shape and consists of approximately acres.
Presently on the site are two somewhat dilapidated residences. The land
itself is relatively low and will likely require soil correction prior to
future development. The property to the south of the proposed rezone
area contains the Inuring Lane Apartments. The apartments are separated
from the rezone area by a steep embankment. To the north of the rezone
area is the Burlington Northern Railroad, which separates the property
from Cedar Creat Apartments. Of course, to the east of the property is
Maus Foods, which is separated from the development area by Cedar
Street. Homes lying east of Cedar Creat Apartments and directly
northeast of the rezone area have been earmarked by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority as a potential area for redevelopment. A future
plan for development of the rezone site might also include plans for
redevelopment of this somewhat blighted area east of the Cedar Crest
Apartments.
ZONING AMENDMENT CONSIDERATIONS
1. RelationehiQ to municipal C_Nrehensive Plan. Attached are sections
taken rrom the municipal Comprenensive Plan that might impact your
decision on this matter. In reviewing this proposed request, I have
found no policies that would be violated by this proposal and have
found some that seem to support this proposal. Please refer to
copies of pertinent sections of the Comprehensive Plan for more
information.
2. Geographic Area. The proposed area for rezoning is adjacent to a 8-4
zone ana aa3acent to an R-3 zone. In a sense, PZM zoning is a
combination of B-4 and R-3 zoning. Therefore, in terms of transition
between the two zones, the PZM zoning appears appropriate. In
addition, the site being located directly adjacent to a food store is
a prime area for retail development. Therefore, use of this property
for retail purposes may represent the highest and best use of the
property. The property is also located adjacent to apartment
buildingat however, those apartment buildings are buffered by
railroad tracks to the north and a steep grade to the east and
south. It appears, then, from a geographic standpoint that the
proposed rezoning is compatible with the general area.
3. The character of the surroundsn% area. This particular consideration
is similar to the item anove. The proposed rezoning will not create
a land use in conflict with the adjoining properties. It should also
be noted that any development of a retail establishment on this site
does require a conditional use permit, which provides the City with
the potential of attaching additional conditions designed to mitigate
negative impacts of retail development.
ME
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
4. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in
which it is propOsea. Given the presence of physical reature8 lost
bUrei Ends area from adjoining lands, it appears reasonable to
expect that establishment of a retail establishment on this site will
have a negligible effect on the property values of adjoining lands.
5. The demonstrated need for such use. A case could be made that
oevelopment or this particular parcel as a commercial site represents
the highest and beat use of this land because it is so close to a
strong commercial activity center and because the property is so well
buffered from other uses. The fact that it appears suitable for
retail development does, in a sense, support the idea that there is a
need for rezoning demonstrated at this particular site. The proposal
also serves to contribute toward conaolidation of a retail area,
which is a goal of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the proposed rezoning of subject parcel from R-3 to
PZM zoning.
Motion to approve based on the finding that the proposal to 1)
consistent with the Comprehensive Planr 2) compatible with the
geographic area and character of the adjoining lands; 3) the rezoning
will not tend to depreciate the area in which it is proposed; 4) the
need for the proposed rezoning has been sufficiently demonstrated.
2. Motion to deny the rezoning amendment.
3. Table the matter pending development of plans.
C. STAPP RELATION:
As stated earlier, staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning
request. "w only hesitation is that a concrete plan has not been
proposed prior to this rezoning request. This negative is mitigated,
however, by the fact that any retail development in this area will
require a conditional use permit which provides the City with the
opportunity to attach conditions to the permit designed to protect the
values of the adjoining properties.
D. A..Ie..n....N DATA:
Copy of the zoning map; Excerpts from the Zoning Ordinance regarding PZM
zoning; Excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan.
-5-
CHAPTER 10
1 r •PZ -RESIDENTIAL- i 'PZ -MTX D" ZONING DISTRICTS
SECTION:
10-1: Purpose
10-2: General Description
10-7: PZ -R, Permitted Uses
10-4: PZ -R, Permitted Accessory Uses
10-5: PZ -R, Conditional Uses
10-6: PZ -M, Permitted Uses
10-7: PZ -M, Permitted Accessory Uses
10-5: PZ -M, Conditional Uses
10-9: Procedure
10-10: Compliance
b
10-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of the -PZ-, Performance Zoning
Districts are to allow for development flexibility
and special design control within sensitive areas
of the City due to environmental or physical limitations.
The Performance Zoning Districts also attempt to
create a reasonable balance between the interest
of the property owner in freely developing his property,
and at the same time protect the Interest of surrounding
properties in the following ways:
(A) By encouraging,a more creative approach in
commercial and'housing developments, that
will result in Quality living environments
through innovative design and aesthetic controls;
(B) By permitting a combination of housing types
and styles, including single family, two family,
and multiple 'family dwellings, with the exception
of mobile homes;
i
(C) By allowing flexibility in design by permitting
cluster developments and a variety of architectural
styles and treatments;
(0) By allowing flexibility In setback and height
restrictions.
(E) By providing an efficient use of land resulting in
more coat efficient installation of utilities,
streets, and other facilities;
(r) By encouraging the preservation of common
Open spats, recreational facilities, natural
�1
features, such as woodland, wetland, and floodplain;
O
b
(c) When areas are to be preserved by the
developer the City may require that such
areas be fenced during construction to
assure that equipment will not damage
preservation areae.
10-6: PERPORMANCE TONE - MUM ("PZ-M") PERMITTED USES: Only the
following uses are permitted Uses within a PZ-M District:
"PZ-MIEED ZONING DISTRICT"
(A) These uses listed as permitted uses within
the "R-3" Zoning District oubject to the standards
contained therein.
(S) Club or Lodge without the serving of food
or beverages.
[C] Those uses that exist prior to the adoption
of this Chapter.
a
(D] A permitted use shall be regulated and controlled
by the terma, conditions, and provisions of
this Ordinance ae they pertain to an R-3 District.
10-7: PZ-M: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: Only the following
uses are permitted accessory uses within a PZ-M District.
(A) Those uses listed as permitted accessory uses
in the "R-3" Zoning District.
(8] A permitted accasory use shall be regulated
and controlled by the terms, conditions, and
provisions of thio Ordinance as they pertain
to an R-3 District.
10-8: PZ-M: CONDITIONAL USES: Only the following uses
are conditional uses in a PZ-M District.
(A) Those was listed as conditional uses in the
"R-3" Zoning District and as regulated therein
except as modified in this Chapter.
(e) Hospitals, medical offices and clinics, dental
offices and clinics, professional offices
and commercial (leased) offices (limited to
appraisers, architects, attorneys, certified
public accountants, clergyman, dentists, engineers,
manufacturers representatives, physicians,
real estate agents, and other similar was
which have no storage of merchandise, and
are service oriented with no retail sale of
1 goods on the premises), and funeral homes
and mortuaries provided that:
0
0
1. When abutting -R-1", •R-2". `R-3• or PZ -R
District, a buffer area with screening
and landscaping in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (GI - shall be erected.
ICI
Nursing Homes and similar group housing, but
not including hospitals, sanitariums or similar
institutions, provided that:
1. Side yards are double the minimum requirements
established for this District and are
acreened in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 IGI of this Ordinance.
2. One (1) off-street leading space in compliance
with Chapter 3, Secion 6 of this Ordinance
is installed.
01
Parking Facilities for adjacent commercial
or multiple dwelling establishments provided
that:
1. Screening of abutting residential uses
and landscaping is provided in compliance
with Chapter 3, Section 2 IGI of this
ordinance.
(E)
Retail commercial activities as listed in
Chapter 12, Section 2, of this Ordinance, (w'cla rat .t4
provided thatr ') J
• a�+n�t�rx)
1. Merchandise is sold at retail only.
2. The procedures outlined hereinafter are
compiled with in full.
IP1
Buildings combining residential and non-residential
uses allowed in this district provided that:
1. Residential and non-residential uses shall
not be contained on the same floor.
2. The procedureo outlined hereinafter are
complied with in full.
IGI
Senior oitiaen housing provided that:
1. Nojmore than ten (10) percent of the
occupants may be persons sixty (60) years
of age or under (spouse of a person over
sixty (60) years of age or caretakera. eta.).
2. incept for caretaker units. occupancy
shall be limited to man and wife, blood
relatives, or a single man or single woman.
0
w
3.
To continue to quality for the senior
citizen housing classification the owner
or agent sha11 annually file with the
City Adm•^_istrator or the Building Inspector
a certified copy of a monthly resume of
occupants of auch a multiple dwelling.
listing the number of tenants by age and
clearly identifying and Betting forth
the relationship of occupants sixty (60)
years of age or under to qualified tanants,
or to the building.
4.
One (1) off-street loading apace in compliance
with Chapter 3, Section 6 of this Ordinance
is installed.
3.
8levator service is provided to each floor
level.
G.
Usable open apace as defined in Chapter 2,
Section 2 of this Ordinance, at a minimum,
Is equal to twenty (20) percent of the
gross lot area. .
7.
The site of the main entrance of the principal
use is served or is located within four
hundred (400) Leet of regular transit
`
service.
8.
The site of the main entrance of the principal
use is wit4tin tour hundred (400) feet
of commercial shopping development or
adequate provision for access to such
facilities is provided.
(8I private clubs and lodges serving food and
beverages provided that:
1.
Such use shall be restricted to ...bars
!
and their guests.
2.
Adequate dining room, kitchen, and bar
space must be provided according to standards
Imposed on similar unrestricted customer
operations. The serving of alcoholic
beverages to members and their guests
shall be allowed, providing that such
service is in compliance with applicable
rederal. State and Municipal regulations.
3.
Offices of such use shall be limited to
no more than twenty (20) percent of the
gross floor aru of the principal structure.
w
APARTMENT DENSITY BONUS: When multiple family
structures of tan (10) units or more are approved
a M-10- of tan (10) percent reduction in
the lot area par unit as regulated in Chapter 3,
Section 6 may be allowed. The reduction in
lot area shall be determined based upon the
_.following table:
Condition To Earn Bonus Lot Area Reduction (per unit)
1. Type two (2) construction. 100 of.
2. Elevator serving each floor. 50 of.
3. Transit service available within three
hundred (300) feet of the entrance. 50 of.
d. Two-thirds (2/3) of the required
fee free parking underground
or within principal structure
! (not including attached or
detached garages). 150 of.
5. Indoor recreation and social
rooms equal to twenty-five
(25) square feet per unit
or seven -hundred -fifty (750)
square fact total, whichever
in greater. 50 of.
6. major outdoor recreation
facilities such as swimming
Pools. tennis courts or
similar facilities requiring
a substantial investment
equaling at minimum five
(5) percent of the construction
cost of the principal structure. 20 of.
' IJ1 FINDINIGS OF PACT: Prior to granting of a
Conditional use permit the City Planning Commincion
and City Council shall make the following
findings of fact. In the event that the applicant
shall submit insufficiant materiels for the
City to make informed findings of fact the
City Staff and Planning Commission shall request
additional information pursuant to Chaptar 22
of this ordinance.
1. The proposed project is consistent with
the Spirit and intens of the lbnticello
Comprehensive Plan goals and policies
end in keeping with the intent of the
Moatieallo Zoning Ordinance.
O
2.
The proposed project is consistent with the
purpose of the performance Zoning Ordinance
outlined Section 1 this
as of Chapter.
` 3.
The proposed project will not have any
adverse impacts sa outlined in Chapter 22
of this Ordinance.
6.
The proposed project shall meet minimum
screening and landscaping requirements
as outlined in Chapter 3, Section 2 [G].
S.
The proposed project shall provide adequate
parking pursuant to Chapter 1, Section S
of this Ordinance and off-street loading
pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 6 of this
Ordinance.
6.
The proposed project shall provide a elder
range of housing types, price ranges,
and styles within the communtiy.
7.
The proposed project will provide amenities
and facilities and open spaces greater
than the minimum requirements under alternative
toning.
8.
The proposed project shall in no way be
detrimental to the environment. Scenic
aspects and natural features, such as
atreams, trees, topography, and gaological
features, shall be protected and preserved
to the greatest extant possible.
9.
The proposed project shall not rose
any undue burden upon the public services
and facilities, such as fire, police,
`
schools, streete,water, sanitary sewer.
and storm sewer.
10.
The proposed project is designed in such
a manner to form a desirable and unified
environment within its own boundaries,
and also which will not be detrimental
to future land uses in the surrounding
art". Architecture and site treatments
shall be compatible with adjacent structures
and site plans and shall respect the privacy
of neighboring homes and/or businesses.
11.
findings of fact submitted by the planning
Commission to the City Council shall address
additional requirements necessary to make
the project In compliance with this Chapter
In all areas where the planning Commission
feels the proposed project is lacking.
16
0
Variance from these guidelines may be permitted
when site specific conditions and specific
proposal elements show that a strict interpretation
of the guidelines will either place undue
hardship on the developer or will be detrimental
to adjacent properties. In no case shall
standards be reduced so that the findings
of fact outlined above cannot be achieved
AND in no case shall the guidelines prevent
the City from reQuiring greater standards
when specific conditions outlined above must
be satisfied.
1. Setback Guidelines
(a) The following guidelines shall serve
as a starting point in the discussion
of setbacks of structures from property
lines and existing adjacent structures.
The following table represents guidelines
for aide yard setbacks for principal
structures based on the type of proposed
structures as well as the adjacent.
use.
P
PROPOSED USE
S.F. LESS THAN LESS THAN MORE THAN
9 UNITS 9 UNITS 9 UNITS
W B.F. 10 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. 23 FT.
I LESS THAN
�1 S UNITS 15 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. 20 FT.
q LESS THAN
n 9 UZ11TS 20 FT. 20 FT. 20 FT. 20 FT.
MRS THAN
9 UNITS 20 FT. 20 FT. 20 FT. 25 FT.
(b) Sita specific conditions such as
topography, asisting and proposed
vegetation, and visibility from other
propartiss may warrant increasing
Lhasa standards. Setback& shall
not be reduced below those sat forth
in the applicable zoning district.
(c)• The front yard guidelines shall be
as described in Chapter I, Section 2
of this ordinance.
(d) The raar yard setback shall be 70 •
feat unless natural topography &hall
dictate a greater setback. The applicant
shall preserve vegetation and mknlmize
grading to the extent that consideration
is given t0 ChaN features. O
S
1
IKI STANDARDS: Except as specifically provided
herein, there shall be no fixed standards
for conditional uses within the Mixed Performance
Zoning District. In their review the City
Met' take into account standards that are
contained in other sections of this Ordinance
that moat closely resemble those that would
apply to a similar use if it were proposed
in a district other then the Performance Zone.
(L] PROJECT REVM PROCESS: The following are
guidelines for reviewing projects within the
PZ -Mixed Zoning District. Procedures for
the review of such proposals shall be as outlined
in,* the PDD section of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance. The City Staff and Planning Commission
shall review the project and give recommendations
so as to permit the City Council to make informed
findings of fact as outlined above. Variance
from these guidelines may be permitted when
site specific conditions and specific proposal
elements show that a strict interpretation
fo the guidelines will either place undue
hardship on the developer or will be detrimental
to adjacent properties. In no case shall standards
be reduced so that the findings of fact outlined
above can not be achieved AND in no case Shall
the guidelines prevent the City from requiring
greater standards when specific conditions
oulined in above must be satisfied.
1. Setback Guidelines
(a) Setback requirements shall be based
upon the zoning requirements of the
District for which the project would
be zoned if conventional zoning was
applied, as described in Chapter 3.
Section ] of this Ordinance.
(b) Site specific conditions such as
topography. existing and proposed
vegetation, and visibility from other
Properties may warrant increasing
these standards. Setbacks should
not be reduced below those not forth
in the applicable toning district.
(o) The front yard guidelines shall be
as described in Chapter 3, section 3
of the ordisance.
(d) The rear yard setback shall he as •
described in Chapter 7, section 7
of this Ordinanceunlessnatural topography shall
dictate a greater setback. The applicant
shall preserve vegetation and minimise
grading to the extent that consideration is O
given to these futures.
�i
(a) When projects Propose to construct
more than site principal structure
on the same lot the above guidelines
shall apply to the Perimeter of the
site. Internal setbacks shall give
due regard to such consideration
As lire Protection and public safety,
traffic .visibility at circulation
Satersactions. Reduction of internal
I
standards shall be permitted if the
applicant can demonstrate that external
setbacks are adequate and that the
reduction is used to anhanca the
layout or shall preserve significant
natural features.
I
T. Density Requirements
(a) Density calculations shall be based
on the zoning requirements of the
district the project would be zoned
for if conventional zoning were applied.
(b) In applying theta standards credits
for innovative construction methods
or provision of amenities above normal
construction may be permitted. The
following is a list of density credits.
L. Underground Parking -400 sq. ft. per apace
provided under the
structure.
Ii. Preservation of
Natural reaturos - When the project will
preserve significant
natural features the
area preserved may be
deducted from the required
lot area. This deduction
shall not include required
setbacks.
iii. Additional
Landscaping - When the Project provides
for landscaping above and
beyond the normal requirement
a density allowance shall
be permitted. She extentof
the credit shall be determined
by evaluating the visibility
of the project from adjacent
parcels and similar projects
within the City.
(c) Negative Credits
'
L. Under special conditions the
City may consider requiring additional
area requirements to ensure the
preservation of significant natural
site featuroo, when utility demands
will place a burden on public
facilities, when projected traffic
counts are greater than the carrying
capacity of the surrounding transportation
system.
11. When imposing negative credits
the city shall base such determination
on studies prepared by qualified
profeasional City Staff or consultants.
When such conditions may warrant
the Staff shall direct the applicant
to have prepared such studies
that will demonstrate that these
issues will in fact not cause
a negative impact to the health,
safety, and general welfare of
the City. Should the planning
Commission or the City Council
feel that these issues have not
been properly addressed they
shall withhold any approval until
l such time as the applicant or
City Staff has prepared necessary
studies.
0
iv. Unable Recreation
Space When the project provides
usable recreational open
space above the normal
requirement that area
may also be deducted from
the lot area requirement.
V. Innovative Housing - When the project shall
propose Innovative housing
opportunities a reduction
of the site requirements
may be permitted. Such
Innovation must be demonstra,
such that this type of
housing would not be feasibl
without a density credit.
llnancial feasibility
alone shall not be considers
unless the applicant can
+ demonstrate that the honing
will benefit low and/or
moderate income households.
(c) Negative Credits
'
L. Under special conditions the
City may consider requiring additional
area requirements to ensure the
preservation of significant natural
site featuroo, when utility demands
will place a burden on public
facilities, when projected traffic
counts are greater than the carrying
capacity of the surrounding transportation
system.
11. When imposing negative credits
the city shall base such determination
on studies prepared by qualified
profeasional City Staff or consultants.
When such conditions may warrant
the Staff shall direct the applicant
to have prepared such studies
that will demonstrate that these
issues will in fact not cause
a negative impact to the health,
safety, and general welfare of
the City. Should the planning
Commission or the City Council
feel that these issues have not
been properly addressed they
shall withhold any approval until
l such time as the applicant or
City Staff has prepared necessary
studies.
0
E. Surrounding Property Owners: Surrounding
property owners shall be notified in writing
of any proposed developments. Applicants
shall be encouraged to suet with property
owners prior to public hearings or when
ever such a meeting will allow better
involvement of neighbors in the review
process. while complete consent of adjacent
property owners shall not be mandatory
for approval of projects developed under
the PZ -Mined Zoning. involvement
with adjacent owners shall be encouraged
through all steps within the approval
process.
6. Sub -'salon Requirements, Amendments and
Special Requirements:
(a) All applicants shall submit final
building plans plans to the City prior
to the granting of permits. No changes
to the plans shall be permitted without
consent from.the City Council. All
requirements as a condition of approval
shall be addressed in the final development
agreement and indicated on all appropriate
plans. City Staff shall inspect
the work during construction to assuro
that such plans are followed.
(b) The C>,ty Council may at its discretion
place special requirements that will
ensure the complete construction
of all requirements. Such conditions
may include Performance bonds, time
limitations for commencement of the
work, and limitations on the hours
of construction.
(c) when areae are to be preserved by
the developer the City may require
that such areae be fenced during
construction to assure that equipment
will not damage preservation era".
10-9: PROCBOQRES: Applicants requesting a conditional
use permit shams submit plans, specifications, and
other materials as outlined in Chapter 20 of this
Ordinance. Application procedures shall be defined
pursuant to provisions contained in Chapter 20, Section 4.
of this Ordinance.
10-10: COMPLIANCE: No development shall occur, nor shall
any building permits be issued for any construction,
that is not in accord with the approved final pians.
0.,
low
l : �
EXCERPT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
I
COM4fERCIAL POLICIES
1. Commercial development in general and successful retailing fff
functions should occur both in the central business district and
the shopping center area contiguous to Interstate 96.
1 f
2.
The Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other measures
and procedures will be modified in realistic recognition of the
needs of contemporary commercial enterprises and the need to
/)cs�
0-1
properly control such enterprises at the local community levell
commercial development policy will not be rigid and inflexible,
and neither shall it be indiscriminately permissive.
3.
Adequate provision should be made for expansion of suitable
areas for highway oriented commercial development requiring
Large acreages for use such as motels, auto and implement
dealerships, and lumber and building supply yards. These uses
should be encouraged to develop in new locations along
Interstate 94 at Highway 23.
4.
The location of new shopping areas should be justified by an
A
adequate market study (market radius, customer potential,
P
suitable location in the market radius, etc.) and consideration
for the neighborhood, land use, and circulation pattern.
S.
Commercial areas should be as compact as possible. Compact
areae are particularly advantageous for retail uses,
�I/recommercial
as they concentrate shopping and parking. A community is
i""y
benefited by reducing exposure to residential areae and having a
`
better control over parking and traffic needs. for this reason,
'strip* and 'spot" commercial development should not be
permitted.
6.
Highway oriented uses along Interstate 91 should be concentrated
a
to the greatest extent possible so as not to waste prima
commercial land nor spread the uses so as to not be definable as
a 'viable commercial area*.
7.
Future commercial areae should be based upon the concept of the
integrated business center developed according to a specific
site plan and justified by an economic analysis of the area to
be served.
8.
A11 major commercial areas shall be pre -zoned based upon the
Comprehensive Plan. No areas shall be ce-zoned to commercial
N q
use unless they are shown to be propeely located in accordance
with the policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan.
9.
Boundaries of commercial districts shall be well-defined so as
prevent intrusion into residential areaas residential areas
I
�JAIto
Ce'
must be properly screened from the associated ill effects of
adjacent and nearby commercial area.
-as-
s
Central Business District Policies
1.
The Central Business District along County Highway 75 and Walnut
Street should be further developed to de-emphasize through
traffic in favor of emphasizing convenience and safety for the -;
shopping public. Development of aesthetically desirable
N
conditions should be accomplished through the addition of new _
paved surfaces, landscaping, better lighting, benches,
fountains, canopies, and other street furniture to provide a
V;
more attractive environment for the pedestrian and shopper.
2.
The downtown should be as compact and intensively developed as
e y
possible.
3.
The retailing component should be tightly nucleated and
all-weather connection (interior and exterior) between stores
should be provided.
!.
Consistent designs for street furniture, informational signs,
street lighting, and landscaping should be developed to make the
downtown appear mote unified. The City will work with private
enterprise to encourage consistency in other areas of appearance
and design.
5.61r.-ne major flow of vehicular traffic should be around the area -
not through it.
\
6.
Pedestrian circulation within the downtown must be emphasized.
Pedestrian access from parking areae to the retail center must
be free from unnecessary conflict with vehicular traffic.
7.
)adequate oft-street parking should be provided to reach a
satisfactory floor area to parking area ratio and said packing
�11\
should be so located as to provide the greatest convenience to
lV
lv
cattail customers. The convenient location of customer parking
should take priority over employee parking.
B.Within
that Central Business District emphasis should Dat given to
nl�
creating additional parking rather than accommodating the
Iv
traditional through traffic movements.
9.
Parking needs should be solved on an area-wide basis and not on
a site-by-site basis. The City should play a strong role in the
determination of the packing solution.
10.
The core area should be surrounded by activities that complement
those in the retail Cote, itselti such activities include
�v
institutions, sdcvice industry, automotive services, medium to
high density houiing, and the like.
_ V,
1� j•' �' /••/j�•?„���'• _ A rezoning request to rezone
' �` - R / �; residential unplatted property
`F it -3 (medium density residential)
rformanoe zone mixed).
ies.
c�_
?+.��• rr .�./ '` ., AcG'' ,, •,x
`W
,t.Ot..
�.
19 r
01
IA
I \\1
Planning commission Agenda - 5/2/89
6. Public Bears - A variance re%uest to allow 1) a parking lot to be
constructed Rtnin the 5 -toot curt) Darrier to Lot line requirement{ and
21 to allow a arlvewag curD cut to us In excess or the z4 -root maximum
allowed. Applicant, 3 6 K Properties. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AMID BACKGRDUND:
J 6 K Properties to back before you with variance requests on their
proposed parking lot layout for the employee parking lot. The public
hearing notice shored there were two variance requests that are being
requested[ and in reality, it is only the first request listed as fl in
the public hearing notice, and that to to be allowed to construct a
parking lot within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot line requirement, as
the driveway as shown is at the maximum allowed, a 24 -foot driveway curb
cut. To lay out a parking lot on a standard original city lot, 66 x 165,
will require some type of variances to lay out a parking lot within this
lot site arrangement. In this case, the applicant is requesting to be
allowed to construct the parking lot right up to the property line on the
east and south sides of the property and allow a 3 -1/2 -foot separation
between the curb and the property line on the west side of the property.
The ordinance requires a 5 -foot separation curb barrier to lot line
requirement. The proposed layout as presented does meet the rest of the
minimnorequirements of the ordinance in regards to the parking lot
layout.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the variance request to allow a parking lot to be constructed
within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot line requirement.
2. Deny the variance request to allow a parking lot to be constructed
within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot line requirement.
C. STAFF WOOKKENDATION:
City staff members have reviewed the enclosed site plan for the Haus Food
employee parking lot. The layout for the employee parking lot does meet
the minimum requirements of our ordinance, with the exception of the
5 -foot curb barrier to lot line requirement on the east, south, and west
aides of the parking lot. The design of the parking lot also includes
the short section of proposed storm sewer to catch the water runoff from
this proposed parking lot and directed to a mein city storm sewer line.
D. 80PPDRTIM DATA:
Oopy of the location of the proposed variance request[ Copy of the site
plan for the proposed variance request[ Copy of section of ordinance
pertaining to variance request.
-6.
A variance request to allow
.,;;t,"1 "••M�t %. f /w = (� ' • - t) a parking lot to be constructed
^: ,•/ ��1'/.+��» �. 1��/ : l� R` within the 5 -foot curb barrier
r•�,'r`v'J 1 .. /i: • , t ,l , j+ of line requirement:
i) 'EVlow, a driveway curb
cut to be n excess of the
r 24 last maAmum allowed.
;�� "; 1 r`i j ,r�,t. t 'tr . •.�`t�r> ' Props aa.
NO
•may �..0 � � . t � � �/ �� � r`••./ . ' tt
i •rl '1(M � � � . e C. E)M...•� e�nt I •+►1RR, � l,�•,
■
C
►�--� r`...c.:y 1, E � eatt` - I I - f ' �, • . �
- \\J
,i ; e��i. � .11c chi � .� ,•
E:
1.
i
Except in the case of single family
and two family dwellings, driveways
and stalls shall be surfaced with
�- six (5) inch class five base and two (2)
inch bituminous topping or concrete
equivalant. Plana for surfacing and
drainage or driveways and stalls for
five (5) or more vehicles ah -1 1 be
submitted to the City Engineer for
his review and the final drainage
plan shall be subject to his written
approval.
(1) STRIPING: Except for single, two
family and townhouses, all perking
stalls shall be marked with white
painted lines not leas than four (t)
inches wide.
(m) LIGH2MG: Any lighting used to illuminate
an off-street parking area shall be
so arranged as to reflect the light
away from adjoining property, abutting
residential uses and public right-of-ways
and be in compliance with Chapter 7,
Section 2, (G) and (R) of this Ordinance.
(n) SIGNS: No sign shall be so located
as to restrict the eight lines and
orderly operation and traffic movement
within any parking lot.
I
L`:G AND UUMSCAPING: Except forle, two family and townhouses, \open off-street parking shall a perimeter curb barrier aroundentire parking lot, said curbier shall not be closer than five (5) to any lot line. Grass, plantingsurfacing material shall be providedllaresa bordering the parking.
(p) REQUIRED SCREVING: ALL open, non-reoidential,
off-street parking areas of five (5)
or more spaces shall be screened and
•Landscaped from abutting or surrounding
risidentlal districts in compliance
with Chapter 1, Section 2 of this
Ordinance.
If
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
7. Public Hearing - A variance recpest to allow a parking lot expansion to
be constructed within the 5-fooE curb barrier to lot (fine requirement.
Applicant, J B R Properties. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AMID BACKGROUND:
Maus Foods is proposing to expand their parking lot on the east side of
their parking lot going into the green area on the east aide up to their
property line. By ordinance, we require a 5 -foot separation from
property line to the curb. To accommodate the creation of this
additional parking lot expansion, the applicant is proposing all compact
spaces along this row of parking, which would be 7-1/2 feet by
16-1/2 feet in size. With the remaining balance of their parking lot,
the applicant is proposing to restripe their parking spaces to
accommodate approximately a 22 -foot driving lane between parking stalls
rather than the minimum as required by ordinance today, which is a
24 -foot minimum driving aisle width.
In looking at our minimum driving aisle width requirement of 24 feet, we
are finding that the newer vehicles that are constructed today are
shorter in length, therefore, not needing a total width of 24 feet to
work in the maneuvering in and out of a parking space. We propose to do
further research and check with other communities on their current
ordinance in regards to parking aisle widths.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the variance requests to allow a parking lot expansion to be
constructed within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot line requirement.
2. Deny the variance request to allow a parking lot expansion to be
constructed within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot line requirement.
C. STAFF RECOMMMATION:
City staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow a parking
lot expansion to be constructed within the 5 -foot curb barrier to lot
line requirement. With the expansion of this perking lot, the easterly
row of this parking lot will be for compact parking spaces only and will
be signed accordingly. City staff will also be researching the parking
lot driving aisle width, which currently is a 24 -foot minimum width. In
researching that, if we feel it is necessary to cam up with an ordinance
amendment for that, we will be beck to you at a future meeting with this
information.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed variance request) Copy of the site
plan for the proposed variance request) Copy of the City ordinance
section an parking lot requirements.
.7-
A variance request to allow a parking
lot expansion to be constructed
within the 5 -foot curb barrier
to lot line requirement.
r Properties.
-N,
ell,
C
R_ L-1
i ice.
WD• I I - S i� T 4; n a 1 xf' ani
J, —L4 t�.• �.. I v.. a�-. �qw• � v-• tw v-. 7.Y w-. �s.. ' b.. � �... •1 •:�pr•... �w
I
TOTAL VARKMO: 183 CARS
lb.
__.__. ..._�C.11i..AMM) �.��..�: _ � �LrC: N�AiY NI►d, 1 L � pl
� tt D�irl ✓t [
sl _. SIXTH STREET --
--� Except in the case of single family
and two family dwellings, drivevays
and stalls shall be surfaced with
Six (6) inch class five base and two (2)
inch bituminous topping or concrete
equivalent. Plans for surfacing and
drainage of driveways and stalls for
five (9) or more vehicles shall be
submitted to the City Engineer for
his review and the final drainage
plan shall be subject to his written
approval.
(1) STRIPING: Except for single, tvo
family and townhouses, all parking
stalls shall be marked with white
painted lines not less than four (6)
inches wide.
(m) LIGHTING: Any lighting used to illuminate
an off-street parking area shall be
so arranged as to reflect the light
away from adjoining property, abutting
residential uses and public right-of-ways
and be in compliance with Chapter 7,
Section 2, [G) and (H) of this Ordinance.
(n) SIGNS: No Sign shall be So located
as to restrict the sight lines and
orderly operation and traffic movement
within any parking lot.
i
(o) CURSING AND LANDSCAPING: Except for
single, two family and townhouses, \
all open off-street parking shall
have a perimeter curb barrier around
the entire parking lot, said curb
barrier shall not be closer than five (S)
feet to any lot line. Grass, plantings
or surfacing mmterial'shall be provided
in allareau bordering the parking
area.
(p) REQUIRED SCREENING: All open, non-residential,
off-street parking areas of five (S)
or more spaces shall be screened and
-landscaped from abutting or surrounding
residential districts in compliance
with Chapter 2, Section 2 of this
Ordinance.
e
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
8. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow an additional drivewa curb
cut witnin i2S feet of street frontage. Applicant, First National Bank.
First National Bank is proposing to install an additional curb cut on the
north side of their property immediately west of their existing curb cut
driveway entrance. The applicant has seen the need in the expansion of
the business at the First National Bank to increase additional parking
spaces and also to create an additional driveway to further facilitate
the parking driving circulation within their parking lot. As you will
note on the enclosed site plan, the new driveway curb cut is proposed to
be 10 feet from the northwest corner of their parking lot. This is
designed to encourage an "enter only" in this area to facilitate using
the drive -up facilities which are located to the south part of their
building. On the far south end of their property, they are proposing to
Install 13 additional parking spaces to be utilized by their employees.
Up near the northeast corner of their property, they are proposing to
install four additional parking stalls. With the location of the
proposed new driveway curb cut, it does fall within the minimum amount of
125 feet of street frontage for an additional driveway curb cut.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the variance request to allow an additional driveway curb cut
within 125 feet of street frontage.
2. Deny the variance request to allow an additional driveway curb cut
within 125 feet of street frontage.
C. STAPP RBOOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow the
second driveway curb cut within the 125 feet of street frontage which is
required. With the additional driveway curb cut, it will improve the
driving/parking circulation within this existing parking lot and also
possibly alleviate some congestion problems at our West Fourth Street/
Pine Street intersection.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed variance request: Copy of the new
site plan for the variance request] Copy of the existing site plan for
the First National Banks Copy of the ordinance section dealing with the
125 feet of street frontage.
-s-
A variance request to allow an
additional driveway curb cut within
•,` N i'/II _ 125 fact of street frontage.
First National Hank.
All
�'� �, "tel "v:7 ,,. "°'"GY : `' F • ��
a.
c�
H/CPVW4)- /�I•' ` j/: r!/ l �'
I Tip,
17
�• � :r•a•• i • y ' ♦ Haus d'g� �i , 1 . t
• ,,,•war: t -. __ C � \ \
a
' > '", `•itit. �. 9='it.
' � '.� �. 1• ��'�.-..Vr"•.. r.'aM ::'g�ce`C'�,',y ::,,...y_�:..:�'/•���«. .•r.'.+'�:-,.
ix6Ta.hi�%
`�' � � '" -fes'• •�.
ZZAS
.� fir' ... - � \ _ •4 �. �:� '���4•� :� `' ,l•
1 •)3 .STALt� �•.4v., a;�.. _� •�•it �•.:'� ti �.. :.�l�:.:"t.:
n
0
Except in the case of single, two
family and townhouse dwellings, parking
area design which requires backing
into the public street is prohibited.
(d) No curb cut access shall be located
lass than forty (40) feet from the
intersection of two (2) or more street
right-of-vays. This distance shall
be measured from the intersection
of lot lines.
(e) Except in the case of single family,
two family and townhouse dwellings,
parking areas and their aisles shall
be developed in compliance with the
following sandards:
• WALL WALL TO I:ITERW= TO
TO INTERL04= L`ITER14=
AXL3 MINIMOM MINLCr4 MINIMM
70 48.6' 44.5' . 40.3-
45 56.8- 53.41 50.0-
60 62.01 59.71 57.4-
90 64.0- 64.0' 64.0- '
Parallel parking : Twenty-two (22) feat in length.
(f) No curb cut access shall exceed twenty-four (24)
fast in width.
(9) Curb cut openings and driveways shall
be at a minimum three (7) feet from
the side yard property line in residential
districts and five (5) feet from the
side yard lot line in busineas or
industrial districts.
(h) Driveway access curb openings an a
public street except for single, two
family and townhouse dwellings shall
not be located loco than forty (40)
feet from one mother.
(S) The grade elevation of any parking
area shall not exceed five (5) percent.
(J) Each property shall be allowed one (1) curb cut per
one hundred twenty-five (125) feet
Of street frontage. All property
shall be entitled to at least one (1)
curb cut. single family uses shall be limited
to one (1) curb cut access par property.
(k) sORSACINO: All areas intended to
be utilized for parking space and
driveways shall be surfaced with materials
suitable to control dust sad drainage.
Planning Commission Agenda - 5/2/89
l9. Public Hearing_- A conditional use request to allow expansion of an open
ana outdoor storage as an accessory use in a B -a trj% onai ousiness)
zone. A omwitionai use request to allow an e3nnsion or o� ana
outaoor sales as a princepam ana_accessor� use in a a -a iregiFrmi
business) zone. AppllcanE, Pair -s Garoen Center. (J.0.)
A. REPERMiCE AND BAS:
At the time of this writing, we have not received sufficient information
from the applicant regarding these conditional use requests.
D. DATA:
Oopy of March 23, 1989, letter sent to Revin Pair requesting information
by Monday, April 181 Copy of conditional use request.
-9-
city 4 In. -ti..".
MONTICELLO, MN 55362.9248
i _-
Nn (612)295-V11 March 23, 1989
Amu o (612)333,%M
250 east Broaerar
Aamacauo. tatmaaoo
663a2.9246
D
MrKevin Fair
Alve On,nto,n
Pair's Garden Center
201 East Broadway
Fran Fair
P.O. Box 746
Wi"La,n Farr
Monticello, MN 55362
wturen S,nun
Dear Mr. Fair:
""'nor'
�t�
It has coma to our attention that you have purchased Lots 6, 7, 8,
AcImmisinnd
and 9, Block B, for the purpose of providing additional sales and/or
W- o a zon"W.
storage area associated with the operation of Fair's Garden Center.
»nO'Nem
It Is my duty to inform you that utilization of Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9
roncworkr.
as an "accessory" use as described requires that you obtain a
John SIRWO
conditional use permit as outlined in 14-4: (Al and (B) of the
a �+e
ce
Monticello Zoning Ordinan.
—01horale D'^1 —ot
KoropOtak
The City requests that you caWlete the attached application for a
conditional use permit and supply the following information as part
of your application. Staff will be reviewing the information to
determine to what degree the use of Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9 as
atorage/solea area le consistent with the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. After reviewing the information with you, a plan for
future action will be established designed to address any potential
areas of non-compliance. It to planned that your conditional use
permit application will be addressed at the Planning Colmiission
Meeting of May 2, 1989.
Following is information that the City would like you to submit to
the City by Monday, April 18, 1989.
1. Completed application form.
2. Site plan to include plan for entire area encompassing
Lots 1-9. Site plan to include location and dimensions of
the following !terns:
a. All etructures, including main business structure,
garages, reaidences, etc.
b. Storage structures, including storage bins.
c. Outside galea area.
250 east Broaerar
Aamacauo. tatmaaoo
663a2.9246
D
i
1
Mr. Kevin Pair
Match 23, 1989
Page 2
d. outside storage area, types of materials stored.
e. Proposed or existing screening fence or landscaping.
f. Parking area. Please outline parking spaces.
Sincerely,
� Ia
Je O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
JOAd
cc: Ken Maus
Pran Pair
Tom Hayes
Pile _ '
EO
NZ1.11. t1CAlflft6 Al"Lilyllutr
C-.,:,T or xcW11^_1_tz
TYPO Of HEARING:
�COHOITIOHAL USE - fee $129.00 + expenses.
C]REZONIHG - fat $290.00 + all necessary consul.tiag expenses.
�YAAIAHCE -•fee $_90.00_ for setbacks or $125.00 Lor others + expenses.
fee 1
❑0THE3 -1-25-Az
APPltcaet(s):
'Applicant ($) address: ,'l0/ fwft RROA�r7�+
Appltcant( s) phone(s): Home: �29S-tAft 7/t n
0fce:',�f5— ��1y
Address of property: -1 qq fAf/ynlh4�iw?_"
Legal description of property; Lots/421-f Eloek %1' Subdivision OP,*C;ro./t�V
Sec at:a
Currently Zoned: /�Proposed toning; 6-y
flames of property owners within 7:0''feet: [ See attac:led
Phase eaplaIn the reason for the Public Has ring roque::: Li�tu rPow;gye ,.+
•� 5�2 poi .' .4.y/l� �� w//� i7oo�, .�.�/ Qu�.�aa ri.Gor .ir. a �-��Irao„�.i,i/
�,. riNl r r ) 201/t. -
•:(te of plat to be sutdlv(ded: acres
...Ime ot firm• re;artng subdivIstan plat.
i ate4_1l-Y% Igned
................................:5................... ............................
- - - - -((or City use only).' _
tato application raceiveds Aueoipc aluewrs
I _ �,
Oat• of Public Hearing at the rl&nninq Cormiuloni S/��w' ' 2Lsa I -7.3Q/. /,7
Ouci cion of Planning Co•eission
I Leo at taCh�ti
It a variance: was Cher. an App.a17 O Teel C]la.al tf *,attach ♦ copy of one Appeal.
Ilatu of Counall considerations 3Arleq CLas s 71 T(V o1`7%%%
tleclsion of the Councils '
I See attached
l'ui.nu at a I ,
s � $ee ae:aehed•
uatu -it pubticatLonl *&Ctftlt971= (attach a copy of the public ,tearing not,col
r Wtr ..t naLlingt at//7 An, (attaeha copy of the &(,,davit of aullln;)
n
I
A
MEMO
TO: THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: OLLIE [OROPCHAR, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR P'1
DATE: THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1989
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A NOTICE FOR THE CITY'S JOINT
GOVERNMENTAL UNITS MEETING.
At the Industrial Development Committee's April meeting,
the members targeted Monday. June 5, 1989 as the date for
the point meeting between the Planning Commission, the
Mousing and Redevelopment Authority, the Economic Devel—
opment Authority, the Industrial Development Committee,
the City Council, and the City Staff. As you may recall,
a similiar meeting was held last June at the Fire Rall
and the response received from the participants was
positive. The intent of the meeting is to encourage
cooperative efforts between the local governmental unite
which will enhance the future of the City of Monticello.
Please consider the date, June S, respond and/or place It
on your calendar. Although, the time and place was not
established I'm assuming an ovaning meeting at the Fire
Nall. You will receive a notice and agenda prior to
the meeting.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Ass