Planning Commission Agenda 12-03-2019 (Joint Meeting)AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, December 3rd, 2019 — 4:30 p.m.
Academy Room, Monticello Community Center
Council Members: Mayor Brian Stumpf, Jim Davidson, Bill Fair, Lloyd Hilgart, Charlotte
Gabler
Commissioners: Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson, John Alstad, Paul Konsor, and Alison
Zimpfer
Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), Jacob Thunander, Ron
Hackenmueller
1. General Business
A. Call to Order
2. Regular Agenda
A. Consideration of a Concept Stage Planned Unit Development proposal for a
building addition on two lots in the IBC (Industrial and Business Campus) District
Applicant: Ultra Machining Company
3. Adjournment
������li�d� ��r�����1��� 4����Oi�4A���dh ���t
4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Angela Schumann
Mayor Stumpf and Monticello City Council
Monticello Planning Commission
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
NAC FILE NO:
PLANNING CASE NO:
PROPERTY ID:
Stephen Grittman
November 25, 2019
Monticello — Ultra Machining Corp (UMC) PUD
Concept Review
191.07 — 19.26
155143001020
Application and Proiect Description. This memorandum reviews the elements of a
proposed concept plan for a Planned Unit Development on a parcel along Chelsea
Road East, adjacent to the existing UMC facility at 500 Chelsea Road. To the east of
_ the parcel is the Twin City Die Cast facility,
� a�, ���; and industrial manufacture. South of the
� '�� ;� �� �- subject property is the Monticello School
� _�. �` �_ /,� � campus site.
UMC would acquire the site fromThe
Monticello Economic Development
Authority (the EDA having purchased the
property from Monticello Industrial Park
LLC), and expand their existing building to
include a new 52,000 square foot
manufacturing area linked to the existing
building with a 2-story connection that
provides both equipment and pedestrian
access between the two buildings. The
property, as well as the current principal
UMC property, is zoned "IBC", Industrial-Business Campus, and guided for industrial
uses.
The principal purpose of the PUD is to accommodate the project to extend over the
existing lot line that divides the two properties. In many cases, these lots could be
combined to result in a simple expansion. However, the applicants are seeking a
method by which they would be able to eliminate the connection and convey the two
principal buildings separately in the future, if that were to become necessary. By
extending across the common lot line, the applicants require the PUD application.
Although the future separation is anticipated as an option, the two properties would be
developed as a single unit, with a site plan that re-centers the primary access drive
along the common property line, and relies on shared passenger vehicle parking and
truck access lane that follows the exterior boundary of the two-lot PUD property. Truck
ingress and egress would be shared over this drive, and access points (one on the east,
one on the west) would provide truck access separate driveway circulation from the
passenger vehicle parking areas.
Architecturally, the proposed building would consist of two levels, with a main roof
height of 36 feet above the finished first floor, plus approximately 4 feet of parapet, for a
total height of approximately 40 feet. The plans include a"fin" wall that would extend to
50 feet as an architectural feature of the new building.
The plans also show a covered canopy that extends across the front of the two
buildings creating an open, but covered, walkway between the two main entrances.
Building materials are primarily precast concrete, with some architectural metal
detailing, including the fin wall.
The applicants have identified a series of departures from the zoning ordinance that
they are requesting under the PUD flexibility. These include the following:
Zero-setback expansion crossing property lines.
Shared parking and access for both passenger vehicles and trucks.
50 foot overall height (CUP typically required for buildings greater than 30 feet in
height).
For the project to proceed, there are a series of City approvals that will be required:
• PUD Concept Review (the subject of this report). The project requires a PUD as
certain aspects of site design may require flexibility including building size.
Further approvals would include the following:
• Rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development District
The current proposal is for a PUD Concept Plan review, which is not a formal zoning
application, but is intended to provide the applicant an opportunity to get City feedback
on a potential development proposal prior to more formal zoning review and the
extensive supporting materials that such reviews require. The Planning Commission
and City Council will have the opportunity to review the project, ask questions of the
proposer, and provide comment as to the issues and elements raised by the project.
This is not a formal public hearing. This memorandum provides an overview of the
project, and will serve as an outline for the discussion. No formal approval or denial is
offered for a Concept Review.
However, it is vital that Planning Commission and City Council members engage in a
frank and open discussion of the project benefits and potential issues. The Concept
Review process is most valuable when the applicants have the opportunity to
understand how the City is likely to look at the project and the potential issues it
presents. In this way, the subsequent land use and development details can be more
finely tuned to address City policy elements.
PUD Concept Review Criteria. The first stage for PUD review consists of an informal
Concept Plan review which is separate from the formal PUD application which will follow the
Concept Review step. The Ordinance identifies the purpose of Planned Unit Development as
follows:
(1) Purpose and Intent
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide
greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non-residential areas
in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development
outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved
by undertaking a process that results in a development outcome exceeding that
which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning district. The City
reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re-apply
under the standard applicable zoning district.
PUD Concept reviews are to proceed as follows:
(a) PUD Concept Proposal
Prior to submitting formal development stage PUD, preliminary plat (as
applicable) and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the
applicant may, at its option, prepare an informal concept plan and present
it to the Planning Commission and City Council at a concurrent work
session, as scheduled by the Community Development Department. The
purpose of the Concept Proposal is to:
Provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration
between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City
Council;
2
2. Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a
requirement for extensive engineering and other plans.
3. Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the
proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design
and review.
The intent of Concept Proposal review is to consider the general acceptability of the
proposed land use, and identify potential issues that may guide the City's later
consideration of a full PUD application. The Concept Proposal review includes notice to
area property owners, but is not a public hearing. The City Council and Planning
Commission meet in joint session to provide feedback to the developer, and may
include an opportunity for informal public comment as they deem appropriate.
Staff Preliminarv Comments and Issues. For this proposal, the primary
considerations evident at this point in the process would likely include the following
elements:
Land Use. The proposed land use is considered to be consistent with the
directions of the Comprehensive Plan. Although the area is bordered by
commercial use designations, the subject property (and those flanking it) are
guided as "Places to Work" — industrial land uses generally.
Parking. Parking supply has not been calculated in detail, pending more
finalized site and building plans. However, the shared parking and entrance
layout positively separates passenger and truck traffic, encouraging a safer
site plan.
iii. Building Height and Architecture. The building height is effectively 40 feet,
which exceeds the standard allowance by 10 feet. However, as noted above,
greater heights may be accommodated through the Conditional Use Permit
process. As part of a future application, the applicant should detail the
elevation and materials for the proposed building connection. The conditions
for CUP review cited in the ordinance relate to fire code compliance, which
can also be addressed through the PUD process. The PUD application rolls
each of the various zoning requests into a consolidated review.
iv. Site Planning. A preliminary site plan is provided as a part of the PUD
Concept plan. As noted above, the site relocates the common entrance to
the center of the PUD. Planning staff would note that the existing access
point would be moved to the east. One alteration to suggest would be that
the various driveway entrance points be angled to meet Chelsea Road at 90
degrees, rather than follow the lot lines, creating skewed alignments.
v. Lighting. Because the site abuts a residential neighborhood, it will be critical
to ensure that site lighting does not impact the adjoining single family homes.
This will require attention to both the buffer as well as lighting design.
3
vi. Signage. No specific signage has been proposed as a part of this addition.
The applicants should include any signage requests as a part of the
Development Stage PUD application.
vii. Landscaping. The applicants created an extensive landscape at the time that
the initial UMC building was constructed. They note that their intent is to
continue their development as a"showcase business" for the community, and
both architecture and landscaping were cited as hallmarks of their project at
the time of the original development. It is presumed that this will be reflected
in the landscaping plan provided as a part of the Development Stage PUD
submittals.
viii. The City Engineer's comments relating to ongoing plan development are
attached.
Summary. As noted, the Planning Commission and City Council provide comment and
feedback at the Concept Review level. City officials should identify any areas of concern
that would require amendment to avoid the potential for eventual denial, as well as any
elements of the concept that the City would find essential for eventual approval.
Specific comment should address the following potential issues:
1. Overall Land Use.
2. Building Height and Design.
3. Parking Supply and access.
4. Building Materials and Architecture.
5. Landscaping, green space, setbacks, and other site plan improvements.
6. Circulation and Access.
7. Engineering comments and recommendations.
The notes listed above acknowledge that a significant amount of detail will be added as
the project proceeds to a more advanced stage of review.
SUPPORTING DATA
A. Aerial Site Image
B. Applicant Narrative
C. PUD Ares of Flexibility
D. Plan Set Proposal
E. Proposed Schedule
F. City Engineer's Comments dated 11/25/19
0
° ` • ' ` � - .
� , � '� � � �'�
u , r;` � , 4r �,,
� `: P o ��'` ❑ �
� � � ,y �'!� .
� Q�..� � . � .
U� � : p�,.. . t—
� � �' .. � � � � -z � - s . �r� �nd �N iNN��
.,
� � � �
°� � � � � x
.
� ���' �� �� � ��� � F� �
L � N : ,�5fl +a_. .�� � . - 1 _ ��� ,. ..
U ,�� :• .
�� �7
r.. . a s� . � ,� :� �� i
, � � • . .���,.�_..
� � � � � � �
�� �.s � .. �In . „ � . y I '
�e£ � 6 ,. �4 ' � F �'
� ��F�� : r � {�� � .�7 _ � � .. . ' '
q�'') ��
� o �d� � -, � � -� �_ � - r
Q � -I CJ ; 'r . C,; � � � �, -
� o *�'6�� . �z - � r 91. h!.
> c� ;� �� ,ti . 4� !�j -
N � F,'�' � 'S' � � \� � �+
e *.
� 1^� � . � - ----- - --- -
V , 4 � I �
� � ,��`� �� � . ��� �;. . n. ' . py46�
� `N . .. � '.� �.f � ' �f I � ' • T � '[..� R�� �1.7��
O , ~ � �` ' �T � V
� O . �� r � �� - �,��, .. �
� � .% . � _ .��'.
a � �,�%�" ' o � �� � � _
N `n ; � � T _ -. •�. ,�w� - , ,
� r' ` � ,�� y �' , , - '� ��,µ. , w„
(,/') � o �,� +' � . • • � ,.,..,� :. �. .. .,. w
a �
� - � V . ,.*.� � ���* � p � ;F a , ;t,�. �. �
, , ,
.
Q — , . , ,
. ,
I 1 �, � w ,
� , , , .. �. ► w �
� , -,,, �I � • ? � � � �. � � , � � .
� + s.
' e-.� . _ I, � . (��
V „ � - � . . � _. r r � . n _
.� , e' T ' .� f
� � . . .. .. 4 ..l . ,.. �: � � '• , . ^ -•
� / _ ... �. �� i -..� ��q .
O� i r .e . � r YA �. ' r—.-.- .�v��
U � ^+r� , v���� ; ���'-
p o , ��a � , �
� L , „ � r ���
�--� � , '';;'
di � �I I' � n' `r � � .,
� U � � � � �.
V^1 � i ' F���y:` !I ... . � p � "' 'j' lC7 , �
y/ � ���' �.?�} � � � � .�_ . _
� � � 4`f::.. .. v �1 ."' :�� ,� ;� . ����+-.
� �
� ..:..:� ..:-�_ �. .. ' ... .,�:' ._ ���,� � —
�o �� :. � � � .� ��
� U �' � �:, � i ,� � r .• � � � F �- . * � �
Q � T ' _ - - 5 `�� `i "`� �� � 3
� O .r... , , r �.� 'r.4`• . . �.. ��a � - ' •- ... , , •
0 � i . � - �i I � . � . . � � �. �rr - - n.
UC� . �' y � r• t .
r `��� �. ... ti _ a• .;�t"���
.y. .
- .
� �' - ., : ..� . . . .
� G 's"- .
� V � , � .. _
.
O
._ _ ���� � �- �-� _ - � -
� 00 , . ,�� .`� :w` ,' ,� a'�, .; � •.�"`! . p - �d t� .2 y _ �'� r�'�,y'"�'I
r tl� ~
� t� I �..� � �
� � � � �� � f � � -
U �2S ,.� - _ I � t•! f,,�ri;;� [7 �IVI'.7��i��! ❑32
f� c-� . �.. . ' � ' ���� �. r � � " � _ �
� v � ; . - ``�" �' _ `, „ -
�; �
++ . �-
O �. it �+J ' ' , $
� J . �g � � � ? �' t. � i Z �'— i ,J'� �n
� � `� " ". � __ . . � f °��.. , � 1� i. ' � `r . !r � �' . ; �
�Q 4 ,�, • ° �r'r�+�+• I .r -� ' � .�� e ..
� J � T . � e - _ `=.0 _
11/Zs/19
MEMORANDUM
Re: UMC— New Production Facility
Parcel ID: 155143001020
PAI Project No. 74761_19170
Subject: PUD Areas of flexibility from standard zoning
To: Angela Schumann, City of Monticello
Brock Martinson, Pope Architects
Jaci Dukowitz, UMC
From Tim Dolan, Decklan Group
To whom it may concern:
In accordance with the City of Monticello Community Development's PUD Concept Proposal,
please find below a project narrative for UMC's new facility to be located on Parcel
155143001020.
Ultra Machining Company (UMC) is applying for the creation of a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) within the City of Monticello. The proposed PUD is currently zoned "IBC" within the city's
zoning code. Through the proposed PUD, UMC wishes to help ensure high quality construction
standards, promote an aesthetically-pleasing design in concert with the surrounding
neighborhood, incorporate unique and extensive landscaping and in general, contribute to the
economic growth and success of the City of Monticello.
UMC has sought to find a creative solution to continuing to grow its business within the City of
Monticello. Through the efforts of UMC, its partners and city staff, the company was able to
identify a way in which it could expand adjacent to its current facility by creating a"corporate
campus" structure via PUD. UMC plans to build an approximately 52,000 square foot
state-of-the-art manufacturing facility which will be connected to its current building via a two
story "link" allowing for the seamless flow of employees and materials between the existing
building and new building. The two buildings will also share a"grand" driveway access, as well
as parking facilities and an efficient perimeter truck access road.
The proposed PUD will contribute substantial value to the public.
From an economic perspective alone, the project will create and/or maintain approximately 250
local, high-paying, high-skilled jobs as well as increase the tax base for the City of Monticello
and the local school district. The creation of this campus via PUD will also create a parcel that
allows for two or more future expansions to the UMC Campus, which will only magnify the
economic effects previously stated. Due to UMC's unique manufacturing processes and diverse
product lines, the company also supports many "outside operations" which serve as a source of
revenue for other area employers.
UMC's proposed PUD will also greatly enhance the appearance of the locale. The proposed
building and "link" to-be-built on the Campus, exceed most if not all of the aesthetic building
standards for the zoning district. Through the use of architectural elements, diverse materials
including metals, stone and glass, as well as varying textures and colors, UMC has strived to set
the standard for pride-in-ownership throughout the design process for this project. The company
is also committed to maintaining a high standard of landscaping which will greatly enhance the
appearance of the neighborhood.
From a public safety standpoint, UMC's proposed PUD will substantially improve transportation
flow and visibility versus what is otherwise accepted within the underlying district. Utilizing a
shared primary access for employees and visitors for the entire campus enables substantial
spacing for driveway accesses on Chelsea Road and allows for clean and predictable sitelines.
The unique perimeter truck access road allows for isolation of large vehicle movements both on
the site, as well as entering Chelsea Road. These features promote safe and efficient vehicle
movements while also allowing for maximum site utilization now and in the future.
UMC has a goal of being a showcase business for the City of Monticello, a point of pride in
business park type development. The ability to continue to grow within the city is something the
company takes great pride in. The company's philanthropic contributions will only grow with its
continued success and UMC looks forward to its continued role as a good corporate citizen.
Through the granting of this CUP, the City of Monticello has the opportunity to host a campus
that will showcase cutting edge technology and play host to many visiting business executives.
UMC hopes to work in conjunction with the city to make this campus the envy of precision
manufacturing facilities throughout the country.
PiOPE
A R C H I 7 E C T 5
11/18/19
MEMORANDUM
Re: UMC — New Production Facility
Pa rcel I D: 155143001020
PAI Project No. 74761_19170
Subject: PUD Areas of flexibility from standard zoning
To: Angela Schumann, City of Monticello
Tim Dolan, Decklan Group
Jaci Dukowitz, UMC
File, Pope Architects
From Brock Martinson, Pope Architects
To whom it may concern:
In accordance with the City of Monticello Community Development's PUD Concept Proposal, please find below a list of
the areas of flexibility sought for UMC's new facility to be located on Parcel 155143001020.
• Current Zoning: IBC
• Setbacks:
o Front:50'
o Interior Side: 30'
■ "Link" building is desired to connect new facility to existing facility. "Link" to extend across
interior property line. (See Architectural Site Plan)
o Street Side: 50'
o Rear:40'
• Max Height: 2 Stories/30 Feet
o Desired Fin Height: 50'
o Desired T.O. Parapet Height: 40'
• Max Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 'Reserved' in Zoning Code
o Desired FAR: 17%
• Max Impervious: 'Reserved' in Zoning Code
o Desired Max Impervious: 48%
• Joint Use Parking/Site Access
o A shared visitor parking area located between the two buildings is desired. (See Architectural Site
Plan)
o A shared truck access road at the E,S,W perimeter of the two buildings is desired. (See Architectural
Site Plan)
PQPE ARCHITECTS, INC.
1295 BpNDANA BOULEVARD N, SUITE 200 www. popea rch.com
ST. PAUL, MN 551p8-2735
(651) 642-9200 I FRX (551� 642-ll01
°o �z�0¢
- ^ � w O — � �
� e$ e U U U w O
_ � � Q U Z
_ � p LL H Z
Z
Qa - � O�
e a �
o� $ �
w
w
�
W
�
�
H
� �
a w O
� � o � o o � o
aaN � en
� Q �a�w ~ - �� `' ~ - �� `' � - �� d Z �� d
� � o m z y x a � x a x a � x a
� ~ w � � a C� 7 � " � m �= � N � m U � N � m � N � m
W �� �� z �zaV��� �zaV��� �zaV��� �zaV���
z
LL m o W wa�� j�a� m d�J V aa� m d�J U 5a� m d�J Z aa� � d�J
W�Y N�-o �ody,� wody;� �ody,� Wody,�
�(� � `" �(� c� n c� ci `a � � c� n c� ci `a � w c� n c� ci `a � U' c� n c� ci `a �
0 -
� o � o 0 0
� �����a �o��� o���a W ��a
U �" �„m��mo �" �"
W �_����� w^ �zo��J ����� ��aN���
O z��ox#� =am�m " ���ax#� o�aNx#�
� 3�"�� �o a�o� 5= �� �o��,�
� O���ci`a � Qa� ncia U�m�ci`a � o noci`a �
/
�
J
U N
Q �
� �
�
Oa�
—oo
���
U w z
Z
� � �
Q J
w
O = 0
� (� J
O J
� W
o U
� ~
z
W 0
Z �
U
�
�
�
� "3
�
� z � 0 Q
w O — � �
U U U w O
� 0 LL � Z
p z —
a � �
e o � z � p ¢
- ^ � w O — � �
� e$ e U U U w O
_ � � Q U Z
_ � p LL H Z
�Z
O �
O�.$ � a �
„�e
� _„�_e �er „� a n_ _ _s __ n_
� m� _ _ _ _
� nsn.,., eee .,� �. � �. �. _.,n n_
d �
� J r, —_
o w a�
' g � pG'o� tY
� � � '�3<
- �' � _ ��Ea�� �
w� �oo = = p ����<M1 �2�
`y o�p z ��p � o � �LL3'o m
N N m�o�� ��o �� s s s Yo �o>
�Z
Q
� a
�
�
w
¢ =
; �������������� ����� �������������������������������������������������'
� � _ __ _— ------- — ---;— r�az va _-------�I
� �� I
1 � 1 I
� i I
; /� � ; I
o� /� i � II
� � �/ � � o /�
i U�// i � e � II �
� � � � �
� � �I
� i/ o i a l
i � � i
� � w� ; �
� � � I
� �h
� // : ! I
/ �
� i/ � i ��oti� I
i =—____�_ -- ----- ---�; - � �—_—_— --- J
i i �
�/ i
� i
�------------------------- - -------� ----- -------------- ----------- i
/
/ �
/� �
/ II�I��I�I��I�I�II� �
w
L
� z � 0 Q
w O — � �
U U U w O
�oLL�Z
o Z—
a ��
M
�
Q
e o � z� 0 Q
— ^ " w O — � �
� e$ e U U U w O
_ � � Q U Z
_ � p LL H Z
Z
� O �
=o - a �
o��$
�^ : �
w
J
�
�
S p
U e
�
�
�
Q
�
W
Q
� �
�
O
�
w
� � B
� � �
� 3� E�
�''< �''< 3d
5 5
m
a a a a
a
G
�
p Z Q J
� O � p
w
�
¢
ww��
wo�
XLL
w
$
w
C
C
C
C
w
a�
�
E
a�
U
N
�
L
�
�
�
�
i
0
Z
�
�
�
�
�
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v ,v c � v � .� .� _ >
� o v°1 � a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
• � �n `� � v � a "� v '= o � � v
0 �
� � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
s
U
L
c�
C
�
L
�
�
L
�
�
L.L
�
f6
7
C
(6
�
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v v c �' v �.� .� � >
(n o v v + a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
•� v�i � � v � a � v '= o � � v
0 � � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
�
�
�
�L
Q
Q
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v v c �' v �.� .� � >
(n o v v + a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
•� v�i � � v � a � v '= o � � v
0 � � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
�
�
�
a�
c
�
�
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v v c �' v �.� .� � >
(n o v v + a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
•� v�i � � v � a � v '= o � � v
0 � � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
a�
�
E
a�
+,
a
a�
�
�
�
tin
�
Q
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v v c �' v �.� .� � >
(n o v v + a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
•� v�i � � v � a � v '= o � � v
0 � � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
a�
�
E
a�
>
0
z
a�
�
0
+�
U
0
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v v c �' v �.� .� � >
(n o v v + a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
•� v�i � � v � a � v '= o � � v
0 � � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
a�
�
E
a�
U
N
�
� � 3� o.� a, a, a, a a
U v v c �' v �.� .� � >
(n o v v + a o v a v °
� .� � � +_ � .� v v v � a
�+ * �' �, c� � � �' � _ � v� � Q
U � � �' �°.� � �°.� � 3 0 •� � � �
•� v�i � � v � a � v '= o � � v
0 � � v �� � � a a
� >, o
a Q. � i�., U C� � �
° a v � o 0
(,� a � v � � �
c ��
`i Q- O � i i
C � c�.7 N a v�i v�i
�� > � �
� U 0 U U
�
0
U
c�
z
W
m
�
�
z
�
�
0
a
Q
W
z
z
�
�
W
�
z
W
>
a
a
z
w
X
0
�
wsb
November 25, 2019
Matt Leonard
City Engineer/Public Works Director
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: UMC
Concept Stage PUD Plan Review
City Project No. 2019-037
WSB Project No. R-015189-000
Dear Mr. Leonard:
We have reviewed the conceptual site plans dated November 18, 2019 and offer the following
comments:
1. The applicant shall provide a traffic study report consisting of the following in order to
review any turn lane or access requirements:
a. Provide traffic generation calculations for the expansion site.
b. Provide traffic analysis of the site driveways now and in the future (year of
opening and 20 years)
c. Provide sight distance analysis at the site driveways.
2. The new access locations shall be designed to intersect Chelsea Road at a 90-degree
angle.
3. Extend a 6-foot wide sidewalk along the south side of Chelsea Road along the existing
and proposed sites connecting to the sidewalk at Mills Fleet Farm.
4. A stormwater management plan shall be provided in accordance with the requirements
in the City's Design Manual and checklist. The site is planned to drain to the pond to the
southwest. That pond will provide rate control for the site. The proposed site was planned
for a curve number of 85.
5. The new site will need to provide onsite volume control for runoff of 1.1" overthe new
impervious area, Pre-treatment measures are required prior to discharging to the existing
pond.
6. An NPDES/SDS Construction Storm Water General Permit (CSWGP) shall be provided
with the grading permit or with the building permit application for review, prior to
construction commencing.
7. A utility plan shall be provided showing the existing and proposed sanitary sewer,
watermain and storm sewer serving the site.
8. The building department will review required fire hydrant location(s) and emergency
vehicle access/circulation.
F:\Community Development Director\Boards & Commissions\Planning Commission\2019\Agenda\December\Joint Meeting\Exh F.Ltr-m-leonard UMC 112519.docx
UMC Concept Stage PUD Plan Review
November 25, 2019
Page 2
9. The site is outside of the DWSMA and is not subject to requirements of the City's
Wellhead Protection Plan.
10. A more detailed review of the development plans will be completed when the applicant
submits complete civil plans and a stormwater management report.
11. The existing drainage and utility easements for Lot 1 and 2 of the Monticello Commerce
6th Addition plat shall be reviewed for any encroachments.
Please have the applicant provide a written response addressing the comments above. Please
give me a call at 612-360-1304 if you have any questions or comments regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
WSB
.
� ,�, �.�s�
Shibani K. Bisson, PE
Senior Project Manager