Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda Packet 01-12-1988AGENDA REGULAR !MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 12, 1988 - 7:30 p.m. Members: Richard Carlson, Jim Ridgeway, Joyce Dowling, Cindy Lamm, Richard Martie 7:30 p.m. 1. Call to Order. 7:32 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held December 8, 1987. 7:34 p.m. 3. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow outdoor sales in a B-3 (highway business) zone. Applicant, Monticello Housing and RV Center, Inc. 7:49 p.m. 4. Tabled request for a preliminary plat review of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, Charles Ritze. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS 8:14 p.m. 1. A conditional use request to allow auction sales in a B-3 (highway business) zone. Applicant, Martie's Farm Service. Council Action: Approved as per Planning Co®aission , recommendation. 8:16 p.m. 2. A variance request to allow construction of a building addition within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant, American Legion Post #260. Council Action: Acknowledged Planning Commission's recommendation but approved the applicant's variance request. 8:18 p.m. 3. A request for final plat review of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, City of Monticello. Council Action: No action necessary, as it was tabled by the Planning Commission. 8:20 p.m. 4. City of Monticello Annexation Update. 8:30 p.m. S. Set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commircion meeting for February 9, 1988, 7:30 p.m. 8:32 p.m. 6. Adjournment. I MnAYTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, December 8, 1987 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Richard Carlson, Cindy Lem, Richard Martie. Members Absent: Joyce Dowling, Jim Ridgeway. Staff Present: Gary Anderson 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at 7:32 p.m. Motion was made by Cindy Lama, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held November 10, 1987. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Hearin- A conditional use request to allow auction sales in a B-3 (nlgnway Lsiness) zone. Applicant, Martle-s Farm Service. Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, indicated to Planning Commission members Mr. Martie's request to have an auction sale on the site of his existing business, Martle's Farm Store. Mr. Martie would like to conduct auction sales one or two times per month over the next couple of months. Mr. Lloyd Scheeler, auctioneer, was present to represent Mr. Martie's conditional use request. Mr. Scheeler indicated the hay and straw auctions which are proposed to be held at Martie's Farm Service site would usually begin on or around the last week in November and end approximately the first week in March. Depending on how the sales go, the sales will usually be held once or twice a month. Zoning Administrator Anderson explained to Planning Commission members that not all of the conditions will apply in this case, as this property does not abut a residential area. However, if Marvin Elwood Road to the west of the Martie's Farm Service site does develop from a rural nature to an urban type of street, some of these conditions would then apply. With no further input from the public, motion was made by Cindy Lemm, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve the conditional use request to allow auction ogles in a 13-3 (highway business) zone. Also within the motion was that the conditional use be granted for a period of one year, at which time it would be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. Motion carried unanimously with Joyce Dowling and Jim Ridgeway absent. 0 Planning Commission Minutes - 12/8/87 Public.Hearing - A variance request to allow construction of a building acultion witnin the rront yard setback requirement. Applicant, American Legion Post #260. Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning Commission members the location of the proposed variance request on the site plan submitted. A public hearing notice stated that it would be a front yard setback, and Zoning Administrator Anderson indicated that it was a sideyard setback encroachment in that the shortest side of a building, whether it's used for the front of the building or not, is always considered the front yard. In this case, however, the front entrances to this building are in the sideyard side of the property. Discussion then centered around why the building addition footings and foundation walls have already been installed, and now the applicant is before the Planning Commission members with a variance request, kind of like putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. Zoning Administrator Anderson indicated to Planning Commission members that Mr. Rick iiolfsteller, City Administrator, had talked to Mr. Floyd Markling, representing the American Legion, indicating that Mr. Markling had gone to each of the City Council members and got their approval to commence with the construction of the building addition footings and foundation wall and did not indicate that his variance request would be approved should it tomo before the City Council at their December 14, 1987, City Council meeting. Mr. Floyd Markling, representing the American Legion, indicated that he did receive permission from each of the City Council members and also made it very clear that his intent wasn't to get started with the building addition footings and foundation wall until the request had gone before the Monticello Planning mission and/or City Council meetings. But due to the weather turning cold and the weather outlook would not improve, Mr. Markling decided to see if there was an alternate way of at least getting the building addition footings and foundation wall in. Mr. Markling did explain that should the City Council not approve his variance request that he would cover up the footings and foundation wall already installed. Planning Commission members felt very uncomfortable with the footings and foundation wall already installed and then coming before the Planning Commission members with hie request for a variance. With no further input from Planning Commission members, a motion wan made by Richard Martie, seconded by Cindy Lemur, to deny the variance request to allow construction of a building addition within the front yard setback requirement. Motion carried unanimously with Joyce Dowling and Jim Ridgeway absent.. Reason for Denial: Starting addition construction prior to Planning C—isaion meeting and failure to demonstrate the hardship for the variance. 9 Planning Commission Minutes - 12/8/87 5. Public Hearing - A request for final plat review of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, City of Monticello. Zoning Administrator Anderson explained to Planning Commission members in attendance that some conflicts arose and that the rough draft for the final plat of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition had not been completed as of the meeting date time. Planning Commission members could choose to act on the request or to table it until the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. City Public Works Director, John Simola, was present to explain'.to " Planning Commission members some of the delays which have beed-' encountered with the preparation of the final plat for this propos€d Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition subdivision plat. He indicated to Planning Commission members that he had no problem with the Planning Commission tabling this agenda item until the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. _. Therefore, motion was made by Richard Martie, seconded by Cindy L,emm, to table the request for final plat review of a proposed new subdivision plat until the next regularly scheduled meeting, Tuesday, January 12, 1988, 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously with Joyce Dowling and Jim Ridgeway absent. ` ADDITIONAL INPORMATION ITEMS 1. A request for general concept stage review of a planned unit development to be known as Highland Heights One. Applicant, Rivera Pinancial and .� Development Company. Council Action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation. 2. A request for preliminary plat review of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, Charles Ritze. Council Action: No action• necessary, as it was tabled by the Planning Conmission. . 3. A request for preliminary plat review of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, City of Monticello. Council Action: :,Approved as'per Planning Commission recommendation. 6. A sketch plan review of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, Tom Brennan. Council Action: Approved as per Planning commission recommendation. 5. Motion by Cindy Lemma, seconded by Richard Martie, to set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, January 12, 1988, 7:30 p.m. with Joyce Dowling and Jim Ridgeway absent. 6. Adjournment. Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Cindy Lemm, to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m. with Joyce Dowling and Jim Ridgeway absent. Respectfully submitted, Gert'/AnoeHim, 20ning AOministrator 3 Planning Commission Agenda - 1/12/88 3. Public Hearin- A conditional use request to allow outdoor sales in a B-3 (highway 9.siness) zone. Applicant, Monticello Housing and RV Center, Inc. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Mr. Ralph Hermes, owner of Monticello Housing and RV Cuter, Inc., is proposing to create a sales lot on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Commercial Court Addition. On these lots, Mr. Hermes would like to have parked recreational motor homes and mobile homes for display. In the enclosed supplement, you will find the conditions for outdoor rales in a B-3 (highway business) zone. Under condition number one, outside sales can only take up 30 percent of the principal ucc of the building. In Mr. Hermes case, 30 percent of the principal use of his portion of the building which he uses is approximately 600 sq ft. Thirty percent of this space in the building which P.r. Hermes has for his business would accommodate only.18 aq ft of outdoor sales lot area. Mr. Hermes is requesting to use the entire lot area on Lots 1 and 2 for his outdoor sales area. Under condition number two, outside sales areas are to be fenced or screened from the view of neighboring residential uses or abutting our zoning district. In Mr. Hermes case, we as a City staff feel unless there is definite objection from the public that Mr. Hennes not have to install solid screening or fence in the outside sales area from the view of the neighboring residential property to the northeast of Mr. Hermes business building. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the conditional use request to allow outdoor sales in a 8-3 (highway business) zone. 2. Deny the conditional use request to allow outdoor sales in a 8-3 (highway business) zone. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends approval of Mr. Hermes request to allow outdoor axles in a B-3 (highway business) zone. We also recommend that condition number one that the sales area be increased approximately 1,750 percent to utilize the entire area for Lots 1 and 2 for sales area lot. We also feel under condition number two that Mr. Hermes would not have to fence or acreen the area abutting the view of the neighboring residential property. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the location of the conditional use request# Copy of the conditions under Subsection F, Outdoor Sales. ME (F] Open or outdoor service, sale apd rental an a principal or accessory use and including sales in or from motorised vehicles, trailers or wagons provided that: 1. Outside services, sales and equipment rental connected with the principal uses is limited to thirty (70) percent of the gross floor area of the psincipal'ase. This percentage may be increased as a condition of the conditional use permit. 2. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of neighboring residential uses or abutting 'S• District in compliance with Chapter 7, Section 2 (G] of this Ordl —ce. ]. 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 residancos and shall be in compliance with Chapter 2, Section 2 [5] of this Ordinance, 4. 54108 area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. S'. Does not take up parkinq space as required for conformity to this Ordinance. 5. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this Ordinance are Considered and satisfactorily met. � L Planning 99*ission Agenda - 1/12/88 4. A tabled request for a preliminary plat-faview of a proposed new subdivision plat. Applicant, Charles Ritze..(G.A.) A. REFERENCE AMID BACKGROUND: - Mr. Ritze's preliminary plat of Ritze Maih6i Second Addition has been prepared in its entirety for your review. Mr. Ritze has run into a stalemate with the adjoining property owner to the north, Mr. Reinhold Yager, in obtaining additional easement of tAe road easement of Hilltop Drive. For the platting of a residential lot in the City of Monticello, the minimum residential lot width being 80 feet, the minimum lot frontage a residential lot can have on an abutting public right-of-way is 2/3 of the minimum lot width or 53 feet of frontage on a public right-of-way. As you will note on the enclosed preliminary plat, Mr. Ritze has only 15 feet of lot frontage on a public right -0f -wap. The stalemate between Mr. Yager and Mr: Aitze is stemming from the actual section line which is noted at the top part of this preliminary plat. Mr. Yager, when he purchased the property, was led to believe the fence which is highlighted in here was the actual. section line or his south property line. However, Mr. Dennis Taylor, Taylor Land Surveyors, the firm which is hired to do the preliminary plat 'for Mr. Ritze, has discovered that the actual section line does not run parallel with the existing fence line as Mr. Yager had indicated. With the location of this section line or northerly property line, part or parte of some of Mr. Yager's out buildings are within Mr. Rites's property. The preliminary plat for the Ritze,_Mgnpr.Second Addition is before you completed as far as it can be done.with_tbe exception of obtaining this additional public right-of-way. Mr. Ritze has no other route to go with this if there is an unwilling seller of acme property to deed back to the City for additional street right-of-way than to apply for a variance to be allowed only 15 feet of lot frontage on a public right-of-way. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the preliminary plat request for the proposed new subdivision plat. 2. Deny the preliminary plat for the proposed new subdivision plat. 3. Table the preliminary plat request for the proposed new subdivision plat. 4. Table the preliminary plat request for the proposed new subdivision and have Mr. Ritze file a variance request for the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. -2- Planning Commission Agenda - 1/12/88 C. STAFF REOOMMENDATIONs City staff recommends that you again table Mr. Ritze's preliminary plat request for a proposed new subdivision plat. And if Mr. Ritze would like to continue any further with this that he file a variance request with the Zoning Administrator and if said variance request is filed before the public hearing deadline that the variance request for less than the minimum lot frontage an a public right-of-way be heard before the lbnticel,lo Planning.Cammission at their next regularly scheduled meeting on February •4, 1988. D. a .a an...w DATA: Copy of the location of the proposed preliminary plat; Copy of the preliminary plat for Ritze !tenor Second Addition. M n -3- 1 1� A request for a preliminary plat review of a proposed 'now subdivision Plat. Charles Ritzs- _ .. r PROPOSED PREL,M/N4RY PLAT OF RITZE MANOR SECOND ADDITION PREPARED FON, CHARLES AI,I( l P—. S—f IAA,rIr wE5•DEwLrA, 1` �';�r �Y I' f / - ... ,.. � k it 7: Y.•... no, tA LOCA//ON MAP' L 11' WE ,fA Nit wu! IM(I(OS 33IN MO 049F WIVAMM, PQ IM I P9 MVOKIUD.,MIY Lo. I. Iloc. P. RrI!( .440*. WR.AHE covin E.. mw. Planning Commission Agenda - 1/12/88 4 Additional Information Item 4. City of Monticello Annexation Update. (G.A.) The stage is finally set for the ural arguments section of the City of !Monticello annexation request. After the long session from the_laitial filing date to the public hearings which were held to the briefs that were filed by both attorneys to what is now called the oral arguments section in front of the Municipal Board, this meeting before the Municipal Board is scheduled for January 15, 1988. RESOLUTION OF THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY'S MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1, MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS. 1-1 THROUGH 1-7, AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-8, ALL LOCATED WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY. WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-1 through 1-7, and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-0 (the •Plans•), all located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, have been submitted to the Monticello Planning Commission, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 669.027) and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said Plana to determine the consistency of said Plans to the Comprehensive Plan of the City. ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION, that the Plans are consistent with the Monticello Comprehensive Plan, and the Commission recommends approval of the Plans to the Monticello City Council. Adopted, p�Jt►IkR.t/ 3. Ate Attests I Cnaarman RESOLUTION MONTZCELLO PLANNING COMMISS INDING Tl1Fi'HUUstnb ,u�u ELOPMENT AUTHORITY'S MODIPIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1, MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS. 1-1 THROUGH 1-7, AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-8, ALL LOCATED WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY0`ZetrK� WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-1 through 1-7, and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-8 (the "Plans*), all located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, have been submitted to the Monticello Planning Commission, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.0271 and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said Plane to determine the consistency of said Plane to the Comprehensive Plan of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION, that the Plane are consistent with the Monticello Comprehensive Plan, and the CommLesion recommends approval of the Plans to the Monticello City Council. Adopted s y'S Api v 4 %q q 3, Ate Attests �T Cnatrman