Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/20221. Agenda Documents Documents: 030122.PCAGENDA.PDF 2A.CONSIDERATION OF THE POINTES AT CEDAR ZONING.PDF 2B.CONSIDERATION OF OTTER CREEK PLATTING AND REZONING OF PARCEL FROM A-O TO I-1.PDF 2C.CONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.PDF 2D.CONSIDERATION OF MOBILITY CHAPTER AMENDMENTS.PDF 3A.CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED LAND SALE BY THE MONTICELLO EDA IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN.PDF 3C.CONSIDERATION OF ADOPT THE 2022-2025 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKPLAN.PDF 3D.COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORT.PDF 1.1. Agenda Documents Documents: 3B. PLANNING COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION UPDATE.PDF AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, March 1, 2022 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: Paul Konsor, Andrew Tapper, Alison Zimpfer, Eric Hagen and Teri Lehner Council Liaison: Charlotte Gabler Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), Hayden Stensgard, and Ron Hackenmueller 1. General Business A. Call to Order B. Consideration of approving minutes a. Joint Workshop Minutes —January 10, 2022 C. Citizen Comments D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda E. Consideration to approve agenda 2. Public Hearings A. Consideration of an Amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for adoption of The Pointes at Cedar Planned Development District and an amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for amendment to the boundary of the Freeway Bonus Sign Overlay District Applicant: City of Monticello B. Consideration of a request for preliminary plat of Otter Creek Crossing Th and 81n Additions and an amendment to the Official Zoning Map for rezoning from A-O to 1-1 (Light Industrial) Applicant: City of Monticello & the Monticello Economic Development Authority C. Consideration of Amending the City of Monticello's Subdivision Ordinance, Section 152.027—Procedure for Final Plat, and Section 152.061—Easements Applicant: City of Monticello D. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4, "Mobility and Connectivity' as related to Roadway Classification and Traffic Applicant: City of Monticello 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration to adopt a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello Finding that the Proposed Sale of Certain Land by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Consistent with the City of Monticello's Comprehensive Plan. B. City Engineer's Report C. Consideration of Adopting 2022-2025 Planning Commission Workplan D. Community Development Director's Report 4. Added Items S. Adjournment Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 2A. Public Hearing — Consideration of an Amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for adoption of The Pointes at Cedar Planned Development District and an amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for amendment to the boundary of the Freeway Bonus Sign Overlay District. Applicant: City of Monticello Prepared by: NAC Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Commission action): 03/01/2022 03/28/2022 Additional Analysis/Review by: Community Development Director, Community and Economic Development Coordinator, City Clerk, Chief Building and Zoning Official ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Motion to table action on Amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for adoption of The Pointes at Cedar Planned Development District and an amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for amendment to the boundary of the Freeway Bonus Sign Overlay District and continue the hearing to April 5t", 2022, at 6:00 PM. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Property: Legal Description: Outlot C, Monticello Business Center/Outlot A & Lot 1, Block 1, Monticello Business Center 7t" Addition/Outlot A, Cedar Street Addition/Lot 1, Block 2, Amax Addition/Outlot C & Lot 1, Block 1, Deephaven/Outlot A & Lot 1, Block 1, Deephaven 2 See City Hall for Legals of Unplatted Land Planning Case Number: 2021-052 Request(s): Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Deadline for Decision: NA Land Use Designation: Commercial — Residential Flex Zoning Designation: B-4/B-3/Monticello Lakes PUD/Deephaven PUD Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: Freeway Bonus District applies to the plat of Deephaven Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 Current Site Uses: Commercial Self Storage, Retail Commercial Building Over 10,000 SF, Single -Family Residential, Multi -Family Residential, Agriculture Land Surrounding Land Uses: Retail Commercial Building Over 10,000 SF, Retail Commercial Building Less than 10,000 SF, Veterinary Facility (Neighborhood), Offices, Single -Family Residential, General Warehousing, Industrial Services, Repair Establishment, Light Manufacturing, Commercial Lodging, Automotive Wash Facility, Auto Repair —Minor, Financial Institution, Restaurant, Vehicle Fuel Sales Project Description: Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for establishment of regulations and controls relating to the area as described in the adopted The Pointes Small Area Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends tabling of the proposed amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for adoption of The Pointes at Cedar Planned Development District and an amendment to the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance for amendment to the boundary of the Freeway Bonus Sign Overlay District. At this time, additional review and feedback is being provided by The Pointes Zoning Work Group, city staff and the City Attorney. Staff are also in process of meeting with property owners within The Pointes boundaries. SUPPORTING DATA None Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 2B. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for preliminary plat of Otter Creek Crossing 7t" and 8tn Additions and an amendment to the Official Zoning Map for rezoning from A-O to 1-1 (Light Industrial). Applicant: City of Monticello & the Monticello Economic Development Authoritv Prepared by: NAC Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Commission action): 03/01/2022 03/28/2022 Additional Analysis by: Community Development Director, Community and Economic Development Coordinator, Project Engineer, Economic Development Manager ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Decision 1: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat (Plat Area 2 - proposed as Otter Creek Crossing 7th Addition) amending Otter Creek Crossing (3rd and 4t" Additions), amending the exiting plat for three (3) buildable parcels for development and one outlot ("Plat Area 2"). 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC 2022-011 recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat, based on findings in the attached resolutions, and subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to deny the adoption of Resolution No. PC 2022-011 recommending denial of the Preliminary Plat, based on findings to be identified following the public hearing. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. PC 2022-011, subject to submission of additional information as requested by the Planning Commission. Decision 2: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat (Plat Area 3- proposed as Otter Creek Crossing 8tn Addition) amending Otter Creek Crossing, creating four (4) buildable parcels for development and one outlot ("Plat Area 3"). 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC 2022-012 recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat, based on findings in the attached resolutions, and subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to deny the adoption of Resolution No. PC 2022-012 recommending denial of the Preliminary Plat, based on findings to be identified following the public hearing. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. PC 2022-012, subject to submission of additional information as requested by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 Decision 3: Consideration of an amendment to the Monticello Official Zoning Map for rezoning of from A-O (Agriculture -Open Space) to 1-1 (Light Industrial) District for Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing. 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC 2022-013 recommending approval of the amendment to the Monticello Official Zoning Map for rezoning of from A-O (Agriculture - Open Space) to 1-1 (Light Industrial) District for Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing, based on findings in the attached resolution, and subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to deny the adoption of Resolution No. PC 2022-013 recommending denial of the amendment to the Monticello Official Zoning Map for rezoning of from A-O (Agriculture -Open Space) to 1-1 (Light Industrial) District for Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing, based on findings to be identified following the public hearing. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. PC 2022-013, subject to submission of additional information as requested by the Planning Commission. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Property: Legal Description (current): Outlot A, Otter Creek Crossing 3rd Addition, and Lot 1, Block 1, Outlot A, and Outlot B, Otter Creek Crossing 41" Addition (Plat Area 2) Outlot E (part) and Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing, and Outlot A, 901" Street 3rd Addition (Plat Area 3) PIDs Plat Area 1: 155194000010, 155223000010, 155223001010, 155223000020 PIDs Plat Area 2: 155171000050, 155185000010, 155171000060 PID for Parcel Rezoning: 155171000060 Planning Case Number: 2022-011 Request(s): The City, through its EDA, seeks to re -subdivide the subject property into a series of buildable parcels and revised outlots for industrial development and reconfigured stormwater ponding. As owner of Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing, the EDA also seeks to rezone the parcel to 1-1, Light Industrial, consistent with the Monticello 2040 Plan and the balance of Otter Creek Business Park. 2 Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 Deadline for Decision Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: Not applicable Light Industrial 1-1, Light Industrial District NA Current Site Use: Industrial and Vacant Surrounding Land Uses: North: Industrial and Vacant (Nuss Trucking) East: Industrial Vacant South: Industrial and Vacant West: Industrial and Bertram Lakes Park Project Description: The City seeks to revise current property lines in the affected areas to accommodate expansion of existing and new industrial development, revise and update the stormwater system in the area, and update wetland configurations to facilitate more efficient use of the district. ANALYSIS: The proposed plats consistent of land owned currently by the City of Monticello, the Monticello Economic Development Authority and Suburban Manufacturing. The subject plat sites consist of approximately 23 acres northwest of Dalton Avenue (including Suburban Manufacturing) and 50 acres adjacent to Chelsea Road (east of the Dahlheimer Distributing property). All of the area is part of the Otter Creek Crossing Business Park, and platted for development, or as outlots for wetlands and stormwater management. 3 Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 Under Monticello's zoning ordinance, outlots are not considered developable property. As such, the City's EDA is seeking to subdivide the outlots in Otter Creek, Otter Creek 3rd Addition, and Otter Creek 4t" Addition to create developable lots and to reconfigure existing lots for development purposes. Plat Area 2 For the 23-acre property in Decision 1 above identified as Plat Area 2, the project consists of a series of lot line adjustments to accommodate the planned expansion of the existing Suburban Manufacturing (located on the proposed Lot 3, Block 1), as well as the property needs of future industrial development adjoining Dalton Avenue and Dalton Court. At this time, staff believes the plat will be Otter Creek 7t" Addition, but this will require review and verification by the Wright County Surveyor. Specifically, as related to Suburban Manufacturing, the existing lot line between the underlying Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlot A of Otter Creek 4t" Addition is proposed to be re -platted to allow for the conveyance of additional property to the south to Suburban. The lot line between Lot 1, 4 Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 Block 1 of 41" Addition and the adjacent Outlot A of Otter Creek 3rd Addition will be an adjustment to straighten Suburban's property line to the west. As a current owner in the plat, Suburban Manufacturing will be required to sign the plat, with any consents to plat as necessary. The lot line between the proposed Lots 1 and 2 is in the same location as shown on prior plats, but the parcels are now platted lots rather than outlots. Lot Requirements. The resulting plat reflects three lots, each meeting the width and area requirements of the zoning ordinance. In the 1-1 zoning district, lots have a required minimum width of 100 feet, and lot size square footage standard of 20,000 square feet. All lots are far in excess of these standards, ranging from 4.6 acres to more than 10 acres in area. Outlot A is platted to cover both drainage and utility as well as delineated wetland purposes. A future stormwater expansion is planned within Outlot A. To facilitate the expansion, additional drainage and utility easement may be necessary along Lots 1 and 2 at the discretion of the City Engineer. Access. Access to the proposed lots remains unchanged. Lot 3, Block 1, will continue to gain access from Dalton Avenue. Lots 1 and 2 access points are proposed from Dalton Court. Any access to Lot 2 from Dalton Avenue would be at the discretion of the City Engineer. Grading, Drainage and Utilities. Each lot has access to a public street and public utilities. The proposed plat also includes a reconfiguration of the outlot that covers the existing and soon to - be -reconfigured stormwater pond currently between Suburban and Karlsburger Foods to the northwest of the site. Plat Area 3 For the approximately 50-acre property in Decision 2 above, identified as Plat Area 3, the project replats the outlots of Otter Creek Crossing, as well as a portion of 90t" Street Addition into developable lots. At this time, staff believes the plat will be Otter Creek 8t" Addition, but this will require review and verification by the Wright County Surveyor. The primary purpose of the subdivision is to provide for the creation of buildable lots, rather than outlots, and to provide street access to the proposed lots via the extension of the Dalton Street right of way. Lot Requirements. The resulting plat reflects four lots, each meeting the width and area requirements of the zoning ordinance. In the 1-1 zoning district, lots have a required minimum width of 100 feet, and lot size square footage standard of 20,000 square feet. All lots are far in excess of these standards, ranging from 4.6 acres to more than 10 acres in area. 5 Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 Outlot A is platted to cover both drainage and utility as well as delineated wetland purposes. A future stormwater expansion is planned within Outlot A. Access. The plat provides for a right of way extension for Dalton Way from the current terminus via the plat of Otter Creek 3rd Addition into the proposed plat. The extension of Dalton Way will provide lot access to Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1 and 2, Block 2. Lot 1, Block 3 will be accessed from Chelsea Road. Grading, Drainage and Utilities. As proposed on the plat, each lot is proposed to have access to a public street via the proposed Dalton Court right of way. Utility extensions would also occur within the right of way. Rezoning of Outlot F The Monticello Economic Development Authority is the owner of Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing. The parcel is currently guided for Light Industrial Park (LIP) within the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Although annexed to the City with the original plat of Otter Creek Crossing, the parcel retained its A-O designation upon annexation as it was retained in ownership by a private party. Since that time, the EDA acquired the property. As it is contiguous to the existing Otter Creek Business Park, the acquisition provides additional land area needed for the creation of jobs and wages within the community. The parcel is directly adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood to the south. Any industrial development requires buffering through landscaping. In addition, a larger building setback to the property lines is required. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Based on the preceding review, City Staff recommends approval of the revised Preliminary Plats as shown on the exhibits to this report, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z. Staff further recommends rezoning of Outlot F, Otter Creek Crossing to 1-1. The City of Monticello's EDA acquired the property for the specific purpose of economic development — the creation of tax based and living wage jobs. Rezoning of the parcel is consistent with those goals and the guided land use. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution 2022-011-Preliminary Plat, Area 2 B. Resolution 2022-012-Preliminary Plat, Area 3 C. Resolution 2022-013-Rezoning 0 Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 Fi] G. H. K. L. M DRAFT Ordinance No. XXX Preliminary Plat, Area 2, without topography Preliminary Plat, Area 2, with topography Preliminary Plat, Area 3, without topography Preliminary Plat, Area 3, with topography Otter Creek Crossing Otter Creek Crossing 3rd Addition Otter Creek Crossing 4tn Addition Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Excerpts Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Excerpts 7 Planning Commission Agenda - 03/01/2022 EXHIBIT Z Conditions of Approval Preliminary Plat (Plat Area 2) of Otter Creek Industrial Park 1. All proposed easements shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. As a current owner in the plat, Suburban Manufacturing will be required to sign the plat, with any consents to plat as necessary. 3. Plats are subject to the review of the Wright County Surveyor. 4. Additional drainage and utility easement shall be provided along Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of Plat Area 2 for stormwater purposes at the discretion of the City Engineer. 5. Additional drainage and utility easement is required for the existing stormwater pipe along the southern portion of the proposed Lot 3, Block 1, per the direction of the City Engineer. 6. Compliance with the comments of the City Engineer's letter dated February 24, 2022. 7. Final plats are approved and filed in accordance with the requirements of the Monticello Subdivision Ordinance. 8. Considerations of other Staff and the Planning Commission. EXHIBIT Z Conditions of Approval Preliminary Plat — Plat Area 3 of Otter Creek Industrial Park 1. All proposed easements shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. Plats are subject to the review of the Wright County Surveyor. 3. Compliance with the comments of the City Engineer's letter dated February 24, 2022. 4. Final plats are approved and filed in accordance with the requirements of the Monticello Subdivision Ordinance. 5. Considerations of other Staff and the Planning Commission 0 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-011 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OTTER CREEK CROSSING REPLAT AREA 2 WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is seeking a replatting of certain property in the Otter Creek Industrial Park; and WHEREAS, the site has previously been platted as a series of lots and outlots for industrial development, stormwater management, and wetland protection; and WHEREAS, the replat is intended to facilitate the more efficient use and/or expansion of new and existing industrial businesses; and WHEREAS, the platted lots will be consistent with requirements of the City's Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance requirements; and WHEREAS, the subject property will be developed under the requirements of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application for the plat pursuant to the regulations of the applicable ordinances and land use plans and policies; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 1, 2022 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1. The proposed uses are consistent with the intent and purpose of the I-1, Light Industrial District. 2. The proposed uses will be consistent with the existing and future land uses in the area in which they are located, including the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. 3. The impacts of the improvements are those anticipated by the existing and future land uses and are addressed through standard review and ordinances as adopted. 4. The proposed access and development details meet the intent and requirements of the applicable zoning regulations, and are consistent with the applicable land use policies and ordinances. 5. The proposed plat is not anticipated to negatively impact surrounding industrial properties, and instead is expected to encourage future industrial development on the subject property. 6. Approval of the plat will not result in the need for additional road or utility infrastructure and should not otherwise negatively impact the health or safety of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota recommends to the City Council that the proposed Preliminary Plat for Plat Area 2 of the Otter Creek Industrial Park be approved, subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z of the staff report, as follows: 1. All proposed easements shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. Final plats are approved and filed in accordance with the requirements of the Monticello Subdivision Ordinance. 3. Considerations of other Staff and the Planning Commission. ADOPTED this lst day of March, 2022 by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Paul Konsor, Chair ATTEST: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-012 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OTTER CREEK CROSSING REPLAT AREA 3 WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is seeking a replatting of certain property in the Otter Creek Industrial Park; and WHEREAS, the site has previously been platted as a series of lots and outlots for industrial development, stormwater management, and wetland protection; and WHEREAS, the replat is intended to facilitate the more efficient use and/or expansion of new and existing industrial businesses; and WHEREAS, the platted lots will be consistent with requirements of the City's Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance requirements; and WHEREAS, the subject property will be developed under the requirements of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application for the plat pursuant to the regulations of the applicable ordinances and land use plans and policies; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 1, 2022 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1. The proposed uses are consistent with the intent and purpose of the I-1, Light Industrial District. 2. The proposed uses will be consistent with the existing and future land uses in the area in which they are located, including the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. 3. The impacts of the improvements are those anticipated by the existing and future land uses and are addressed through standard review and ordinances as adopted. 4. The proposed access and development details meet the intent and requirements of the applicable zoning regulations, and are consistent with the applicable land use policies and ordinances. 5. The proposed plat is not anticipated to negatively impact surrounding industrial properties, and instead is expected to encourage future industrial development on the subject property. 6. Approval of the plat will not result in the need for additional road or utility infrastructure and should not otherwise negatively impact the health or safety of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota recommends to the City Council that the proposed Preliminary Plat for Plat Area 3 of the Otter Creek Industrial Park be approved, subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z of the staff report, as follows: 1. All proposed easements shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. Final plats are approved and filed in accordance with the requirements of the Monticello Subdivision Ordinance. 3. Considerations of other Staff and the Planning Commission. ADOPTED this Ist day of March, 2022 by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Paul Konsor, Chair ATTEST: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-013 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP, REZONING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM A-O, AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT: OUTLOT F, OTTER CREEK CROSSING PID: 155-171-000060 WHEREAS, the City, as owner, proposes to incorporate said property into the Otter Creek Crossing Industrial Park for development; and WHEREAS, the property is currently platted as an outlot, and has remained zoned A-O during the time it has been undeveloped; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for light industrial uses in the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the site is located and was originally platted as a part of the City's Otter Creek Industrial Park district, and that district accommodates a variety of light industrial uses; and WHEREAS, a companion plat, along with the proposed rezoning, is consistent with the long- term use and development of the property for light industrial uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 1, 2022 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1. The Rezoning provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site by putting the existing and proposed improvements and parcels to reasonable industrial uses for the area. 2. The proposed improvements on the site under the I-1 Light Industrial Zoning are consistent with the needs of the development in this location and the adjoining Otter Creek Industrial Park. 3. The improvements will have expected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 4.. The industrial uses for the project are consistent with the intent of the City's economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the proposed zoning regulations, in support of the companion plat CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-013 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approves the rezoning of the subject property to I-1, Light Industrial District. ADOPTED this I' day of March, 2022, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION IRE ATTEST: Paul Konsor, Chair Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 2 ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AMENDING THE ZONING MAP BY REZONING THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY FROM A-O, AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT: OUTLOT F, OTTER CREEK CROSSING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Monticello is hereby amended by rezoning Outlot F of Otter Creek Crossing (PID 155-171-000060) from A-O, Agriculture Open Space to 1-1, Light Industrial District. Section 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to mark the official zoning map to reflect this ordinance. The map shall not be republished at this time. Section 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make any changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. The ordinance in its entirety and map shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance and map are available online and at Monticello City Hall for examination upon request. ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council this day of , 2022. Lloyd Hilgart, Mayor ATTEST: Rachel Leonard, City Administrator AYES: NAYS: L0 1 O N N 1 Q J n z LU J ry n H 0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Outlot A, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 3RD ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Outlot A, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Outlot B, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Lot 1, Block 1, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. PROPERTY SUMMARY 1. Subject property's addresses are shown on survey. 2. Subject property's property identification numbers are shown on survey. 3. The gross area of the subject property is 1,012,405 Square Feet or 23.242 acres. SURVEY NOTES 1. The bearing system is based on the recorded plat of OTTER CREEK CROSSING 3RD ADDITION, having an assumed bearing of N00°25'16"E for the West line of Outlot A. 2. The vertical datum is based on NAVD88. 3. Field work was completed on 12/10/2021. PLAT AREAS Proposed plat areas are as follows: Lot 1, Block 1 = 473,100 Square Feet or 10.861 acres Lot 2, Block 1 = 221,846 Square Feet or 5.093 acres Lot 3, Block 1 = 204,092 Square Feet or 4.685 acres Outlot A = 113,367 Square Feet or 2.603 acres Total = 1,012,405 Square Feet or 23.242 acres ADDRESSES Owner: City of Monticello Surveyor: WSB 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF OTTER CREEK CROSSING WHICH ARE WITHIN LOT 1, BLOCK 2, SAID OTTER CREEK CROSSING HAVE BEEN VACATED PER DOCUMENT. NO. A974166. VICINITY MAP CSAH NO. 39 �\\111 -I\� s y 'Ap 9Q 0 SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 121, RANGE 25, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA I I / ^ A I_I N 1 V\/. Div LEGEND I — — — — — — I Q FOUND SECTION MONUMENT I \ FOUND MONUMENT O SET MONUMENT I \ SIGN DECIDUOUS TREE \ EVERGREEN TREE © PEDESTAL \ HAND HOLE I I \ \ \ vLT FIBER OPTIC VAULT I I z \ \ LIGHT POLE w w 2 \ W ,a POWER POLE W Q I F GUY WIRE w U w \ ❑E ELECTRIC PANEL v w C \ ELECTRIC MANHOLE I O p N LL w se CO Z SOIL BORING I I z 0 o z \ \ D FLARED END SECTION w Z o 0 z \ \ \ O ® CATCH BASIN w � w z fi U) Z \ \ \ ® BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN I U J tL H 2 O s� STORM MANHOLE w < LU � \ �s SANITARY MANHOLE I U a / Q SANITARY LIFT STATION IRR IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX � HYDRANT Z WATER VALVE �1 > SANITARY LINE STORM LINE I ��� �O. » � rn �� Off' � I WATER MAIN FD RLS 16233 — — S89053' 4"E 494.44 �, U1 L'�� c UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATION — — — — — — — — — — — — — E UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC \ T I I } F UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC T F 12 �I- y N N O T EXISTING DRAINAGE AND I I } w O I ` UTILITY EASEMENT PER i o (� �\'� o� � 103.79 \ \ c UNDERGROUND GAS PLAT OF OTTER CREEK v00 OH OVERHEAD POWER I < UO I I I N CROSSING 1ST ADDITION S89°53'44"E �/�� / 1 110.63 \ FENCE I Z w U I o �� S89°53'44"E vS00°06'16"W I I QaY I I I I CURB & GUTTER I 0- w I C) \ ��- - 6 34.00 N °' I z w I o0 \ �\�7 FD RLS 42621 210 o \ HEDGE LINE I o Q w I O \ I i I WO (� `� J z P. � _ 2��,s3 FD 1/2" \ 1 J Ln I PIPE TREE LINE % i I ` \ \ \ I \ \ \ F.p 1/2" PIPE (^ �� \� o \ ( \ 4 `29s 0 \ UEDGE OF I ` \ 2 \ BUILDING EDGE I \ J Q 1 R�7 I z \\\ \ \ DELINEATED 11 2.603 AC._429 \ \ �I I 1 h \ PLAT BOUNDARY �i I I z I O \ \ \ �\/ �6`% \OTC 00�� \� _ OUTLOT A S�� 99 �o 00 I t J� / < P D� DRAINA E AND UTILITY EASEMENT'S �' , PROPOSED LOT LINE C.p z N z OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO \ sQ I \� p J P O /�/j 4 / \ PROPOSED D and U EASEMENT LLJ rn I U) 0 ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED \ 9O n �\% �� j / P�� Otis ��� \°?42, OVALL OF O�OT P„ n, 7 CO U v z PID: 155194000010 \ 29� \ IP 5�� o I IT \ 2 ^ N12 2513 W I N I Q �/ G �Q 5 �J Aso °„ LAND BEING CONVEYED p w -, �'� I� - 6 V O I /1T 6 O z �-> I I U / Q \J V I L_ \J I ,L. TO SUBURBAN LO z U I ITI �T A \� 1 — — _ W 1 — — _ �� .l C .,� ¢ 1 1 43.48 z a � � N90°00'00"W 210.00 \S G �h �� } O FD 1/2" 17 � cv l l U I z `/ I L_v I n �9 P ``' 3� �, N87° 8 42"W 5 J w 0 PIPE o �O Hw \ram �\ ��� O!`� Dc� �dw0 L�NLAND BEING CONVEYED O I I U 0 U g \ \ �' G Q O � TO CITY OF MONTICELLO O u) \ Q,� 5 Q,O ���' y, 0 w U Q />> O� z I I I a I w Q �_ J \ �� EXISTING t�,��<� 204,092 Q. FT. zQ / O. r — -1 NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING I w LL w J \ Y O POOND /O p/ 4.6 5 AC. OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO w w / ^^ 80 L — J DRAINAGE AND UTILITY I I LLI oN 11 \ \ (\�'��V / OT 3 ADDRESS: PID:155 31 DALT ON AVE Z W O EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY I -- �� \ O� ��O \� `1 Q O THE PLAT OF OTTER CREEK I I Q I U U / w \ y OF P5�'�� p\r 4j L D BEING o w CROSSING 4TH ADDITION I \ G\(� ��^\\ �� NVEYED TO WHICH ARE WITHIN LOT 1, I I I 0���5��522 J UBURBAN BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOT B, SAID I LOT '� FD 1/2" PIPE . O O �_ 'I O 3,279 SQ. FT. OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH � FD 1/2" PI � J � \ 0.075AC. i� I /�1 /� I ' �I ` � / ADDITION ARE PROPOSED TO L_� I r I 473,100 SQ. FT. / < y FD 1/2" PIPE / // \ IL..Jr\ I Y / BE VACATED. I I � i I L_ 10.861 AC. LAND BEIDd JJCONVEYED Sr9 \ G-P���Q� TO CITY MONTICELLO 5,919SQ. FT. 0.136 AC. FDRLS L=�SL=23.26 �O \ 0234R=30.0012- R s� S � A=44o2455" BLOCK_ �' / / FD1/2"PIPE N8805 '0 '�W 30.41 JI \ \ \ / </ \ %11 IT FD1/2"y'k' i \\ /// ��\�.� vv I L_v I i--n 1� I I \ 1 \ PIPE \ LAND BEING \ \ / CONVEYED TO n�`� <, / SUBURBAN \ I \ L LOT 2 7,984 SQ. FT. 0.183 AC. 00 �< < / I \ \ \ 221,846 SQ. FT.NO J �D 1/2" PIPE \ 5.093AC. \ \ \ \\ 041 OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED PID:155223000010 \ ls \\ \04 I I \� FD 1/2" PIPI' ctios'��ss st69"61 91 /Oti DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: 6 �{ N N l �-6 l N T T BEING 6 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, NOT TO SCALE AND 12 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. �QS?6,\ FD1/2" \ �>. O T PIPE I / Graphic Scale (in feet) a0 \ am \\A L�'r\ \\ I / / \ ,c/ \ 0 100 200 1 inch = 100 feet wsb SCALE: DRAWN BY: 1" = 100' SURVEY BY: CHECK BY: SR JRH z O U) W 0Y w a 0 O z O } O Q W' J W W Z d O M p Q w Z 00 > Q =)nO �=ZQ o Oz 2 ~ _3U) �mOJ _ W ~ WW Q Z = Q' > �QzOL)L d — W fn N 0 wU)W OfJ r < �� N o � 000zw =W _)Z p — W in J =) Preliminary Plat CD co CL 4-0 NW I..L 0 CY)N (1) 0- 0 c� W C: N O � U ^L 4-+ O WSB PROJECT NO. 019295-000 SHEET 1 OF 1 L0 N O N N i Q J Ill ZLU G J ry n H 0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Outlot A, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 3RD ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Outlot A, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Outlot B, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Lot 1, Block 1, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. PROPERTY SUMMARY 1. Subject property's addresses are shown on survey. 2. Subject property's property identification numbers are shown on survey. 3. The gross area of the subject property is 1,012,405 Square Feet or 23.242 acres. SURVEY NOTES 1. The bearing system is based on the recorded plat of OTTER CREEK CROSSING 3RD ADDITION, having an assumed bearing of N00°25'16"E for the West line of Outlot A. 2. The vertical datum is based on NAVD88. 3. Field work was completed on 12/10/2021. PLAT AREAS Proposed plat areas are as follows: Lot 1, Block 1 = 473,100 Square Feet or 10.861 acres Lot 2, Block 1 = 221,846 Square Feet or 5.093 acres Lot 3, Block 1 = 204,092 Square Feet or 4.685 acres Outlot A = 113,367 Square Feet or 2.603 acres Total = 1,012,405 Square Feet or 23.242 acres ADDRESSES Owner: City of Monticello Surveyor: WSB 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF OTTER CREEK CROSSING WHICH ARE WITHIN LOT 1, BLOCK 2, SAID OTTER CREEK CROSSING HAVE BEEN VACATED PER DOCUMENT. NO. A974166. VICINITY MAP CSAH NO. 39 I\\111 S .9 9Q — 0 I C 5�1 SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 121, RANGE 25, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA LEGEND Q FOUND SECTION MONUMENT FOUND MONUMENT O SET MONUMENT SIGN DECIDUOUS TREE EVERGREEN TREE © PEDESTAL HAND HOLE vLT FIBER OPTIC VAULT LIGHT POLE ,a POWER POLE --) GUY WIRE ❑E ELECTRIC PANEL ELECTRIC MANHOLE se SOIL BORING D FLARED END SECTION ® CATCH BASIN ® BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN s@ STORM MANHOLE @s SANITARY MANHOLE SANITARY LIFT STATION IRR IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX � HYDRANT Z WATER VALVE > SANITARY LINE >> STORM LINE I WATER MAIN I D RLS 1623 c UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATION E UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 12 - ° 6_ I- y F UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC / I I G UNDERGROUND GAS ~ O J � off OVERHEAD POWER FENCE _ !I z W o o d CURB & GUTTER I UJ Z I K HEDGE LINE I LU ; to Iwo/ TREE LINE / I BUILDING EDGE / ° PLAT BOUNDARY U-) I IY z II I � 1 � PROPOSED LOT LINE I III I I PROPOSED D and U EASEMENT W �` I I =I LAND BEING CONVEYED 7 I o I �� TO SUBURBAN LO LAND BEING CONVEYED O TO CITY OF MONTICELLO O z I I F-00 r — -1 NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING I L — J DRAINAGE AND UTILITY I \ EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF OTTER CREEK of al CROSSING 4TH ADDITION WHICH ARE WITHIN LOT 1, BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOT B, SAID OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH I I rl ADDITION ARE PROPOSED TO I r I BE VACATED. o I o I I KILI.: I I I J / ^ A I_I N I /1 ^ 1 V�J. Div sT �/TUM/ U \ \ NO \426 S SURFACE FD 1/2" O \ \ EDGE �- 02 � DELINEATED WETLAND 2.603 AC. I 9 \ N, OUTLOT A ��% h 99 �° \ AIN E AND UTILITY EASEMENT LL OFOUTLOT i.. i I 'o o z � O , FD 1/2" 1 43.4 L: V LU 0 SIGN PIP 0 W U Q z a _NTICELLO ¢ z 8 III III I I V ` �G �A10 _ ADD ES 1 31 D TON E O w ° —� �O� O��p \(�� OT 3 PID: 1552230010 � / \ \ / F 5� r I L D BEING �o 0 \ \ \ G\ J�P2�\\ I �� l NVEYED TO C7- I L) t�Ez �SZ`L3 I UBURBAN�� I LOT FD 1/2" PIPE % � � �0..�5 �^ J I '� � � 3,279 SQ. FT. 0.075 AC. �PFD 1f2 Pi 473,100 SQ FT. L-LJ r U 1V AC. \ o / / s® \ �0�P� RET WALL </ I LAND BEIW NVEYED 8 G�PQ�� T�CITY �ON ICELLO ��P �C Pp0 0 0 / \ L-23.26 / 0.136 26 h �0( LEV I ( F� 4i S L z ,6 R-30.00 V / / � / < �/ v , � 0 ° ACE I R'6� SS A=44°24'55" \ // �� �/ \ —b = �Q _ _ , \ ,� BLOCK \� 1 2" E / '0 \ 0111 0. z JI x \ I \ \ \ / / < / < x \i' �J V I L \ \% \/ / '� � LAND RING \ \ SS \ ° E /: 94 V �J \ � S RM CONVEYEDYO <�"� � LOT \ SUBURBAN v // S / / 7 84 SQ. FT. J '� r / I\ 2 \ I � IU \ U w \ o V �aLL I �Z N (0Zrn -iw \\ G �J� wC \ O z N Q s 00 Hw 2 zU)0 LL owa�o \ J U o zCN tl I W Z 0 LL z a EDGE OF STREAM J wOfw zoZ \ UHtL �Cf) m I LU U) 0 Pz0 wow I U l� E9 / I I PANN 1 S89°53' 4"�494.44 to — NH LEV: - �—���I CO I EXISTING DRAINAGE AND \ UTILITY EASEMENT PER V �' SS Rl�fi 933. o o > �� PLAT OF OTTER CREEK zT (\ � V: 924. / \� / / / CROSSING 1STADDITION�1 � —�0.63 1 3 1 F 92"4 W S89'53'44"E: S00°06'16" o \ O / \� 6 34.00 3: N / I �' EXISTING BUILDING I �- 1/2" PIPE ( �� O� o RET WALL Cn Lu v _ �� z 1 A CP \ �I �I 00 oo I vv \ I v OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO \\o I \R�TNJALL J �� P��OP �� ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED z 0 PID: 155194000010 A \ �w \\\� U nI IT1 /'\T A \� 1 \ N90°09007W-210.00 LU °x JLU \ \\�� �� 204092 Q. F��`'\P�� ��N8 C8$' C w Q I �- J \ \ \f 0 EXISTING U I I ~ LU J \ �\ \ Y O POND / 4.6 5 AC. OWN •CITY I \ \ � 83 AC. /<'� I / \ \ ` 221,8�SQFT . . v / \ 1/2" PIPE \ 5.093 AC. I \ \\ \ o \ OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO SAN Ste,✓ \ ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED ( \ \ \ \ \ L y \ \ PID:155223000010 / S ELEV. 940.62 \ \ <�b' / CD \ 9°F °ti N LO , \ \j0 ti � T F 1/2" \ �Q'L'iss I I / / �\ ® \ � °ti / �/ \ 89 �/ NSTUB / FD 1/2" 0 �, -'PIPE - " 80 1 �\ I V,O e I I N 6 �-I I I I / /j/ / \ 74o N N 6 943.2 . �\ F- - II _1 J L GAS\SIG \ BEING 6 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, 4 / \ Graphic Scale (in feet) NOT TO SCALE AND 12 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY/^ / \ I / 1 ti \ LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. I / 80 k'0 100 200 \ � / / \ 0ti 1 inch = 100 feet DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: wsb SCALE: DRAWN BY: 1" = 100' SURVEY BY: CHECK BY - SR JRH z O U) W 0Y z O H a- U U w 0 w a 0 O z O } O J W Q w W Z (7 �DLJwZ 0000 LO > of nO �=ZQ o O 2 ~ J U �ED0JW _ J ~WWQZ= Q' >, 2QZ_0LL 0 0 W cn U) LL N 0 wU)W �'J r U < Lu :�,- �H N o 0f0Uzw W 0 = W - _U Z p — � in J =) Preliminary Plat .CD CL 4_0 NW I..L 0 CY)N (1) O U }� c� 0 N O � U 4_+ O WSB PROJECT NO. 019295-000 SHEET 1 OF 1 o�pe�k PLAT AREAS \ O0�Q���� / / z Y Z o .� \ \ Proposed plat areas are as follows: o 0 o U) PA A � Lot 1, Block 1 = 345,887 Square Feet or 7.940 acres m � Q \ \ °s� \ \ Lot 1, Block 2 = 452,317 Square Feet or 10.384 acres \_ - - - / w w J V 6, \ \ Lot 2, Block 2 = 387,057 Square Feet or 8.886 acres \ N'LY LINES OF OUTLOT E, _ - - - /�� so Lot 1, Block 3 = 293,835 Square Feet or 6.746 acres F OTTER CREEK CROSSING / p A .0LU \ Outlot A = 635,018 Square Feet or 14.578 acres \ O \ u_v I \ FID cp��0 R/W = 68,319 Square Feet or 1.568 acres RLS 44581 J DRAINAGE AND UTILITY �,' \ \ Total = 2,182,435 Square Feet or 50.102 acres L� L_yJ f Iy v ��� EASEMENT PER PLAT OF �J / �I Q OTTER CREEK CROSSING i \ \ ADDRESSES I� Owner: City of Monticello O'S'��Y �F� ��4,� s8�� ; V ✓ / / / I /1 TT F_— �) / [) E_ E_ I �� / [) /1 ^ ^ I N I / A \ I Surveyor: WSB 1'p O� \ I / / I \J I I L_ I \ I \ L_ L_ I \ i I \ \J .:.: I I V \ 7 \ -O\ 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 SSiy ° A\� / Minneapolis, MN 55416 G7<OT `� �Cx.�\ / �Q L) n A f1 f1 ITI /1 N I c� s� y v / / I O° I \ LJ /—v L/ L/ I I 1 \J 1 \4 ,� \ 17 '90 OT l 1 •� A I Ste, �\ 1 OAT/ >� \ NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY Lu oti�' �" \ / I I �6' �`��\ mod, EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF OTTER z Oi (n , / SE'LY LINE OF OUTLOT A, OTTER \� I 0O I CREEK CROSSING WHICH ARE WITHIN LOT 1, O / CREEK CROSSING 1ST ADDITION I O� �'\ BLOCK 2, SAID OTTER CREEK CROSSING HAVE �° Z) ofo •O �, BEEN VACATED PER DOCUMENT. NO. A974166. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Outlot E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, Wright County, Minnesota. EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING: That part of Outlot E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 1 ST ADDITION, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota; thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 17 seconds West, assumed bearing along the southeasterly line of said Lot 1, 434.31 feet; thence South 40 degrees 53 minutes 16 seconds East, 507.03 feet; thence North 41 degrees 02 minutes 17 seconds East, 434.31 feet to the northeasterly line of said Outlot E; thence North 40 degrees 53 minutes 16 seconds West, along said northeasterly line, 507.03 feet to the point of beginning. AND ALSO EXCEPT That part of Outlot E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of Outlot A, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 1 ST ADDITION, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota; thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 17 seconds West, assumed bearing along the southwesterly extension of the southeasterly line of said Outlot A, 512.89 feet to the west line of said Outlot E; thence North 00 degrees 49 minutes 08 seconds West, along said west line, 686.83 feet to the southwesterly line of said Outlot A; thence South 49 degrees 07 minutes 40 seconds East, along said southwesterly line, 458.31 feet to the point of beginning. Outlot A, 90TH STREET 3RD ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. AND Outlot F, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, Wright County, Minnesota. U_ Y i <� Cb \ \ ( O 0� \ \ \ \ OLU w < /� �� / / MOST S'LY CORNER I GJ\ \ \ > \ o JU v' Al/ OFOUTLOTA,OTTERCREEK I \ \ PROPERTY SUMMARY » \ v w A / CROSSING 1ST ADDITION I \ \ \ \ z �� / I \� \ \ \ 1. Subject property's addresses are shown on survey. LEGEND Q FOUND SECTION MONUMENT FOUND MONUMENT O SET MONUMENT SIGN DECIDUOUS TREE EVERGREEN TREE © PEDESTAL ® HAND HOLE vLT FIBER OPTIC VAULT LIGHT POLE a POWER POLE GUY WIRE ❑E ELECTRIC PANEL ELECTRIC MANHOLE ss SOIL BORING D FLARED END SECTION ® CATCH BASIN ® BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN s� STORM MANHOLE @s SANITARY MANHOLE SANITARY LIFT STATION IRR IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX HYDRANT Z WATER VALVE — SANITARY LINE STORM LINE WATER MAIN O O C UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATION 2. Subject property's property identification numbers are shown on survey. E UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC / SW'LY EXTENSION OF THE SE'LY I \ \ \ \ 3. The gross area of the subject property is 2,182,435 Square Feet or 50.102 acres. F UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC / `LINE OF OUTLOT A, OTTER CREEK I \ n \ \ \ G UNDERGROUND GAS CROSSING 1ST ADDITION off OVERHEAD POWER FENCE SURVEY NOTES 1. The bearing system is based on the recorded plat of OTTER CREEK CROSSING, CURB & GUTTER RLS 44581 LOT 1 I / /� 9 \ having an assumed bearing of S00°49'08"E for the West lines of Outlot E and Outlot F. HEDGE LINE I \ I �� ��� \ \ \ \ MI I /�v \ 2. The vertical datum is based on NAVD88. _ < i ` \ \ \ BLOCK 1 0 l DRAINAGE AND UTILITY / p� �� < �1^ C,\ L - FD 1/2' eIPE \ wI T EASEMENT PER PLAT OF � - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ /��`b �Q\� ���� 3. Field work was completed on 12/10/2021. F- — -1 NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING \ < \ I I OTTER CREEK CROSSING L_ — _J DRAINAGE AND UTILITY 345,887 SQ. FT. co/ SQ �� EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY 7.940 AC. OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO I i% O I (J \ THE PLAT OF OTTER CREEK o CROSSING WHICH ARE WITHIN W ADDRE�S: UNASSIGNED \: D 1/2" PIPE ` \ \ QO ��1 OUTLOT E AND OUTLOT F, \�/ C ] \ \ \ \ \ I \ PID:' 155171000050 / 20° SAID OTTER CREEK / \ \ \ \ I \ / 0 \ CROSSING ARE PROPOSED L I J L \ \ \ \ I / Sl TO BE VACATED. I I I \\ \ �81319 \\�L J Q. FT. \ / co "' 12 \ \ 1.56804 TREE LINE BUILDING EDGE PLAT BOUNDARY PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED D and U EASEMENT \ I N. \ / L vT OUTLOT A / N LOT 1 /�------------„� , z \ \ I % DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT / z / //� \ \ \ OVER ALL OF OUTLOT A / \ u \ I L�J O \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I ) 635,018 SQ. FT. / / BLOCK 3 O LL C-) I 14.578 AC. / 293,835 SQ. FT. T j ) r L- 1 \ /� S'WLY LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, \ k I n i \ L _ IJ O w \ \ \ \ \ I/ / / / 6.746 AC. ^ �1T .i 1 I \ 1-- 6'y 4 90TH STREET 3RD ADDITION �— LLj zo \\ \ \ \ /Y / / 1 t Tln�l 7 �S,, / .n 1 C I J \ /1 i T / I / - / oo `) OWNFRrC%T F Mql` T J�L�O w \ \ \J V I _ I i Q( M / �, r) � 2NIA D UT�U�TY �' ^� % N LINE OF VACATED T v 1 O \ \ \ ��/ // I i / / / N / \ Ii PID: 1= ERPLAT OF / L=51.31 \\ CHELSEA ROAD WEST 1 r\ V — — — — \ \ \ \ /�/ \ I I i / / / \\ `/ EpSER EKCROgSING R=30.00 — — — FD 1/2" PIPE \ \�� \ �J� / I / / / I 0 --- / /� pTTE CRE L/ VTL_`/ A=97059'36 " LL o \ \ I 146 FD RLS 15233 --- — — FD RLS 23968 ' - 12 \\ \ \\ \ / 88.94 S88°38'27"E 666.91 / N 1� �o / 1/ S88 54 20 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY N `, / i / � �� EASEMENT PER PLAT OF 90TH STREET 3RD ADDITION 5 O Z I \ \ I \ DRAINAGE AND UTILITY / / I (b Q I \ \ , % ' _ \ 111 l \ EASEMENT PER PLAT OF / J p 1 d I \ \ 0 2pp \ OTTER CREEK CROSSING / Oct oO� CLU � z w � I tiT � FD RLS 22703 Z 2 U I I 60 0�� ` \ A�� /C'T \ \ / / Oc�` cp J �) i i CL OF VACATED Q w � O S' \ CHELSEA ROAD WEST � U) W I oc S �w~o I \> //\\\ tioS9S/0 \/^ \\\ W C) FED 1/2" PIPE -12 I PIPELINE EASEMENT PER DOC. NO. 724490 LOT 1 452,317 SQ. FT. 10.384 AC. OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED PID:155171000060 BLOC LOT 2 387,057 SQ. FT. 8.886 AC. S70 70 VICINITY MAP CSAH NO. 39 �7 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT \ \ FD 1/2" REBAR N S00020'16"E CENTERLINE OF 60 FT TEMPORARY i\� \�L� \ 10.91 STORM WATER DRAIN EASEMENT J' \ ��' _ _ \ PER DOC. NO. 731770 \ ,` Mo FD 1/2" \ (EXPIRED YET ???) \ \ ' \ tK / PIPE \ \ DRAINAGE AND UTILITY �� \ r EASEMENT PER PLAT OF _ �� � i OTTER CREEK CROSSING �^ \ I J \ FD 1 /2 rl / \ \ Ti�iC<�'1'cc\OC 41 F/CTp�0 \ PIPE I? J \ \ \ 'I'O SF TA o� \ O 6 ��ti'1'd, �Sp \ srs9cc �'LS,S9))To� VO T \ 88059'20"E 1121.27 A F_N F_N 1 T 1 n N I _ \ \8g 0�c�sS�o \\ '0+ \ 7\L1LJI I I\J1 \4 ti > - I►\�� SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 121, RANGE 25, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA L S LINE OF VACATED CHELSEA ROAD WEST L CHELSEA ROAD WEST VACATED PER DOC. NO. A1091043 (CITY RESERVES DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT HOWEVER) DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: N II N 6 i{ N I I N NOT TO SCALE I � 6 I�I -1---J L---1- BEING 6 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, AND 12 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. Graphic Scale (in feet) 0 100 200 1 inch = 100 feet wsb SCALE: DRAWN BY: 1 " = 100' SURVEY BY: CHECK BY: SR JRH Z O U) LLJ z O a 0f 0 W w 0 w a 0 O z O } O z�� U)J IY 0- C) Z ?Qw >IYQ�p o -U) U W Q Z H 2 > ~ J U) m 0 J W Q WW Q z =Wz0LL �w0U)0 U7 wU)W Of _J W < 3_ � U) =000zw = w W U z -W'0J0 co 0 00 Ln Preliminary Plat I..L U) CO W v, L G Q U }+ cU N O � U L 4_0 O WSB PROJECT NO. 019295-000 SHEET 1 OF 1 N w a - - 34.50 oalw /1 N I f1 I_I I I L, \_J 1 4 LJ I I U \ 0c,���� PLAT AREAS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LEGEND \ 0�'i, A, O/ \ Q FOUND SECTION MONUMENT I NC, Of - 0 z �ti Proposed plat areas are as follows: Outlot E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, Wright County, Minnesota. \ O OQ / �� z Y z_ O_ \ \ p p FOUND MONUMENT /�' z ~ \ Lot 1, Block 1 = 345,887 Square Feet or 7.940 acres O SET MONUMENT o� o o o \ 2Roo q EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING: m af ¢ s Lot 1, Block 2 = 452,317 Square Feet or 10.384 acres SIGN > 0 w Y co \ '�-. \ Lot 2, Block 2 = 387,057 Square Feet or 8.886 acres That part of Outlot E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, O ILL/Z DECIDUOUS TREE \ _ _ - - - - J w \ Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, OTTER CREEK \ N'LY LINES OF OUTLOT E, _ _ - - / r� so Lot 1, Block 3 = 293,835 Square Feet or 6.746 acres \ \ F OTTER CREEK CROSSING \ \ / 000 p 0 \ �o� CROSSING 1 ST ADDITION, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, EVERGREEN TREE ILL \ Minnesota; thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 17 seconds West, assumed bearing along the southeasterly line of said © PEDESTAL Outlot A = 635,018 Square Feet or 14.578 acres Lot 1, 434.31 feet; thence South 40 degrees 53 minutes 16 seconds East, 507.03 feet; thence North 41 degrees 02 (' \ HAND HOLE / \ \ o \ O ti minutes 17 seconds East, 434.31 feet to the northeasterly line of said Outlot E; thence North 40 degrees 53 minutes 16 Q \ \ / �� \ seconds West, along said northeasterly line, 507.03 feet to the point of beginning. vLT FIBER OPTIC VAULT / \ 9 Y p 9 9 \ F R/W = 68,319 Square Feet or 1.568 acres FD RLS 44581 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY ice'' LIGHT POLE \ v Ac���p� Total = 2,182,435 Square Feet or 50.102 acres AND ALSO EXCEPT: a POWER POLE EASEMENT PER PLAT OF \ c� L_AJ OTTER CREEK CROSSING \ �O OUTLET OR \ �o��o� That part of Outlot E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, GUY WIRE �A� S'i,� A\ ADDRESSES Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of Outlot A, OTTER CREEK ❑E ELECTRIC PANEL / v v I u_v 1 v �A �. cTNH ELEV: 37.18 CROSSING 1ST ADDITION, according to said plat recorded in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, ELECTRIC MANHOLE �\ \ \\V I y Minnesota; thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 17 seconds West, assumed bearing along the southwesterly extension 01\11�/ 937•�4 Owner: Cit of Monticello ss SOIL BORING c.Q�<y F V (� / %'� \ i I of the southeasterly line of said Outlot A, 512.89 feet to the west line of said Outlot E; thence North 00 degrees 49 r-\ TT r- �) / �) r- r- I / N �) r\ ^ ^ I IN I / \\ EDdE OF Surveyor: WSB minutes 08 seconds West, along said west line, 686.83 feet to the southwesterly line of said Outlot A; thence South 49 FLARED END SECTION p \ Q / \ - - - DELINEATED degrees 07 minutes 40 seconds East, along said southwesterly line, 458.31 feet to the point of beginning. CATCH BASIN O O \ �J \ �/ I I L_ I \ I \ L_ L_ I \ i I \ \J �..� I I V \ 7 ��\ ' \WE LAND 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 \ Minneapolis, MN 55416 AND ® BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN \ \ \ Q\ SO STORM MANHOLE o � O,X'�!� �i `� : j \, \ �� NOTE: ALL UNDERLYING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY Outlot A, 90TH STREET 3RD ADDITION, Wright County, Minnesota. t�s SANITARY MANHOLE �' j'\� \ �I 6' V �� EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF OTTER L SANITARY LIFT STATION Ld (Dz pAND t \ o � �� SELvL�N€OFrLOTA pT��� CREEK CROSSING WHICH ARE WITHIN LOT 1, ERR IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX � CO O /, CREEK CROSSING 1ST ADIJITI I O '� 1 �\ BLOCK 2, SAID OTTER CREEK CROSSING HAVE Outlot F, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, Wright Count Minnesota. �� = �� \\ T 9 Y� � HYDRANT 00 o x , \ �� ( QO �, \ v BEEN VACATED PER DOCUMENT. NO. A974166. g WATER VALVE �V o� j \ oo Z ^\ / \ za^sTORnn J \ > SANITARY LINE \ s w �� MOST'S'LY'QORNE R TNH ELEV: 937.36 o O OF OUTLOT'A, OTTER CREEK PROPERTY SUMMARY » STORM LINE \ � � / \ OUTLET ST — \\ \ v 3: ILL 3: L CROSSING 1 ST ADDITION 1. Subject property's addresses are shown on survey. WATER MAIN r ' C UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATION LLEV: 943.53 ���/ \ \ \ \ EXISTING I \\ -- 2. Subject property's property identification numbers are shown on survey. E UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC @s - \ BITUMINOUS OATH % \ % POND ' Oy / = v� SW'LY EXTENSION OF THE SE'LY V A \ ,' \� 3. The gross area of the subject property is 2,182,435 Square Feet or 50.102 acres. F UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC cns SIGN / LINE O OUTLOT A, OTTER CREEK-- - /\ G UNDERGROUND GAS iTG \ CROSSING 1STADDITION OH OVERHEAD POWER V ' ` - _� \\ - - rvss�V - A (� �_ // ti SURVEY NOTES FENCE \ A� ; - FEs is \ �' , , / / T; CURB & GUTTER L - 1. The bearing system is based on the recorded plat of OTTER CREEK CROSSING, H E : 943.24 LOT I\ i'�� / WET LAND I �� INEATE�� — �i/ NH ELEV: 946.43 having an assumed bearing of S00°49'08"E for the West lines of Outlot E and Outlot F. HEDGE LINE �,; GAS SIGN Oti `5 V� us. / T O\ TL ��3 ' —� ' ;'� 2. The vertical datum is based on NAVD88. M- 939 93 \ V TREE LINE T GRAVJF.K 1 0� \ ` _ , DRAINAGE AND UTILITY __ -- < C �\ L FD34.4 ` CH - - / /�o �� / 3. Field work was completed on 12/10/2021. 9� \ EASEMENT PER PLAT OF - - - - - _ L _ L --- �� , — NOTE ALL UNDERLYING I INV:3o QNG � _- W� T - �/��" /�7 C, : .30 8INCH - - -_ \ -r \ OTTER CREEK CROSSING r t / /�� - U /I g -- \ C) � \ \ 34"87 SQ T. �,� II / ---- /�� \ \ \ o� OWNER: C11 Y OF MONTICELLO iI % �� �, - �ti \ \ �- �,I VA V ADDRE�S. UNASSIGNED \/ �D 1/2" PIPE \ Oy \ \ \ I\ \ PID:�155171000050 / BITUMINOUS PATH LIJ� ISYING�RAIL� V / s� Ne TNH ELEV: 958.63 LIJ < I \ �_ \ 19 �FTo\\ \ \ M V \ IJ-v vv I �,' i ^� --12 1. o \ I / /� \ \ \OUTLOT A,/ // N LOT 1 -- fl` LU \ \ / z \ / \. � \ \ � / / / / % I DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT /// //� z / / / / / se \ � \ �J- OJ /\ ( `\ \ \ > / , OVER ALL OF OUTLOT A �� // / /� BLOCK / �I� O o Oy `\ \ \ / / / �� 635,018 SQ. FT. /��/ /� ������ 14.578 AC. 293;835 SQ. FT. 'w / -� w 6.746 / /TEXISTING TRAIL O R�Z F1M 1�T�(t--E9pRLC�LUPTV w00 co �/x/ 2 li PID: 1UR 1O N4 L1 IA UT S OI YN FG ------ ROgEpS 4 / CREEK / o�//, _ D 1/2"RIPE� A \ \ \ \ O / t% V \ I /�// RL 15 3 ��� 2 68� ' TER L/ V I L_�/� .y — —� — / / $ -- N 12�0" 3 / / - DRAINAGE AND UTILITY 54'2/ oy / , - - = EAS.E-1 PER PLAT OF 90TH STREET 3RD ADDITION 14X20 5 L - -J DRAINAGE AND UTILITY BUILDING EDGE EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF OTTER CREEK CROSSING WHICH ARE WITHIN PLAT BOUNDARY OUTLOT E AND OUTLOT F, PROPOSED LOT LINE SAID OTTER CREEK CROSSING ARE PROPOSED PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY TO BE VACATED. PROPOSED D and U EASEMENT 1 /1T El962.19 / /— L L I ev F SV&W LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, \ 1 n i AIL IJ s; 9bT4STREET 3RD ADDITION 4�04,, k{ ELEV: 99A-f}\?E OF VACATED L=5� , CHELSEA ROAD WEST 1 =30.00 I `J 59'36" \ GA IGN S _ o Ilk- --.. >- ILL (D0z I �� v �,. \ v _ O z \ � � � \\ � � / E�SEM AGE D,UTILI Y/ / / � � BLDG O I V� \��� �) ENT RPLAT I Q FZ��GJ���pG���'C' \ 2pp/ O1TER CR K CROS G� / I �c� 3 0 I / / .� o _ a Q � ILL z w f / / �`7ci/ / F D R 03 CN ' awe v,i �, o �� / ® a w� fl I�� �� / / oy ti I IV/ / �o TDJI�ELEV. 959.63 0 U) ILL W�� O U0, �0O\ I \\� III ��/� �� :� ��� �h\ IIIII, A v — FD 1/2" PIP . ,482 31 5 FT. III I II �/ oti ma's \ \ IIIII / OWNER: CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA I A AND TILI E ADDRESS: UNASSIGNED �� I // PID:155171000060 \ \\ \ NT RLINE OF-6 ORr /387,057 Q. T I I ST 2 WAT R D "A � 8.886 AC I PERQ. 1 ' ' I1 \ \\ \ / / / �/ / / I I I A D Till I i� --- PIPELIN _ Id r PER D0C. NO. lEN E EASE \� 24490 __ \ �- I \ I \ � fry � PIPEILL a 34.50 N I _ S88°59'20"E 1121.27 0 _ A F1 F1 1 T 1 /-\ N I w / AJ 1 4 LJ I i U �7\ LJ LJ I I I \J 1 V / FD 1/2" r REBAR S00020'16"E tiV -10.91 F 1/2" \ IP \ � T \ C c F ti \ — tiF cTT'1'� \ \ ti0 S'c�,��A9 2\ • 6 �F+ tiS 7,'1 0 \ '9) To'�iS, °T \ \ 9i8 9`SRO+ \ \ F� s% \ _VICINITY MAP CSAH NO. 39 SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 121, RANGE 25, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA � I I I I I I I I � I I CL OF VACATED CHELSEA ROAD WEST I I I I � 1 L S LINE OF VACATED CHELSEA ROAD WEST I I I L CHELSEA ROAD WEST VACATED PER DOC. NO. Al091043 (CITY RESERVES DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT HOWEVER) DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: N II N 6 i{ N N NOT TO SCALE I6 I�I -1---J L---1- BEING 6 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, AND 12 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. Graphic Scale (in feet) 0 100 200 1 inch = 100 feet wsb SCALE: DRAWN BY: 1" = 100' SURVEY BY: CHECK BY - SR JRH z O U) W z O a - Of O w 0 w a 0 O z O } O Of Q ILLJ W W Z d O cM p w Z �a 00 LLI> of n � Lu =ZQ o 0 _ ~ J (/) �mOJLu _ J ~LWQZ= Q' >+ 2 Q Z O LL O Lu (n N IrOQ Of o U < a- :�,- 0 = 04 o R- LUpUzWLij = Lu _U Z p — W F5 J 5 Preliminary Plat CD co �.L IM N�4-0 0 CO (1) cn o Q o U �, c� W C: N O � U 4-+ O WSB PROJECT NO. 019295-000 SHEET 1 OF 1 C 00117IF1!G Y,,F- OTTER CREEK CROSSING KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Otter Creek, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Wright, State of Minnesota, to wit: The Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, the South Half of the Northwest Quarter all in Section 10, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota, lying southerly and westerly of Interstate No. 94 right of way except the following described tracts of land: 1) The East 50 rods of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter. 2) Beginning at the northwest comer of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter, thence south along the west line of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 632.70 feet; thence east deflecting 90 degrees 19 minutes left along an old fence line, a distance of 518.32 feet; thence north parallel with said west line of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 56 feet more or less to the thread of Otter Creek; thence easterly and northerly along said thread of Otter Creek, a distance of 834 feet to the north line of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter, thence west along said north line a distance of 630.00 feet to the point of beginning. And that J. Edwin Chadwick, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liabiity Company, fee owner, J. X. Beat, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, fee owner of the following'�p� described property situated In the County of Wright, State of Minnesota, to wit That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter and that part of Lot B, according to the plat by E. B. McCord recorded May 4, 1886 in Book 1 of Sectional Plats, Page 566, in the North Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 121. Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: AND Commencing at the Southwest comer of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter, thence North 0 degrees 49 minutes 08 seconds West, assumed bearing along the West line of said East Hoff of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 494.12 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to be described, said point being the Northwest comer of BONDHUS ADDITION, according to the recorded plat; thence South 88 degrees 58 minutes 44 seconds East, along the North line of said BONDHUS ADDITION, a distance of 1167.86 feet to the centerline of a township road (also known as 90th Street Northeast); thence North 45 degrees 19 minutes 28 seconds East, -along said centerline, a distance of 218.66 feet to the East line of sold East Half of the Southwest Quarter, thence North 0 degrees 22 minutes 22 seconds West, along said East line a distance of 46.10 feet to the Northwesterly right—of—way line of said township road, said point being 696.34 feet North of the Southeast comer of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter, as measured along said East line; thence North 49 degrees 38 minutes 15 seconds West, a distance of 476.31 feet; thence North 40 degrees 21 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 418.51 feet to the North line of the Southeast Quarter of said Southwest Quarter, thence South 88 degrees 54 minutes 20 seconds East, along said North line of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 88.25 feet to the Northeast comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest corner of said Lot B of the North Half of the Southeast Quarter, thence South 89 degrees 32 minutes 41 seconds East along the South line of said Lot 8 (also being the South line of said North Half of the Southeast Quarter), a distance of 223.15 feet; thence North 45 degrees 28 minutes 47 seconds East, a distance of 530.02 feet; thence South 53 degrees 14 minutes 41 seconds East, a distance of 319.12 feet to the southeasterly line of said Lot B, formerly the centerline of 90th Street Northeast and also being the northwesterly line of 90TH STREET 2ND ADDITION, according to the recorded plat; thence North 45 degrees 19 minutes 28 seconds East, along the southeasterly line of said Lot B. a distance of 498.00 feet more or less to the Southwesterly right—of—way line of interstate Highway Number 94; thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly right—of—way line, to Its intersection with the North line of said Lot B, also being the North line of said North Half of the Southeast Quarter, thence North 88 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds West along said North line of Lot B, a distance of 195.42 feet to the Northeast comer of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter, thence continue North 88 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds West, along the North line of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 1342.19 feet to the Northwest comer of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 49 minutes 08 seconds East, along the West line of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 2153.98 feet to the point of beginning. That part of The East 50 rods of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 121, Range 25 lying Southwesterly of 1-94; and that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 121, Range 25, lying Southwesterly of 1-94; Wright County, Minnesota. And that the City of Monticello, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Wright, State of Minnesota, to wit: That part of Lot B, according to the plat by E. B. McCord recorded May 4, 1886 in Book 1 of Sectional Plats, Page 566, in the North Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer of said Lot B of the North Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 32 minutes 41 seconds East along the South line of sold Lot B (also being the South line of said North Half of the Southeast Quarter), a distance of 223.15 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 45 degrees 28 minutes 47 seconds East, a distance of 530.02 feet; thence South 53 degrees 14 minutes 41 seconds East, a distance of 319.12 feet to the southeasterly line of said Lot B, formerly the centerline of 90th Street Northeast and also being the northwesterly line of 90TH STREET 2ND ADDITION, according to the recorded plat; thence South 45 degrees 19 minutes 28 seconds West, along the southeasterly line of said Lot 8, a distance of 271.31 feet more or less to the South line of said Lot B: thence North 89 degrees 32 minutes 41 seconds West along said South line of Lot B, a distance of 441.15 feet to the point of beginning. Hoye caused the some to be surveyed and platted as OTTER CREEK CROSSING and do hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public use forever the Road, Highway and the easements for drainage and utility purposes only as shown on this plat. In witness whereof said Otter Creek, LLC, has caused these presents to be signed 4 by its proper officer this 1 3'day of Deem her• 20 611. SIGNED: r. its chief manager and president n E. Chadwick STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OFHen� —�• �jh}�@ foreg9o�ing instrument wag acknowledged before me this � day of e 2004 by JyhN Cb1.e 111 A4f44er et., % id n II Otter Creek, LLC, a Minnesota Limited L Ilfty Company, on behalf of the company. CYNT" J. M0WAL Notary ublic, canA eln County, Minnesota MOTARYrt1ttC•MI1t�a My Commission expires �•aaa.a.,•u 31 a00J Mir. sonrIM•s In witness whereof sold J. Edwin Chadwick, LLC, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day of CL e_ j1J' b Q. Y' 20 641 SI NED: ' its manager and vice president n E. Chadwick STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF C e -i T G 1, rThe foregoing inst,' merit was ocknowledged before me this d y of e C e r r,ber 20 0� by J O �Y1 G • Chadw �-ht n{QA�QQtr� $ i•>e i �G_nt of J. Edwin Chodwick, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, on behalf of the company. E a CYNTHIA J. MORICAL Notary Public, County, Minnesota i i NOTARY PURI-�ESOw1 My Commission expires a 3 JL 0 05 ofcarOA"nyubmsl.m C)k\ I;%\4_ \I I_OMMe.Ck_.\o..\ 90.rA-r\I ,?-tth In witness whereof said J. X Bowers, LLC, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day of Zeeen-I 111 20 Doi `� its James K. Bowers STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OFhonvine-po Th foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /tday of 20 OLI , by r 5 chief manager of J. X. Bowers, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, on behalf of the company. ,t CYNTHIA J. MORICAL Notary Public, N4 rip_ n,vs County. Minnesota " NOTARY PUBUC-MINNESOTA My Commission expires ''•a.n� b31 i .iDoS Nf Caron sbnE Or�Awk 31,E P PIN In witness whereof City of Monticello, Minnesota, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this\ +ti day of \_)f C C r•-.;y� c i• 20 c LA �� ��/#i. +_ its � �d•�C.(1� ;45 Cr4y R01"rn1ISrA TV II STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF' k� i.. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me. this 1 day of e cerr.'r e:: 20 by >rucE h e \e•�y +�R ��oY Rick �.,o\�tiac\1eM of the Cit of Monticello, Minnesota, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation, on behalf of the corporation. C.\4•`1 iac\M.1k5t+ck,�c,\•r V V--us)r "1^ n _lam S �, Notary Public, 1�9v Yob i My Commission expires —� ,)L z• I hereby certify that I have surveyed and platted the property described on this plat as OTTER CREEK CROSSING; that this plat is a correct representation of said survey, that all distances are correctly shown on the plat in feet and hundredths of a foot; that all monuments have been correctly placed in the ground as shown, or will be placed as required by the local government unit; that the outside boundary lines are correctly designated on the plat; and that there are no wet lands as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 505.02 Subd. 1 or public highways to be designated on the plat, other than as shown. urt M. Kisch, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License -No. 23968 The foregoing surveyors certificate was acknowledged before me this t,1 �� day of bizasnI 20-1 by Kurt M. Kisch, Licensed Land Surveyor, Minnesota License No. 23968. CYNTHIA I MORICAL Notary Public, F ennepin County, Minnesota STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTARY PUBLIC 31.2A 14Comrxc;anExpiresJan 31.2005 My Commission expires �'c�n. 31 . AI COUNTY OF II,W^ .r,.P CITY COUNCIL This plat of OTTER CREEK CROSSING was approved and accepted In compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2, by the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota at a meeting held thisday of 100IIIe •2001,f' CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINN /J�fltes� < Mayor City Administrator CITY PLANNING COMMISSION This plat of OTTER CREEK CROSSING was approved and accepted by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota at a meeting held this `15+ day of _k\}©veMl,f ,^. 20� . Chairman AI P"r Secretary COUNTY AUDITOR, Wright County, Minnesota Taxes paid for all years through year ,2663. and transfer entered this R3" day of Deed tr. 20Qy. COUNTY TREASURER, Wright County, Minnesota 1 hereby certify that taxes payable in the year aooy on lands herein described are paid this 23TtP day of l�eeeYxher 20Q�. COUNTY HIGHWAY ENGINEER, Wright County, Minnesota This plat was recommended for. approval this 23! day of 06C. 20_9�4 DAWN M GROSSINGL-f, tJOTPRY PUBLIC 4XIINESO4 I.K CC',.d EXA 011311P0"5 �L).�.�� Wright County Treasurer i V,v M�1 fi.p_lWright County Highway Engineer COUNTY SURVEYOR, Wright County, Minnesota Examined and recommended for approval this 23day of , eez,,�oer 20 fight County Surveyor COUNTY RECORDER, Wright County, Minnesota 1 hereby certify that this instrument was filed in the office of the County Recorder for record on this �O day of �C'C emh2f. 20-t!9, at LI o'clock j .m., and was duly recorded in Cabinet Sleeve 1654 as Document Number, 9 119 /inA 1 1j Ar Wright County Retarder 3LI A D CK.—LL --I RLK - Kuusisto; Ltd. SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS ., - ., - ., - NORTHWEST CORNER OF BONDHUS ADDITION N S8858'44 00 W W ~ QYO, coal in L5 Z � Wo uWi SOUTHWEST CORNER J OF THE EYZ- SWY4 ��-8250 SEC. 10 T. 121 R. 25--,\\ h l 1319.85 --- SOUTHWEST CORNER N88'58'45"W 2639,70 SEC. 10, TWP 121, RGE. 25 OFFICIAL_ PLAT 0 200 400 g 92 \ SCALE IN FEET Scale: 1 Inch = 200 Feet J \ / -7 / /� I •O Denotes found Wright County cast iron monument \ \ / \ / �� • Denotes found iron monument NORTH LINE LOT B p Denotes 1 /2 inch by 14 inch iron monument that --OF N Y - SE Y4 will be set within one year of recording of this plat, SEC 10 T 121 R 25 and marked with Minnesota Registration No. 23968. 95.42 95.37 MEAD Denotes wet land N8850 00"W) \ \ For the purposes of this plat the West line of the \\ East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota, is assumed to bear S00'49'08"E. 'pot \ETAIL-'^\� _3 610 `L\oJ�� N6/p / aB0 S ?\ < 3gB6B, \ \ \ / • YS 9\ Ro` 96 \ 47.10 9 yh 6 fie•, eL \ N4572 44 E �'�S yo��j �F° G�' y �o�`o ro p` \ N>5.1 \ ! \ .\ B Op.Os4 \\ ,_ ?B �s�3\\ j �k�/0°�`PQ�S ` a�` 0 15 2-60 G \ 8. s r- \ I 0• \i P rp e 32.60� \ ono\46s oIsd ����sr?,III o Sv �50• ��F '6. .. A F 55�ptr�� O h O.a 0 7 \N Olt..11\ BO c: `l >116.33 OWN S61'47 96 E o ��O✓✓;t '` \ `- OU Tj OT G r 1 441 15 /nFFn) 5-883827 f(YEAS.) \ S8932'41 E (DEED) \ -SOUTH LINE LOT B \ \\ SEC• 10 T. 121 R 25 �� "88 94ofgEAS.)x S8854 20'E UT F age and utility easement____`-----� - \ 46.96 (MEA: 46.10 (DEED) I 'ems ,,-NORTH LINE OF BONDHUS ADDITION N0020'16"W (YEA / ' \ N002222"W (DEEL -90�h, STREET NE MEAS. \ 'LAT) Q EA 2 bEEO \ 1 _\V��� P5• o10 Lr) x to ld ro a�40 b o N ry1g6,h� �6 (a a o / -//' SOUTH Y4 CORNER--- J SEC. 10, TWP. 121, RGE. 25, WRIGHT COUNTY CAST 13 9,85 / IRON MONUMENT -` - 754.: CIM '00 ;0. P � n^ p� cc J 1.76 i.'. 61'47'56"E?�� - - 243454 \ -FO P Southwesterly corner of Lot 3, Block 2, 90TH STREET ADD171ON 1 1�I- ,t q �1T 1t 1 r ✓� l" I 1 �< ^ DETAIL\ / Not to scale �a \ ° e / A !, ^� a, o O� F` Pr' l o, t�O o �o °° s• S53'14'41"E 33 33.35 RLK B, — JS45'06'16"W IIL7Enwir10 IzrD �r 47'5 1.92 34.49 '56"E / 4.49 RLK - Kuusisto, Ltd. SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS 10 00 n �- 82.50 1 _ _ 194 35 I I -----NORTHWEST CORNER SEC. 10, TWP. 121. RGE. 25 I '-Northwest corner of —�_NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 o. c� I") 1` Lno -West line of NE 1/4 - `^/ SE 1/4, SEC. 4, TWP 121, RGE. 25 I \ SS3 1 °'s/"\'o F 1 A�� r 1 / '`-DETAIL /r r/r -_ /_ 1 0 C.S.A.I 10 f NO.3S ,- -NORTH ST "" 1n )T CO a,TY 1n uu, vL nc 1CORNER .. RIVL11 IrVV,.1 1 H1vH.r/11 RIv1 I Ir OF S X NW Y4 117AY o, 4T •In - \ I 1 1 / A I I N I /1 {{ 627t (MEAS.)— (a �S8900'10'E 1 I 630.00 (DEED) -_ 1 - 4 1 r 1051.86 1 t 59.10- ,`}i o ; 1 \ S8900'1 E 1 ,n \ 0 473 10 1^ A H NORTH LINE - I - - - - - - x a F I OF S - NW Y 0)y v 269.56 �= 2q gg� g- ry _ �4=19'3D'19" INDO'02'26"E ,,N4 L=115 75 673'4q• \ z o rn I 'C\ON I ryMg' `� N ?p, --12 foot -L=45.$1 f `o _m o 2 I \ c^ W.•w \`--f-L=10213 wo . `" o \\ I yo rn ' V^ �' R=300.Q0 N\ ` c� O �\ . A=79'3019" z of w H v 3 z 1- z o I ` I u •F ,r \- \ 1 _ _,-drainage and I - utility easement i1 a Survey line,-315 ohN 1 ` \ lo0i- � 0 1 \\sus. v `Ix W 5895344'Ea ? N� N� !\ 6p6> \S s 518.32 - 255 87 " N % 01 p\\ 06\ o o \ S85'45'24 W 14. 60 =_ a-ok S/ 2 N89'53'44"W 1 82 5 142.5 I I o r, dS \\ II I I 4 I 1 Z I/ goo l I 101100 1 -----�2 foot dralnag and utility easement------- II s ��tn I I I I I R9�9• LOT 1 BLOCK 2 o FFkci AL PLAT OTTER CREEK CROSSING / LIU L1J F \ -- C.S.A.H. N0. 39 EST WRI/�I IT /\/\1 1NIT\/ 1 11/\1 111/ , )I/ IT r 1 �\ I R rrI71\7f11 \.vvlvl 1 fllvflrrnl R;%7r 1 vl I \ '� J Y2 — NW Y4 +I / n r. I ,1 I \ 1 r 1 627t (MEAS.) II \ l S89 00'70'E 1 1 \ 630.00 (DEED) - I \ — `' \ r/ 1051.86 1 1 59.1012ut460 1\ 1 \ 58473.10 -00,10 E I � ,Ln ' /_ 0 1 \-NORTH LINE py �� ——269.56 OF S Y - 00 NW Y4I 2 \tea, _ -� p=19*30'19' - '\ \ o, �,, IN00'02 26' E �I � \p�x1� \\w�\�• > v ` �/y4)L= 42110 5'F. 75\--- 36 ,\ -- 12 foot arainage an107 es<_, QON s0 L=45. 1C�O A=10'0544r' N8900'IOrW- - Cpc O O• CP \a` cS V P IN s \ I I c� r" co- \Q ":--<L=102.13 page and utility easement --� r �a \�\\ R=300.00 Cf)\ \ 01 � z rn \ �) \ ---,-,,,--drainage and WEST LINE OF THE 1 `1' z �_ I I \�\ �// 1 -\X utility easement EAST 50 RODS --ry \\ OF THE SE Y4 '- NW Y4 EAST50 RODS 825 FT)-->°' J to hLr) / \ N, SEC ' SEC 10 T 121 R 25--'' -------------- ------------ rn W N� r r7� OUTLOT C w \\ \ a a �o po � Survey y= ii3gk/ �� � i \ \ r) / / p 6 S• rp Go �4/ \o rL_20S\aO an p 585t.(b.271.49 / \\ - froc�0,0 N89'53'44"W - c^Jp `'�•. Q I V V O \ / o\\�lIgj3o' \\\/ eyes \\ \\ \ old 7 64S a2\9 WEST Y4 CORNER e o - \ \ \ � \ \ ��� <\ SEC. 10. TWP 121, .� tiJ� \ `0 \ \ � \ r RGE. 25. WRIGHT COUNTY %• \ , -rCASI IRON MONUMENT 1--NORTH LINE NORTHEAST CORNER \, 11 I / I si \ \ (�` OF NE Y4 - SW A O\\/ OF THE E Yz - SW Y4 \ NORTH LINE LOT B / SEC. 10, T 121, R 25-, \ o ` - 24f 00 \ I - \ \ ,� -\ \ \SEC 10 T 121 R 25 g\ p,0 � •hry ,yai _ _ \ I 6>\ ' - OF N Y - SE Y _ � ,'' SEC. 10 T 121 R 25 r ` 1342 19 t- - - - r \ 1 r \ - — ' q�0 00�---2684 37--- 1 r ; \ 1342 19 '- — — r � �_ \ N8850'00"W i , N8850'00'W �� / i ` \ 195 42 (OEEDj� — — — - \ \ `- k° A / 1195.37 MEAS) \ I I \ IN, '-NORTHWEST NORTHWEST CORNER g+ OL( 62y� \ \ I N8850 O"W r \ 12' IN, to OF THE E J4 - SW4 \\ --- moo\ / IN\ s OUTLOT D( 'o. P o oar \yo c, c\ �\ 7>S . pro 1 \ \ S`7\� O>'6., ,''2�o \ \ c'SB \ ` <i 1 n O. A \ (� ,' is �'i' ,ro \ O 9�� \ 1 0 \ \o��\ �> \ . or 01 /r9. \ I I I W I SS ✓ o s \ 6, \ �s G.i °/: 9p \ 1R z'� 16 ,rp, (3 c \\ �91. \ ^6^ 'OI I >\ F\ \/ �o iimo'S \ r�9OZJ, 2� yF I °"� ."� '`'\ C'j \ 9P o ' \ S �' I c I \ F TPA \ ")� P S 63 .O�' 1 I `��\ '1%\ \ \ coo. e0- \ 0 200 400 SCALE IN FEET Scale: 1 Inch = 200 Feet IN, \ � /` 9°j4? 4SeS ?h'` 1 i `\\` \ \ \ \ �fi� y � � \ \ � ✓ l_- • Denotes found iron monument 3N .I OUTLOT B \ I °F ' i \ \ I T Pa "4. \\ DETAIL` % 0 Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron monument that wN ° m \ \ \ n I 1 \ \ \\ \ S"� y' �� \ �' will be set within one year of recording of this plat, o I rn I \ \ t. P, ��,� , \ 3 v \ t \ I 'L/ \ �a / \ \ and marked with Minnesota Registration No. 23968. co j N r \ 9T I \ �c • . C nC0 I I W1- `oca \ �� �\ ,, Denotes wet land t e / � �r \ \ 1 _ � 7> Drainage /�/ � \ .�ry A v t / coA�e / ►7 Easement '�' t ye Z ^ I L )i 1_i `n `w I / \ \00 i \ 1 / Y ^ \ \ \ \ a�ce1 // s- (� \ 41-O- uwi `�`. \ \ \ a'?• taaJ�-1,6j // 4.642S\ <o34 ;S \ o rn 1 I / /) I \ \ \2 e ry o o/ y° 1/ o \ , 6\ �' �\ �� I \ rnl•i ad \ �: NI / 1 \ \ \ \/ \5e 01 ,/ �a�4'//y'Sa' `t'/��� ,� 2" \ \ \ -Ir� j/ r 1 \\ oN O \\ t{il_N / 1 \ \ \\ \ l09 \\ ri �\ // BL�{"i' ,`Z7 / -833 �-`O% \ J J o \ w of OUTLOT E I \ / , /i / k, / �\ II I � \\ I \ m 1 I \ 1 I\` 'RS6Sg\ R? \\ / / 47.10 E 11 825 82.5 \ �\ \ i \ 1 I \ /1 `\\ °2e \\S°\`2 / N45724� t�o��°io�PS;�y .Oc °moo iii I \ 1 I \ \ y \\ \ ° �OSR \ ---� SSp-\\ I/O° P 5 `? c�oJ�e °l \ - 12 fact drainage and utility easement ------ IN, W �` - \\ s O �646�8 sr9r'ri IN,.! O `.�`� so \ \ ocor P IN, \ SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT B o� 3 gi f r c \ 1 OF THE N }t - SE Y4 20 <,0 0 \ s r o r o IN, src \ 1 \ AND NORTHEAST CORNER ao M ry0 L�� \ \ S t1 \ o \ \ OF SE Y4 - SW Y4 �' 9` ( h M ' o �� m \ \ �ii 7s \ - - IiV\ .a�� 4 k l�j cli49'k�56 .% -�\i 20 c�P 1 \ J s \ 1 \ SEC. 10 T. 121 R. 25 - �\ 1 0o h�'y°:1*� �6b6�7\ \ `e0 r ;'� t\ V 0`,�,•-��l 1 ,.. s s. t h s ry s �- \ 90 tL 12 4t drainage and uAjlity easement ------- For the purposes of this plat the West line of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota, is assumed to bear S00'49'08"E. RLK - Kuusisto, Ltd. SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS OFFICIAL PLAT OTTERCRffEXCRO.SSING.;RDADDITION KNOWALL MENBY 7HESEPRESENTS: That the City of Monticello, a Minnesota Munidpa/ Corporation, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County ofWiight, State of Minnesota to wit.• A// of OU77 0TB, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to saidplat on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota. Andalso: That pad of OU77-OT E, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to saidplat on file and offeaoni in the office of the County Recorder Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly comer ofLot 1, Block 1, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 1STADD/T/ON, according to said plat on file and ofrecvrd in the office of the County Recorder Wright County, Minnesota; thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 17seconds West, assumed bearing along the southeasterly line ofsaid Lot 1, 434.31 feet thence South 40 degrees 53 minutes 16 seconds East, 507.03 feet; thence North 41 degrees 02 minutes 17seconds East, 434.31 feet to the nodheasterlyline ofsaid OUTL0TE,• thence North 40 degrees 53 minutes 16seconds West, along said northeasterly line, 507.03 feet to the point ofbeginning. And also: That pad of OWL 0TE, OTTER CREEK CROSSING, according to saidplat on file and ofrecord in the ol/rce ofthe County Recorder Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows Beginning at the most southerly comer ofOudotA, OTTER CREEKCROSS/NG 1STADD/T/ON, according to said plat on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder Wight County, Minnesota, thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 17seconds West, assumed bearing along the southwesterly extension of the southeasterly line of said OudotA, 512.89 feet to d)e westline ofsaid OU77 0TE,• thence North 00 degrees 49 minutes 08 seconds West, along said west fine, 686.83 feet to the southwestedy/ine of said OU77 0TA, thence South 49 degrees 07m/nutes 40 seconds East, along said southwesterly line, 458.31 feet to the point of beginning. Andalso: That pad ofOU77-OT C, OTTER CREEKCROSS/NG 2NDADD/T/ON, according to said p/at on file and ofrecord in the office of the County Recorder Wright County, Minnesota, described as follows Beginning at the most westerly comer ofsaid OUM0T C; thence North 38 degrees 32 minutes 17 seconds East assumed bearing along the northwesterly line ofsaid OU77-0T C, 24.47feet, thence South 42 degrees 30 minutes 10 seconds East 136.91 feet to the southwestedyline ofsaid OUTZOT C; thence North 52 degrees 47m/nutes 51 seconds West along said southwesterly//ne, 135.28 feet to the point of beginning. Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as OTTER CREEKCROSS/NG 3RDADD/T/ONand does hereby donate and dedicate to the pub//c forpub/ic use forever the thoroughfares, cu/de sacs and the easements as shown on this plat for drainage and uti/itypurposes only. In witness whereof, said City ofMontice//o, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officers this I to % day of ck kY, 200 6. C BY, BY.• � Jdql',�-� Clint Herbst, Mayor Rick Wo/fsteller, Qk Administrator STATEOFM/NNESOTA COUNTY OF W r %91r a the foregoing instvment was acknow/edged before me this t.�day of C7&LrdTZ, 200(o by Clint Herbst, Mayor, and Rick Wo/fste/%r C/tyAdminist ator of the City ofMontice//o, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation on beha/fofthe corporation. L )mxkr � 'M • —4ZN. W SS w%W. NotaryPub/ic, lu �t �County, Minnesota DAWN R GROSSINGER M Commission Ex ires. JQ& 3 10 O NOTARY PUBLIC -MINNESOTA Y P 1 My Commission Exgres Jan 31. 2010 /hereby certifyMat /have surveyed andp/atted the property described on this plat as OTTER CREEK CROSSING 3RDADD/T/ON, that this plat is a correct representation ofsaid survey, that at/ distances are correctly shown in feet and hundredths of foot, that a//monuments have been correctly placed in the ground as shown or wi//be placed as required by the ftelgovemmenta/ unit, that the outside boundary lines are conecdydes/gnated on said platand that there are no wet lands as defined by MS 505.02, Subd. 1 orpub/ic highways to be designated other than as shown. s r. "Va . Steven V. lsche, Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 22703 STATEOFM/NNESOTA COUNTYOF S The foregoing Surveyor's Certificate was acknowledged before me this 10 day of Oc f0lXr , 200 (o by Steven V. /sche, Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 22703 Notary Pub/ic, Shuiur'V. County, Minnesota My Commission FD/res: Otlat(tD DEANNA MARIE LESEMAN ,. NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA a ycewwrnEgnubn 31,2010 PLANNING COMM/SS/ON This p/at of OTTER CREEKCROSS/NG 3RDADD/T/ON City of Monticello, Minnesota at regular meeting held this I S} day of N oytmber, 200U4. By Chairman C/TYCOUNCIL was approved by the Planning Commission ofthe This p/at of OTTER CREEKCROSS/NG 3RDADD/T/ON was app�ved and accepted by the City Couny/of Me City ofMontice//o, Minnesota at a r�sgu/armeeting held this t y* day of 11 L*q US 200�. BY BY Clint Herbst, Arayor RickWo/fste/ler QyAd inistiator COUNTYSURVEYOR Examined and recommended forappmva/ this I E*day of ©Gm BEie , 200f.. By. Q .� County Surveyor Wright County, Minnesota COUNTYAUD/TOR Taxes paid fora//years through year 0 S and bansferentered thisL!�dayofkaug-^5eq , 200&. By.-- gazdgy4— W'i4;� 144 l T ccw%Ll�cq CountyAuditor, right County, Minne ta 17 r OO COUNTY7REASURER /hereby certify that taxes payable in the year a04 L on lands herein desdfbed are paid this i,r day of ,,,,Z�200(. By.• &dd LT4- County Treasurtir, Wright County, Mi nesot? COUNTYRECORDER l hereby certify drat this /nstvment was filed in the otirce ofthe CountyRecorderformwrI th/s!Ltday of�DVGmDex,200L, at . c t) o'clock P.M., and was du/yrecorded in Cabinet to , Sleeve 1481 ,as Document Number )031418' . By. ' County Recorder, PfthtCoun6VMnnesot9 AB S/�ffF10F2Sff�ffTS C:Ai b� 1`t OMA-►ccklo 4 66.00 d-_19 $105-1 Centerline of 200 foot Electric Tronsmissimn -- Easement (per Doc No 469184) '� I S89'53'44"E �',1229 89 I494.44 -- - - - -- +J --- %; T vi iLn 1./\LL/\ ulluV JIfvu ofFIC IAA PLAT V Abw CXE�1YCRO,KS,SIVCY",40-PVTIDN \ \ ----NORTH LINE OF NE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 SEC 10 T. 721 R 25 OUTLOT 1 VICINITY MAP Not To Scale Section 10, Township 121, Range 25. / �09 4 3 r� 9 1 �, '� OR1F7! CIlDC 41 / \ Ile / /'\ G \ CD C) 'fir/ \ \ / G Pp� OJ O� \ \ �h� I w sr z S8S �� F\ (��,• ivy �i . � � \\ OUTLOT C I oo / \ 4o s IN,r o O %� 6 1j 1 \\ \ Ozw I OUTLOT Do0 °. S��c --- / SOcS� w ,-MOST SLY COR I 4K tK 41 IN \ \ .� OUTLOT A, OTTER I., a op \ \ CREEK CROSSING `\s h� 6� •O� 1ST ADDITIONC) I \ o, k0• I 1 F \ 0° I ------------ Drainage -------- ,-i Easement PT o. 1 , \ I , \ i i \ P co \ o Do C, \ 1 1 M -WEST LINE OF OUTLOT E, jt \\ O OTTER CREEK\CROSSING ADDN. Z r---NORTH LINE OF SE !14 OF THE SW �14 SEC 10 T. 721 R 25 \ \ 1331.02 I ` --SE COR OUTLOT B OTTER \ I r------ II CREEK CROSSING \ \ I \ GRAPHIC SCALE 120 0 60 120 6 Ilf Nl II 1N NOT TO SCALE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: BEING 6 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, AND 12'IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING PLAT AND RIGHT OF WAY LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PLAT THE WEST LINE OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 SEC. 10 T. 121 R. 25 IS ASSUMED TO BEAR S01'17'56"E DENOTES FOUND IRON MONUMENT 0 DENOTES 1/2*x 14' IRON MONUMENT TO BE SET WITHIN ONE YEAR OF RECORDING OF THE PLAT. DENOTES FOUND WRIGHT COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT W18 A.V" TZOFZ,Sffffff y D 0 t s cn -? O -o / 1 SOT 9 F Cp c nod Clj o \ Oil / / v f C L=41.10 A=52-19'27" \, C�rrr�i j /_�5.61 1.v. / \ C, C j i / '\ 1'`0�0 �\ Y 09 0.� �99 tp ON, Ir I � s• ^ U; / \ "tA. [>7 \ \ O • \ \ t�LQ•,�O \ h � Z z w � ;0 \ \ \ \ rnp O CO� o� N oam \� 7)0, 3 00> =N OC C)Z p0 Z� Z mx o z r�ic)mi z Z� O O 00 �� U' m� z IQM= z C N M = m rn n cn �� Ox O• Z cQ< cn Z ;t 0 c Iz u u n 0 H tb ON 17 a 0 C z o g�m 0 C m �£oX y m =, 7 fD as m� CL m C ;D o O 0EF 0_ (D n m 3 o;,z :m Zo °a CD C 'm (D CD a O 7 _„ fp 5 o� (ca ' c 'm -0 N C �O c o� _ �M 1 woo ° 0 0 Z X M c't y �c 0 � M N M O o� 0 (n N co c a f0 X 0 v a) o) c W 0 N m m o_ O 7 S 0 D) 7 a S 0 W 7 N 0 N a N K 0) QQQryN 7 0) a 9 9 N = zm �z D0 O ;u Ocn Z q (n TJ r Z M =i to c° 3 d ■ r`F , L �s�y►'4. '�4 $ '4bdp'gkSfK � "��� �u `aDf xQ,'Rail 4 s� � � Is y �-d'dal�iCl1{YaCftl ���111 m m O o n CrZ' c -Ngz 0. 4 9 0) N �c FL X d 0 N -{ Mr f/, �v 00 `z O n 0 Jam; \—n \E'm Cm n A n O �cn O Z c � FD a v CD f/J O m Z 2) Dt N fO�D -0 sR 0 N a� gra N 07 a 7 0 a `0G O W I� n 'z y s; w m pCD o r ro o• o� TLzon <D o. o c N c n 2 m O 7 N 0�1 N 0 x 3 m a Co CD a m O N m V, I� c m r f 1 p < m m rL F d ID o a O N r "O r- ° Z OTC CD U 0)CDOCD o M mr -. ��o m O 0 0 0 O t0/J N N 0 0r °• ad 91m 0 '< O p0 ia (OD �CD c ° °0 M ° 0 3: `0GCD M'w 0 >v _ n y tf � °do}v a EF 1 ° a e 0 H N Q 7 .� .0i N N N N O. 0 to N ppi O N O O 0 *< ?=hO CD CD 3 w N 7 > > a 0 a a m M m 5-y 0. ' O» '< N O pj01aoa } c d m Q r3. C N 0 N 0 Q c N in— c 0 (D O z N a M'a N N fa O N 7 cn N ' �C O O 0 0) O w Cl)O 3 CR 3..0s w m P• o c m w� 3- CD W O N a N 0 ° c0i 3 a, 3 M'W CD 0 CL K l m 10- 014 9 \ ` / r zP Sco - -A cq / ' r 2 / M ' 4 n J_, 51. ° F r_1z �/ (D �A� K Z �O / am ii IV0 m� W A / �.M£,V'�� / / � — / / / / --1 00) OC D CD ° O 07 co O O T O co U 2 CD 3 m 4, A a)x O a Z m CD a v CD m 0 CD W n D 3.3 a J N N 0 C> O_ fD n O • N O .tea, l 0 a 5' 4 O ° N O Z0 O N 5. CD CD ID arc' m CO ny n f �.CD v AN O m o'�a m 3A<;CD* Cil c m 0 ? ° ° m ' m ° ° d N n o O= 0 2 W 0 c ctj (D 7 NCL a CD CD N n> CL D/ Dl ? Dl fD = LY O N 7 O !� s o a > COD m c I 0 07 � y C0 OZa3 maC jTl N N O CL rn n c M w --4 NN 0 O C. N a D) m N -+ O -00 .Zml N N m M 0 En �0w' CD 0 3onfd r CDM fDn3m Am a O- 0 w N , O 0 0 O CD co '\ co Cnn w `I O Ud 7 Z N O) M (�D CD O M m� 0 o ID N N CD O v O,ON00 0 CD CD M O.O w t0 ? Q. Er 3 n N — 0 a a 7 �. a m N N a 7 I � 0 9. O 0 S (D 01 N cr oai n a .0 >. o c a M CL cD O D' o �ro (D O - ' CD �4p7 c 0 0 0 co 0 c iZ CD O O O O Q a N N 0 a 0 aA Z CO O 0 aD v r �r O -0 Cm Z Z cM 7 = �m N o m ''� m M z A Fr NI .0o S CD m n 9 CD ° CD O O Oe f0D rr O 0) 7 N O N 7 d� 'O tD Monticello SION ;N 46 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PARK (LIP) The Light Industrial designation accommodates uses such as process and production manufacturing which uses moderate amounts of partially processed materials, warehousing and distribution, research and development, medical laboratories, machine shops, computer technology, professional and corporate offices and industrial engineering facilities. Characteristics such as noise, vibration and odor do not occur or do not generate significant impacts. Hazardous materials handling and storage may also occur but must be stored indoors or screened from the public right-of-way. Activities such as the handling of hazardous materials and outdoor storage are limited. Industrial • Warehousing and Distribution • Manufacturing • Research and Development • Medical Laboratories • Computer Technology • Professional and Corporate Offices Commercial • Office • Service -based Primary Mode Vehicular with access to collectors and arterials F� Transit or shuttle service Secondary Mode Shared bike/ pedestrian facilities • Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.50 to 0.75 • Height - Up to 4 stories • Lot Area - N/A 7001) 2018 Correlating Zoning District 1-1 Light Industrial District MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN 81 CHAPTER 3: ZONING DISTRICTS Section 3.6 Industrial Base Zoning Districts Subsection (D) I- I: Light Industrial District Section 3.6 (D) 1.1 Light Industrial District The purpose of the "I-1," light industrial, district is to provide for the establishment of warehousing and light industrial development. Base Lot Area • Minimum = 20,000 square feet Base Lot Width • Minimum = 100 feet City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 127 CHAPTER 3: ZONING DISTRICTS Section 3.6 Industrial Base Zoning Districts Subsection (D) 1-I: Light Industrial District DEVELOPMENTTABLE 3-17: 1-1 I I REQUIRED YARDS (in feet) f I] I I Max Height (stories Max Floor Area Max Impervious (% Front Interior Street Rear / feet) Ratio (FAR) of gross lot area) Side Side All Uses 30 15 30 15 4 stories (Reserved) (Reserved) 45 feet [2] [1]: When any yard abuts a zoning district other than I -I or 1-2, the setbacks for the abutting yard must be 50 feet. [2]: Multi -story buildings of more than 4 stories and 45 feet may be allowed as a conditional use pursuant to Section 2.4(D) contingent upon strict adherence to fire safety code provisions as specified by the International Building Code as adopted in Title 4, Chapter I of the Monticello City Code. Accessory Structures See Section 5.3(B) for all general standards and limitations on accessory structures. ■ Section 3.3, Common District Requirements Other Section 3.6(B), Standards Applicable to All Industrial Base Zoning Districts Regulations ' Section 4. 1, Landscaping and Screening Standards to Consult Section 4.5, Signs (not all Section 4.8, Off -Street Parking inclusive) Section 4.9, Off -Street Loading ■ Section 4.1 I. Building Materials 1: Minimum street side yard setback of 30 feet. 2: Minimum front yard setback of 30 feet 3: Minimum lot width of goo feet 4: Light manufacturing plant as a permitted use 5: Interior side yard setbacks of 15 feet 6: Minimum lot size of 20,000� square feet 7: Rear yard setback of 15 feet. - -- 20.000 SF MINIMUM 6 - - - -- �20,000 SF N ,Z MI/viMUM� �ti i6 Page 128 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4. I Landscaping and Screening Subsection (G) Standards for Perimeter Buffers (b) The above incentives may be combined to achieve a cumulative reduction in the amount of required tree ACI. (G) Standards for Perimeter Buffers (1) Purpose and Intent Perimeter landscape buffers are intended to mitigate potential negative effects of different contiguous uses. (2) Applicability Except for adjoining single-family detached residential uses, adjoining commercial and industrial uses occurring within the same zoning district boundary, and uses in the CCD district, all development shall provide a perimeter landscape buffer to separate it from uses in a different use classification in accordance with Table 4-2: Buffer Types, and Table 4-3: Buffer Type Application. (3) Types of Buffers Table 4-2: Buffer Types, describes four different buffering types in terms of their function, opacity, width, and planting requirements. Where a particular buffer type is required in Table 4-3: Buffer Type Application, the requirement may be met with the combination of minimum buffer width and minimum screening requirements specified under either Option 1 or Option 2. Where an option utilizing a fence or wall is selected, the fence or wall shall comply with the standards of Section 4.3, Fences and Walls. City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 243 CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.1 Landscaping and Screening Subsection (G) Standards for Perimeter Buffers I I IIJ IJCI II I IClC1 UUIICI IUI It-LIUI 1J QJ UQJII- CU6C 2 ACI of canopy trees + 10 ACI of understory trees + demarcating individual properties with a slight visual 15 small shrubs per 100 linear feet obstruction from the ground to a height of ten feet. TYPE B —AESTHETIC BUFFER This perimeter buffer functions as an intermittent visual obstruction from the ground to a height of at least 20 feet, and creates the impression of special separation without eliminating visual contact between uses. TYPE C — SEMI -OPAQUE BUFFER This perimeter buffer functions as a semi -opaque screen from the ground to at least a height of six feet. TYPE D — OPAQUE BUFFER 8 ACI of canopy trees + 10 ACI of understory trees + 15 small shrubs per 100 linear feet 12 ACI of canopy trees + 14 ACI of understory trees + 25 small shrubs per 100 linear feet 2 ACI of canopy trees + 14 ACI of understory trees + 35 small shrubs per 100 linear feet One 4-foot high berm or one 4-foot high solid fence + 2 ACI of canopy trees + 16 ACI of understory trees per 100 linear feet This perimeter buffer functions as an opaque screen 18 ACI of canopy trees + One 6-foot high solid from the ground to a height of at least six feet. This 20 ACI of understory fence + 12 ACI of canopy type of buffer prevents visual contact between uses trees + 55 small shrubs trees per 100 linear feet and creates a strong impression of total separation. per 100 linear feet [ I ]: Any required perimeter buffer width can be reduced to five feet with the provision of a solid masonry wall at least five feet in height along with ten large shrubs per every 100 linear feet. [2]: Perimeter buffer widths (but not vegetation amounts) may be reduced in accordance with Section 2.4(G) upon approval of an Alternate Landscape Plan under the provisions of Section 4.1(E) if adhering to these requirements is not possible. [3]: In cases where an adjacent use is designed for solar access, understory trees can be substituted for canopy trees. [4]: Required plantings shall conform to the planting standards outlined in section 4.1(C)(2). [5]: Fences and walls shall comply with the standards in Section 4.3, Fences and Walls. Page 244 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4. I Landscaping and Screening Subsection (G) Standards for Perimeter Buffers (4) Determination of Required Buffer Type Table 4-3 specifies the type of perimeter landscape buffer that new development shall provide between it and adjacent property, based on the uses present on the development site and that on the adjacent property. The buffer type is indicated by a letter corresponding to one of the four buffer types depicted in Table 4-2, Buffer Tunes. TABLE Proposed use Type Single -Family Residential 4-3: BUFFER TYPE APPLICATION Existing - Type. Abutting Land [I] OfficeI Civic and Single Family All Other Institutional Commercial Industrial Residential Residential Uses Uses Uses n/a A B C D A n/a A B D All Other Residential Civic and Institutional Uses B A n/a A D Office and Commercial Uses C B A n/a C Industrial Uses D D D C n/a [I]: Letters in cells correspond to the buffer types listed in Table 4-2. Buffer Types. [2]: Multi -family, townhouse, multi -building campus or shopping center type developments shall provide buffers around the perimeter of the development instead of around individual buildings. (5) Location of Perimeter Buffers (a) Perimeter buffers required by this section shall be located only along the outer perimeter of the parcel where it abuts another parcel, and shall extend to the parcel boundary line or right-of-way line. (b) In an industrial district, perimeter buffers are not required along lot lines abutting streets except as provided for in Tables 4=2 and 4=3 when abutting non -industrial districts. In such cases, the outdoor operation or storage components shall include perimeter buffers as necessary to screen outdoor use areas from off -site views. (c) A perimeter buffer may be located along shared access easements between parcels in nonresidential developments. City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 245 CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.1 Landscaping and Screening Subsection (G) Standards for Perimeter Buffers (6) Responsibility for Buffer Installation (a) Vacant Parcels Where a developing parcel is adjacent to a vacant parcel and a perimeter buffer is required in accordance with this section, the developing parcel shall provide a minimum of one-half of the perimeter buffer required adjacent to the vacant land. (b) Existing Land Uses Where a developing parcel is adjacent to an existing use and a perimeter buffer is required in accordance with this section, the developing parcel shall provide the full perimeter buffer required adjacent to the existing use in accordance with Table 4-2, Buffer Types, and Table 4-3: Buffer Type Application, unless a portion or all of a perimeter buffer that complies with the standards of this section already exists between the lots. Where all or part of a perimeter buffer exists, but the buffer does not fully comply with the standards of this section, the developing parcel shall be responsible for providing all the additional planting material necessary to meet the standards of this section. (7) Development within Required Buffers (a) The required buffer shall not contain any development, impervious surfaces, or site features (except fences or walls) that do not function to meet the standards of this section or that require removal of existing vegetation, unless otherwise permitted in this ordinance. (b) Sidewalks, trails, and other elements associated with passive recreation may be placed in perimeter buffers if all required landscaping is provided and damage to existing vegetation is minimized to the maximum extent practicable. (c) Overhead and underground utilities required or allowed by the City are permitted to cross a required buffer in a perpendicular fashion, but shall minimize the impact to vegetation to the maximum extent practicable. Where required landscaping material is damaged or removed due to utility activity within a required buffer, the landowner shall be responsible for replanting all damaged or removed vegetation necessary to ensure the buffer meets the standards in this ordinance. Page 246 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 2C. Public Hearing — Consideration of an Amendment to the City of Monticello's Subdivision Ordinance, Section 152.027—Procedure for Final Plat, and Section 152.061— Easements. Applicant: Citv of Monticello Prepared by: Community Development Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Director Commission action): 03/01/2022 03/28/2022 Additional Analysis by: Community and Economic Development Coordinator, City Clerk, Project Engineer, Consulting City Planner ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC 2022-014 recommending an Amendment to the City of Monticello Subdivision Ordinance, Section 152.027—Procedure for Final Plat, and Section 152.061—Easements, based on findings in said resolution. 2. Motion to deny the adoption of Resolution No. PC 2022-014 recommending an Amendment to the City of Monticello Subdivision Ordinance, Section 152.027— Procedure for Final Plat, and Section 152.061—Easements, based on findings to be identified by the Commission following the public hearing. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. 2022-014, subject to submission of additional materials from the applicant or staff. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Property: Legal Description: City of Monticello Planning Case Number: 2022-012 Request(s): Comprehensive Plan Amendment Deadline for Decision: NA Land Use Designation: City of Monticello, all designations Zoning Designation: City of Monticello, all designations Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: NA Current Site Uses: NA 1 Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 Surrounding Land Uses: NA Project Description: In application of the Subdivision Ordinance, proposed amendments are requested to align with drainage and utility needs along plat and lot perimeters and to address the timing of final plat recording. ANALYSIS: The Monticello Subdivision Ordinance serves to provide the regulations for the division of land within the city that is serves the health, safety and general welfare of its residents by providing for well planned, efficient subdivision that secures public rights for roadway and utility purposes. In recent review of subdivisions, staff have determined that minor amendments to the subdivision ordinance are necessary and in support of this purpose. First, it is recommended that the final plat procedure outline within the ordinance be updated to allow a change from 100 days to 365 days for final plat recording. A number of factors can influence a subdivider's ability to record a plat document within a 100-day timeframe, including property conveyance and closing processes, title issues, the county surveyor's plat review, and the final review and execution of the many documents which accompany a plat (development agreement, easements, etc.). Any one or combination of these factors can delay recording of the plat. A timeline of 365 days to record is a common practice among Minnesota cities and is a common section provision in the development agreement which accompanies a subdivision plat. This amendment also provides consistency within the ordinance. The subdivider has 365 days from the time of preliminary plat approval to submit a final plat and with the proposed amendment would also have 365 days from the time of final plat approval to record the final plat. The second proposed amendment would amend the easement requirements for subdivision. To ensure the proper management of drainage between lots, and space for both public and private utilities, it is recommended that the subdivision ordinance be amended to require a 12' drainage and utility easement along all plat perimeters. This standard is already commonly applied in practice at present in city plat review. The amendment would make these dimensions standard for all subdivision. The City retains the right through subdivision to require other easement for public drainage and utility purposes, as well. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance. The proposed amendment to the perimeter easements is in alignment with the need to provide 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 adequate space for site drainage and public and private utility corridors both along lot and plat lines. The amendment to the standard for timing of recording of the final plat is reflective of the many factors that may influence the ability to record the plat in under 100 days. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution PC-2022-014 B. Draft Ordinance Amendment, Monticello Subdivision Ordinance C. Monticello Subdivision Ordinance, Excerpts CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SECTION 152.027— PROCEDURE FOR FINAL PLAT, AND SECTION 152.061—EASEMENTS WHEREAS, the Subdivision Ordinance serves as the primary implementation tool of the for division of a tract of land into two or more parcels by platting, replatting, conveyance, registered land survey, or other means, and the combination or recombination of parcels; and WHEREAS, various portions of the Subdivision Ordinance have been identified as benefitting from amendment to increase clarity and usefulness; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the matter at its regular meeting on March 1, 2022 and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval of the proposed ordinance amendments, pursuant to the conditions identified by staff and others: 1. The proposed amendments improve the ability of the Planning Commission and City Council to direct land use and land use policy in the City. 2. The proposed amendments are consistent with the intent of the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan for orderly and efficient development and provision for municipal utilities. 3. The proposed amendments address needs arising from a changing conditions or corrects an error in the original text NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota that the proposed amendment to the Monticello Subdivision Ordinance for timing of the recording of final plat and required easements is hereby recommended for approval. ADOPTED this 1St day of March, 2022, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION A ATTEST: Paul Konsor, Chair Angela Schumann, Community Development Director ORDINANCE NO. 2022 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MONTICELLO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SECTION 152.027— PROCEDURE FOR FINAL PLAT, AND SECTION 152.061—EASEMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 152.027 is hereby amended to read as follows: (E) Recording final plat. (1) If the final plat and development agreement are approved by the City Council, the applicant shall record them with the County Recorder within 4-00 365 days after the approval or approval of the final plat shall be considered void, unless a request for a time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the Council. The applicant shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the Zoning Administrator with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of the recording. SECTION 2. Section 152.061 is hereby amended to read as follows: (C) Width and location. An easement for drainage and utilities at least six feet wide shall be provided along each side line of each lot and an easement of 12 feet wide shall be provided along the front, side and rear line of each lot line located along the perimeter of the plat. SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title XV, Subdivision Ordinance and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall have full force and effect upon its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Monticello Wright County, Minnesota, this day of 12022 Lloyd Hilgart, Mayor ATTEST: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director § 152.026 PROCEDURE FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT. (A) Filing. (1) Per the published application calendar, the applicant shall file a request for preliminary plat approval and the accompanying fee and escrow as adopted by ordinance. After the city has received the request for a plat approval, it shall inform the applicant within ten days whether the submittal was complete. If deemed not complete, the applicant will be informed of needed material or information to be made complete. If no notification of completion is made by the city within 15 days, the request will be placed on a regular Planning Commission agenda for consideration. (2) The application shall be accompanied by a fee and escrow as provided for by City Council ordinance. (3) The application shall also be accompanied by electronic and print copies of a preliminary plat and supportive information in conformity with requirements of this chapter and application checklists. The preliminary plat shall be considered as being officially submitted only when all of the information requirements of this chapter are complied with, the appropriate fees paid, and escrows deposited. (4) Where appropriate, the city staff will meet with the applicant to discuss the request and related information. Upon receipt of all the required information, the Zoning Administrator may forward the application and required information to the appropriate city staff consultants and city commissions for review and technical reports. (5) The applicant shall supply proof of title in a form approved by the City Attorney and the legal description of the property for which the subdivision is requested and, as applicable, supply documented authorization from the owner(s) of the property in question to proceed with the requested subdivision. (B) Hearing. (1) When an application is determined to be complete, the Zoning Administrator shall schedule a public hearing for public review of the preliminary plat. The hearing shall be held after adequate time has been allowed for staff and advisory body review of the plat. (2) The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make recommendations to the City Council. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description and a description of the request and shall be published in the official newspaper at least ten days prior to the hearing. Written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least ten days prior to all owners of land within 350 feet of the boundary of the property in question. Failure of a property owner to receive the notice shall not invalidate any such proceedings a set forth within this chapter, provided a bona fide attempt has been made to comply with the notice requirements of this chapter. (3) Timeline for review of the preliminary plat shall be in accordance with M.S. § 462.356, as it may be amended from time to time. (C) Technical assistance reports. The Zoning Administrator shall instruct the appropriate staff to prepare technical reports where appropriate, and provide general assistance in preparing a recommendation on the action to the City Council. (D) Review by other commissions or jurisdictions. (1) The Zoning Administrator shall refer copies of the preliminary plat to the Parks and Recreation Commission and/or county, state, or other public jurisdictions for its review and comments, where appropriate and when required as determined by the Zoning Administrator. (2) In cases where a proposed subdivision is adjacent to a county or state highway, the subdivision shall be subject to county and/or state approval. (E) Planning Commission action. The applicant or a designated representative thereof shall appear before the Planning Commission at the public hearing in order to answer questions concerning the proposed request. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council following the close of the public hearing. If the Planning Commission has not acted upon the preliminary plat, and the statutory review period will expire before the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting, the Council may act on the preliminary plat without the Planning Commission's recommendation. (F) City Council action. (1) Upon completion of the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission, the request shall be placed on the agenda of the City Council. The report and recommendations shall be entered in and made part of the permanent written record of the Council meeting. (2) Upon receiving the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission and city staff, the City Council shall have the option to set and hold a public hearing if deemed necessary or take action based on Planning Commission recommendation. The Council shall make recorded findings of fact and may impose any condition it considers necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The Council shall adopt a resolution approving or denying the request. (3) The City Council shall approve or disapprove the preliminary plat within 120 days following delivery of an application completed in compliance with this chapter, unless the time for Council decision has been extended pursuant to a written agreement with the applicant. (4) The City Council may deny or require modifications to a proposed preliminary plat when said plat fails to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter, or other applicable regulations, including the zoning ordinance. In addition, the Council may deny or require modifications to a proposed preliminary plat when the Council finds that despite technical compliance with applicable ordinances, the plat design results in a likelihood of extraordinary public costs for future maintenance or the potential for public safety hazards that are not typical for subdivisions in the city. (5) The City Council reserves the right to deny or require modifications to a preliminary plat if due regard is not shown for the preservation of all natural features, such as topography, trees, watercourses, scenic points, prehistoric and historical spots, and similar community assets, which, if preserved, will add attractiveness and stability to the proposed development of the property. (6) If the preliminary plat is denied by the City Council, the reasons for such action shall be recorded in the proceedings of the Council. If the preliminary plat is approved, the approval shall not constitute final acceptance of the layout. Subsequent approval will be required of the engineering proposals and other features and requirements as specified by this chapter to be indicated on the final plat. The Council may require such revisions in the preliminary plat and final plat as it deems necessary for the health, safety, general welfare, and convenience of the city. (7) Approval of a preliminary plat shall be null and void unless within 360 days after receiving the last required approval of the preliminary plat there shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator a final plat or plats for all or a portion of the approved preliminary plat in accordance with the conditions upon which approval was granted by the City Council. An extension from this requirement may be granted by the Council upon the reception of a request for extension. An extension shall be requested in writing and filed with the city at least 14 days before the voidance of the approved preliminary plat. There shall be no charge for the filing of such request. The request for extension shall state facts showing a good faith attempt was made to meet the final plat submission requirement. Such request shall be presented to the Council for a decision. (8) In the event of changes to city, county, state, and federal development regulations, the city may require a preliminary plat to be amended to incorporate applicable changes, except as may be prohibited by Minnesota Statutes. (9) Should the applicant desire to amend a preliminary plat as approved, an amended preliminary plat may be submitted. The city may require the applicant to follow the same procedure as a new preliminary plat. No public hearing will be required for the amendment if the opinion of the city is that the scope of the changes does not constitute a new preliminary plat. A filing fee, as established by the city, shall be charged for amendment processing. (10) Approval of the preliminary plat shall not be considered binding in regard to subsequent final plat contemplation. § 152.027 PROCEDURE FOR FINAL PLAT. (A) Filing. (1) After the preliminary plat has been approved, the final plat shall be submitted for review as set forth in the divisions which follow. The city may agree to review the preliminary and final plat simultaneously. The final plat shall incorporate all changes, modifications, and revisions required by the city. Otherwise, it shall strictly conform to the approved preliminary plat. (2) The application for final plat shall be accompanied by electronic and print copies of a preliminary plat and supportive information in conformity with requirements of this chapter and application checklists. (B) Approval of the City Council. (1) The final plat shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for distribution to the City Council and appropriate city staff. The city staff shall examine the final plat and prepare a recommendation to the Council. The Council shall certify final approval within 60 days if the applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements of applicable regulations and conditions and requirements of the preliminary plat approval. (2) If approved, the final plat and development agreement shall be approved by resolution, which resolution shall provide for the acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements, public dedication, and other requirements as indicated by the City Council. If disapproved, the grounds for any refusal to approve a plat shall be set forth in the proceedings of the Council and reported to the person or persons applying for such approval. (C) Development agreement. Before a final plat is approved by the City Council and prior to recording or registering a final plat, the owner or subdivider of the land covered by the plat shall execute and submit to the Council an agreement, which shall be binding on his, her, or their heirs, personal representatives, and assigns, which embodies the terms and conditions of the approval given by the Council, including, but not limited to, requirements set forth in this chapter and which controls the installation of all required improvements. The agreement will require all improvements in compliance with approved engineering standards and applicable regulations. Said development agreement shall provide for the supervision and inspection of the construction by the City Engineer and shall provide for the fees and securities in connection to the improvements. (D) Existing special assessments. When any existing special assessments which have been levied against the property described are to be divided and allocated to the respective lots in the proposed plat, city staff shall: (1) Estimate the clerical cost of preparing a revised assessment role; (2) File the same with the County Auditor; and (3) Make such division and allocation. (E) Recording final plat. (1) If the final plat and development agreement are approved by the City Council, the applicant shall record them with the County Recorder within 100 days after the approval or approval of the final plat shall be considered void, unless a request for a time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the Council. The applicant shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the Zoning Administrator with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of the recording. (2) A final plat will not be released by the city for recording purposes until the applicant has satisfied applicable ministerial requirements of this chapter, including payment of fees, execution of a developer's agreement, deposit of surety, letters of credit, Mylar copies of the final plat, easement and deed documents, and all other requirements of approval by resolution. (3) No building permits shall be let for construction of any structure on any lot in the plat until the construction plans have been approved by the city, the city has received evidence of the plat and development agreement being recorded by the county and the provisions of the subdivision's development agreement have been satisfactorily met. (F) Recording of multiple -phased plats. If a preliminary plat is final platted in stages, unless otherwise provided for in the development contract, all stages must be final platted into lots and blocks (not outlots) within three years after the preliminary plat has been approved by the City Council. If the final plats are not approved and recorded in accordance with this time frame, the preliminary plat approval shall be considered void, unless a request for time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the Council prior to the expiration of the three-year period. (G) Extension. Within 30 days of the deadline of recording of the final plat, the applicant may file with the Zoning Administrator a written request that said deadline be extended six months beyond the date the extension is granted. The Zoning Administrator shall place the request on the agenda of a regularly scheduled City Council meeting to be held within 30 days of the extension filing if in their opinion no change has occurred in any land use restriction or the Comprehensive Plan, or any other official control affecting the use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication or platting required or permitted by the preliminary plat. § 152.061 EASEMENTS. (A) Municipal utility improvements lying within public easements. Municipal utility improvements lying within public easements shall become city property without further notice or action, with exception of approved private streets and private storm sewer systems. (B) Disturbance of surface of easement area. If the surface of the easement area of any portion thereof shall be disturbed by the operation, maintenance, replacement, or removal activities in connection with the use of the easement, said surface and improvements shall be promptly restored by the fee owner of the easement area to their condition prior to the disturbance. (C) Width and location. An easement for drainage and utilities at least six feet wide shall be provided along each side line of each lot and an easement of 12 feet wide shall be provided along the front and rear line of each lot. (D) Continuous utility easement locations. Drainage and utility easements shall connect with easements established in adjoining properties. These easements, when approved, shall not thereafter be changed without the approval of the City Council after a public hearing. (E) Guy wires. Additional easements for pole guys should be provided, where appropriate, at the outside of turns. Where possible, lot lines shall be arranged to bisect the exterior angle so that pole guys fall alongside lot lines. (F) Stormwater management ponds. New stormwater management ponds that are constructed as part of subdivisions shall be covered by drainage and utility easements or outlots that are dedicated to the city. At least one side of a pond should be located adjacent to public right-of-way or an approved maintenance access route and adequate easement dedicated to provide access for future maintenance. Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 2D. Public Hearing — Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4, "Mobility and Connectivity' as related to Roadway Classification and Traffic. Applicant: City of Monticello Prepared by: Community Development Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Director Commission action): 03/01/2022 03/28/2022 Additional Analysis by: Public Works Director/City Engineer, Project Engineer ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC 2022-015 recommending an Amendment to the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4, "Mobility and Connectivity" as related to Roadway Classification and Traffic, based on findings in said resolution. 2. Motion to deny the adoption of Resolution No. PC 2022-015 recommending an Amendment to the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4, "Mobility and Connectivity' as related to Roadway Classification and Traffic, based on findings to be identified by the Commission following the public hearing. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. 2022-015, subject to submission of additional materials from the applicant or staff. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Property: Legal Description: City of Monticello Planning Case Number: 2022-013 Request(s): Comprehensive Plan Amendment Deadline for Decision: NA Land Use Designation: City of Monticello, all designations Zoning Designation: City of Monticello, all designations Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: NA Current Site Uses: NA Surrounding Land Uses: NA 1 Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 Project Description: In application of the Comprehensive Plan Mobility Chapter, the City's Public Works Director/City Engineer has requested amendment to the chapter to accurately depict roadway classifications and traffic count information. ANALYSIS: The Monticello 2040 Plan's Mobility chapter provides a framework to guide the city's transportation network over the next 20 years. The chapter includes maps, text and charts describing the existing street and pathway networks and the planned extensions and expansions of those networks. An important component of transportation planning is the identification of the "functional classification" of roads —the designation of which roads are and will be designed to carry local or regional traffic. The 2040 Plan therefore includes a map and standards for roadway functional classification. These classifications are used to define the design of the roadway (width, pavement section, etc.), access spacing, the corresponding pathway improvements, and the assessment methodology for construction and reconstruction. As staff have applied the 2040 Plan's Mobility chapter in development review, it has been determined that an update is required to correct the existing and planned functional classification system. The proposed amendments to Exhibit 4.1— Planned Roadway and Functional Classification Map are intended to align with the current and planned function of the city's roadways, primarily collector road status. The amendment also proposes a correction to the legend for Local Streets. The proposed map amendments further correspond to a minor proposed change to Table 4.1— City of Monticello Right -of -Way Guidelines. The Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) numbers are proposed to be modified slightly to correspond to Monticello's Functional Classification counts. Finally, staff have removed reference to Monticello Township within the text for roadway jurisdiction, as the Township has no responsibility for roadways within the City. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The proposed amendments reflect the city's current classifications of its roadway network, along with the average annual daily traffic of roadway classifications. Accurate classifications are necessary for review and application in development projects, assessment, and grant applications. SUPPORTING DATA 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/2022 A. Resolution PC-2022-015 B. Proposed Amendments, Monticello 2040 Mobility Chapter CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-015 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — MOBILITY CHAPTER WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes section 462.355 provides that the planning agency for the municipality shall prepare a comprehensive municipal plan and shall periodically review the plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 2020; and WHEREAS, the proposed Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan is a planning tool intended to guide the future growth and development of the City of Monticello; and WHEREAS, amendments to the Mobility Chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Monticello has been prepared for review and approval by the City Council, and; WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are intended to correct and align the Monticello 2040 Plan with the City's current functional classification system for its roadway network; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 1st, 2022 on the proposed amendments to the Mobility Chapter of the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission for the City of Monticello, that it hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the amendments to the Mobility Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan for the City, based on the following Findings of Fact: 1. The proposed amendment provides for the functional classification of roadways within the City to balance mobility and access; 2. The proposed amendment will continue to provide for the City's health, safety and welfare through its municipal transportation system; 3. The proposed amendment furthers the logical and orderly development pattern for public service infrastructure; and 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Monticello 2040 Plan for a planned street network which connects the city in an orderly and efficient fashion. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-015 ADOPTED this 1st day of March, 2022 by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION A ATTEST: Paul Konsor, Chair Angela Schumann, Community Development Director Monticello SION ;N 96 i I CHAPTER 4: MOBIL17YAND CONNECTIVITY 97 INTRODUCTION The Mobility and Connectivity Chapter outlines the goals, policies and transportation strategies to improve mobility and connectivity in Monticello by continuing to build a safe and efficient multimodal transportation system that strengthens the economy and enhances quality of life. This chapter describes how Monticello can increase access to parks, schools, and other community destinations, especially for bicyclists and pedestrians. It also seeks to enhance access to the local and regional transportation system for Monticello's existing and future commercial and industrial development. Multimodal strategies emphasize an integrated pathway system supporting connectivity between activity nodes. The transportation strategy will be implemented together with the land use plan and growth strategy for the continued growth, development and improvement of Monticello. This chapter provides background information to support the land use goals, policies and strategies outlined in the Land Use, Growth and Orderly Annexation Chapter. The Mobility and Connectivity Chapter utilizes the previous analysis and outcomes of Monticello Transportation Plan approved in January 2011, with an emphasis to update the overall transportation strategy based on the updated land use strategies from this Plan. Intersection of Chelsea Road and Highway 25 PLANNED STREET NETWORK Monticello's growth strategy balances land use development needs with real estate market demand, and transportation and infrastructure improvement require- ments to ensure an orderly and efficient use of land and resources. It recognizes that there is significant development potential within Monticello's existing munic- ipal boundary and even greater potential in the surrounding Orderly Annexation Area (MOAA). Exhibit 4.1 shows the location of future roadways and the potential interchange study area at Orchard Road. It should be noted that while no new river crossings are depicted on the future roadways map, a future crossing is being studied at the regional level and will need to be integrated into the roadway network in future plan updates. As development occurs over time, a system of collector roadways extending into the MOAA will be needed. In particular, the planned street network in the East Bertram Study Area via the extension of School Boulevard will require careful planning. The need for the planned collector roadways should be periodically evaluated as community needs evolve and growth and development occur. The growth strategy prioritizes development and improvement within the existing City boundaries. This includes an emphasis on development in the downtown through infill mixed -use development, streetscape improvements and transportation system management on State Highway 25. Consistent with the City of Monticello's economic development goals, the transportation strategy also includes continued support for an additional Interstate 94 interchange at Orchard Road, which will provide valuable freeway access for future industrial development and continued growth anticipated in the northwest portion of Monticello. The City will work towards a "Complete Streets" approach for future roadway improvements to ensure that the needs of all roadway users are considered during the planning and design process (see "Complete Streets" on page 8). The City will also evaluate the improvement and intersection management of existing and expanded collector roads throughout Monticello. The subsections below discuss transportation considerations that will influence the development of the future roadway network. 98 MOBILITY AND CONNECTIVITY .. FUTURETRANSPORTATION STUDY AREA . . 19 s EXHIBIT 4.1 City of Monticello Boundary Monticello Orderly Annexation Area (MOAA) Monticello Township Boundary 0 Parcels Streets - Not Classified a+i+ Railroad Water Bodies Existing Road Classifications Principal Arterial - Interstate Principal Arterial - Other Minor Arterial Major Collector — Minor Collector — Local Future Road Classifications isso Principal Arterial - Interstate loom Principal Arterial - Other Minor Arterial •••• Major Collector ■■■■ Minor Collector .. Local • Future Interchange Future Intersection Note: Future roadway alignments are conceptual and require additional planning and analysis. Future river crossings are being studied by the Central Mississippi River Regional Planning Partnership. MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN 99 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Roadways serve two basic functions: mobility and access. Mobility refers to the ability to travel between places, and access refers to the connection between transportation routes and adjacent land uses. These are competing functions, in that roads designed for one function will often not serve the other effectively. The functional classification system is a hierarchy of roadways based upon the degree to which they provide the mobility versus the access function. The different classifications have different design and operating standards as dictated by their respective functions. A properly designed roadway network has an appropriate mix and integration of the different roadway types, allowing the overall system to operate efficiently and safely. The functional classification system organizes a roadway and street network that distributes traffic from local neighborhood streets to collector roadways, then to minor arterials and ultimately the principal arterial system. Roads are placed into categories based on the degree to which they provide access to adjacent land and mobility for through traffic. Functional classification gives an indication of the relative hierarchy of roadways in the transportation network. F14 V, The transportation strategy depicts several planned collector roadways. In general, collectors "collect' traffic from local streets to connect to the arterial roadway network. Exhibit 4.1 illustrates the functional classification of existing and planned roadways in Monticello. This system should be maintained in coordination with MnDOT and Wright County as the planned street network is implemented. ROADWAY JURISDICTION Roadways are classified based on which level of government owns or has jurisdiction over the road. The levels of government which have involvement for roadways within the city are the State of Minnesota (MnDOT), Wright County, the City of Monticello, and Monticello Township. MnDOT maintains the Interstate and Trunk Highway System. Wright County maintains the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) and County Road (CR) systems. The remaining streets (including State Aid streets) located within the city are the responsibility of the City of Monticello. Non -County streets that are on a municipal/township boundary are jointly owned by the City and the Township. These City/Township roads are maintained through agreements between each jurisdiction. Exhibit 4.2 depicts the jurisdictional classification for roadways serving Monticello. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic volumes are monitored and collected to determine roadway utilization and potential capacity issues. Exhibit 4.3 shows existing traffic volumes on major roadways in Monticello as well as 2040 forecast volume ranges as documented in the Wright County Long -Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). In general, capacity is not a concern for most roadways in Monticello. However, the segment of State Highway 25 from School Boulevard north to the river was identified in the Wright County LRTP as exceeding capacity based on 2040 forecast traffic volumes. The Volume to Capacity (v/c) ratio for this segment, or the ratio of traffic volume to roadway capacity, was calculated at 1.28. Roadways with a v/c ratio greater ' than 1.0 are typically described as exceeding capacity. It should be noted that this analysis is based entirely on traffic volumes and does not account for other roadway characteristics. MnDOT will be a key partner in addressing the safety and mobility issues on State Highway 25 identified during the Comprehensive Plan process. Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation - MnDOT 100 MOBILITY AND CONNECTIVITY RIGHT OF WAY Roadways require different right of way (ROW) widths depending on several factors, including: • Functional Classification • Existing/Forecast Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Volumes • Number of Lanes • Roadway Context (Urban or Rural Section) • Presence of Turn Lanes • Mu/timoda/ Facilities • Maintenance/Snow Removal • Drainage/Storm water Management Table 4.1 shows the City of Monticello ROW guidelines for various roadway types. As the Comprehensive Plan is implemented, the City should preserve the appropriate width for future roadway construction/ reconstruction. If sidewalk/trail facilities are included, additional ROW may be required. It is advisable for the City to purchase ROW for future roadways as early as practicable. This helps to limit future high costs and unforeseen purchase issues as on -going development occurs in the areas of the roadways. ACCESS MANAGEMENT AND ROADWAY SPACING In order to function effectively, adequate spacing must be maintained within the network of roadways that make up the functional classification system. While arterials such as Highway 25 and County Highway 75 are generally spaced five to ten miles from other arterials, collector roadways should be spaced roughly one-half mile to one mile apart. Access management should be employed to ensure that access to each planned land use is provided by the appropriate type of roadway and at the appropriate spacing. The proposed extensions of the existing Highway 25 frontage roads are one example of providing connectivity to commercial destinations through a combination of functional classification and access management. Table 4.2 shows City of Monticello access spacing guidelines. TABLE4.1: CITY OF MONTICELLO RIGHT-OF-WAY GUIDELINES Functional•g Classification AADRequired* Principal Arterial 30,000+ 4-Lane Divided 150 to 200 ft State Highway 25 Minor Arterial 15,000 - 30,000 4-Lane Divided 120 to 150 ft School Boulevard Major Collector 7,500 - 18,000 4-Lane Undivided 100 ft 7th Street East 10,000 - 25,000 4-Lane Divided 120 ft I NA 2,000 - 8,000 2-Lane 80 ft I Chelsea Road Minor Collector 4,000-16,000 3-Lane 80 ft I NA 7,500 - 8,000 4-Lane Undivided 100 ft NA Local 0 - 9,000 2-Lane 60 ft River Street *Additional Right -of -Way width should be obtained for the addition of left and/or right turn lanes. TABLE4.2: CITY OF MONTICELLO ACCESS SPACING GUIDELINES of Access PrincipalType Arterial* Arterial* .. Collector* Collector* Residential No Direct No Direct No Direct No Direct As Required Driveways Access Access Access Access Based on: Based on: Based on: Based on: Speed, Traffic Speed, Traffic Speed, Traffic Speed, Traffic Commercial No Direct Volume, Sight Volume, Sight Volume, Sight Volume, Sight Driveways Access Distance, etc. Distance, etc. Distance, etc. Distance, etc. (1/8 to 1/4 mile) (Min. 500 ft) (Min. 200 ft) (Min. 100 ft) Low Volume Residential 1/8 Mile 1/4 Mile 1/8 Mile 1/8 Mile 1/16 Mile Streets High Volume Residential 1/4 Mile 1/4 Mile 1/4 Mile 1/8 Mile 1/16 Mile Streets High Volume Residential 112 Mile 112 Mile 1/4 Mile 1/4 Mile 1/4 Mile Streets (<1,000 ADT) *Additional Right -of -Way width should be obtained for the addition of left and/or right turn lanes. MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN Planning Commission Agenda: 03/01/22 3A. Consideration to adopt Resolution PC-2022-016 of the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello Finding that the Proposed Sale of Certain Land by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Consistent with the City of Monticello's Comprehensive Plan. Prepared by: Community Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Development Director 3/01/2022 Commission action): Multiple Dates Additional Analysis by: Economic Development Manager, Community & Economic Development Coordinator ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Decision 1: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution PC-2022-016 finding that the Proposed Sale of Certain Land by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Consistent with the City of Monticello's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Motion of other. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to consider a resolution finding that the conveyance of land to Suburban Manufacturing (M & B on Chelsea, LLC) is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Monticello EDA is the current property owner of the proposed conveyance land, portions of Outlots A and B of Otter Creek Crossing 4th Addition. Suburban Manufacturing is proposing to add a 21,400 +/- square foot addition to its existing 40,236 square foot facility. Suburban constructed its current building at this location in 2011-2012. They currently employ approximately 50 FTE staff at the facility. Suburban's expansion plans show the new addition on the south and the west sides of the current building. The existing parking and truck staging area will be impacted and need to be relocated farther to the south on the site. As a result, a small area of the EDA owned lot just south of Suburban Manufacturing property would be added to the Suburban property to allow the expansion to proceed as currently designed. The westerly lot line will also be adjusted to eliminate the jogs in the property line in favor of a straight line, which will also result in minor conveyances between the City and Suburban. Planning Commission Agenda: 03/01/22 Related to the process of the proposed land sale there will also be adjustments to the stormwater drainage public infrastructure. Suburban Manufacturing is a light manufacturer, a permitted use in the 1-1, Light Industrial District. Suburban's existing site, as well as the proposed area of conveyance, is currently guided Light Industrial Park (LIP) and zoned 1-1. The land use guidance and zoning both support the creation of jobs and tax base through the establishment and retention/expansion of light manufacturing in the community. In summary, the City's adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan and its supporting documents provide the basis for the development of the proposed conveyance. The Planning Commission is considering the preliminary plat for the proposed lot configuration as a separate agenda item on March 1st, 2022. As a permitted use in the 1-1 District, Suburban's expansion requires site plan review and building permit. No tax increment assistance is proposed as part of this project. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff supports Alternative #1 above. Staff believes that the proposed project and its principal uses are consistent with the City's long-range plans. The EDA has long held this property specifically to provide an opportunity to meet goals for economic development. The proposed development retains and expands an existing manufacturing facility in Monticello. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Resolution PC-2022-016—Conveyance B. Aerial Image C. Concept Plan D. Land Conveyance Legal Description Exhibit E. Monticello 2040 Plan, Excerpts 2 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2022-016 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED SALE OF CERTAIN LAND BY THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF MONTICELLO'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City") proposes to convey certain property within the City legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") to the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (the "Authority") for economic development purposes; and WHEREAS, the Authority proposes to convey the Property to M & B on Chelsea, LLC, or an entity affiliated therewith or related thereto (the "Developer"), for construction of an expansion to an existing manufacturing facility; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.356, subd. 2, requires the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") to review the proposed acquisition or disposal of publicly -owned real property within the City prior to its acquisition or disposal, to determine whether in the opinion of the Planning Commission, such acquisition or disposal is consistent with the City's comprehensive municipal plan (the "Comprehensive Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed conveyance of the Property, and has determined that the Property is located in Otter Creek Crossings, an area designated for industrial park use within the City's comprehensive plan, and is therefore consistent with such use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, that the conveyance of the Property by the City to the Authority, and the sale of the Property by the Authority to the Developer, are consistent with the City's comprehensive municipal plan, and will promote the development of the City's industrial park. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be communicated to the Board of Commissioners of the Authority. ADOPTED this 1 st day of March, 2022, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Paul Konsor, Chair Error! Unknown document property name. ATTEST: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director Error! Unknown document property name. EXHIBIT A That part of Outlot B, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota, which lies easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the most northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, said OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION; thence South 37 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, assumed bearing along the common lot line between said Lot 1 and said Outlot B, a distance of 73.65 feet; thence South 47 degrees 51 minutes 30 seconds West, along said common lot line, a distance of 66.41 feet; thence North 87 degrees 18 minutes 42 seconds West, along said common lot line, a distance of 75.26 feet; thence North 70 degrees 24 minutes 21 seconds West, along said common lot line and its extension, a distance of 150.26 feet; thence South 34 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 415.70 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, and said line there terminating. AND That part of Outlot A, said OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, which lies easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the hereinbefore point of termination; thence South 34 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 35.23 feet to a line parallel with and 35.00 feet southwesterly of the northeasterly line of said Outlot A, thence South 49 degrees 29 minutes 27 seconds East, along said parallel line, a distance of 223.19 feet to the southeasterly line of said Outlot A, and said line there terminating. Error! Unknown document property name. cyF�s \R O q \ � z N OP\' N=G=N Architecture I Interior Design I Planning STUDIO 70041st Avenue NMh St. Cloutl, Minnesota USA 5630S TELEPHONE 320.251.3304 WEB—negenarchitects.com Consulbnt CertiIced- I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or repod was prepared by me or untler my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Print Name: Lon Hagen Signature: Date. 212122 License No: 41402 SUBURBAN MANUFACTURING GROUP 10531 Dalton Ave. NE Monticello, MN 55362 Revisions COMM. NO.: 210923 ARCHITECT: #Contact Full Name DATE: 2l m DRAWN BY: CAD T hnician Full Name The designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings, graphics, and models thereof, are propneboy and cannot be copied, duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in part, without the expressed wn.n consent of Negen & Associates, Inc. These are available for limited reNew and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors government agencies ventlom and office personnel only in accordance with this notice. 0 200 2021 Negen and Associates, St. Cloud, MN 56303 DD1.3 Architectural Site Plan SITE PLAN A -001 SCALE: V = 30' Location: City of Monticello Project No: 019295-000 Date: February 15, 2022 Description of land being conveyed to Suburban: That part of Outlot B, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota, which lies easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the most northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, said OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION; thence South 37 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, assumed bearing along the common lot line between said Lot 1 and said Outlot B, a distance of 73.65 feet; thence South 47 degrees 51 minutes 30 seconds West, along said common lot line, a distance of 66.41 feet; thence North 87 degrees 18 minutes 42 seconds West, along said common lot line, a distance of 75.26 feet; thence North 70 degrees 24 minutes 21 seconds West, along said common lot line and its extension, a distance of 150.26 feet; thence South 34 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 415.70 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, and said line there terminating. AND That part of Outlot A, said OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, which lies easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the hereinbefore point of termination; thence South 34 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 35.23 feet to a line parallel with and 35.00 feet southwesterly of the northeasterly line of said Outlot A, thence South 49 degrees 29 minutes 27 seconds East, along said parallel line, a distance of 223.19 feet to the southeasterly line of said Outlot A, and said line there terminating. Location: City of Monticello Project No: 019295-000 Date: February 15, 2022 Description of land being conveyed to City of Monticello: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of the following described line: Beginning at the most northerly corner of said Lot 1, OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION; thence South 37 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, assumed bearing along the common lot line between said Lot 1 and Outlot B, said OTTER CREEK CROSSING 4TH ADDITION, a distance of 73.65 feet; thence South 47 degrees 51 minutes 30 seconds West, along said common lot line, a distance of 66.41 feet; thence North 87 degrees 18 minutes 42 seconds West, along said common lot line, a distance of 75.26 feet; thence North 70 degrees 24 minutes 21 seconds West, along said common lot line and its extension, a distance of 150.26 feet; thence South 34 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 415.70 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, and said line there terminating. Monticello SION ;N 46 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PARK (LIP) The Light Industrial designation accommodates uses such as process and production manufacturing which uses moderate amounts of partially processed materials, warehousing and distribution, research and development, medical laboratories, machine shops, computer technology, professional and corporate offices and industrial engineering facilities. Characteristics such as noise, vibration and odor do not occur or do not generate significant impacts. Hazardous materials handling and storage may also occur but must be stored indoors or screened from the public right-of-way. Activities such as the handling of hazardous materials and outdoor storage are limited. Industrial • Warehousing and Distribution • Manufacturing • Research and Development • Medical Laboratories • Computer Technology • Professional and Corporate Offices Commercial • Office • Service -based Primary Mode Vehicular with access to collectors and arterials F� Transit or shuttle service Secondary Mode Shared bike/ pedestrian facilities • Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.50 to 0.75 • Height - Up to 4 stories • Lot Area - N/A 7001) 2018 Correlating Zoning District 1-1 Light Industrial District MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN 81 Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/22 3C. Consideration to adopt the 2022-2025 Planning Commission Workplan REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Staff is requesting that Planning Commission review and adopt the 2022-2025 Planning Commission Workplan. The purpose of the Planning Commission workplan is to connect the work of the Commission to the overall goals of the city and community. The workplan outlines activities of the Commission which lie beyond its required review of land use applications. The workplan is reflective of the direction of the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan and the input of the Planning Commission. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to adopt the 2022-2025 Planning Commission workplan as drafted. 2. Motion to recommend changes to the 2022-2025 Planning Commission Workplan as directed by the Commission. 3. Motion of other. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Subject to any comment of the Commission, staff recommends adoption of the workplan. SUPPORTING DATA A. 2022-2025 Workplan, Draft 1 CITY OF Monticello Monticello Planning Commission 2021-2025 Workplan 2022 UPDATE - DRAFT The Monticello Planning Commission is established to advise the Mayor, Council and Community Development Department in matters concerning planning and land use matters; to review and make recommendations regarding the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan, subdivision and zoning ordinances and other planning rules and regulations; to establish planning rules and regulations; and to conduct public hearings. Purpose Statement: The Planning Commission will support efforts to implement the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. The Planning Commission will work collaboratively with the City Council, other City boards and commissions, and community stakeholders in its work to achieve the Plan and the strategic goals of the city. Organizational & Training Activities: • Continue to support regional planning as identified by the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. o Implementation Chapter, Land Use, Growth & Orderly Annexation ■ Strategy 1.10.1- Consider the outcomes of regional planning initiatives and participate in processes resulting from the efforts of the Central Mississippi River Regional Planning Partnership. • Consistent with Policy 1.2 for Agency Coordination, monitor opportunity for engagement in roadway and pathway connectivity planning across jurisdictions. • Initiate and/or facilitate organizational projects in support of the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. o Implementation Chapter, Land Use, Growth & Orderly Annexation ■ Strategy 1.1.1 - Facilitate biannual meetings to serve as a "Development Forum" with interested property owners, realtors, builders and developers to discuss long-term planning, real estate market conditions. ■ Strategy 1.1.2 - Develop and publish a 'Development Opportunity Map' for use by the public, property owners and development community that identifies vacant and potential development opportunity sites, as well as pending and approved projects with the City and MOAA. Comprehensive Plan Activities: • Support the implementation of the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan through implementation of the Goals, Policies and Strategies identified within the Plan. o Review industrial land inventory and planning consistent with Monticello 2040 Land Use policies for: 11Page ■ 1.1 (Land Use) and 8.1 (Economic Development) - Opportunity Areas ■ 1.2 - Growth Management (Land Use) ■ 5.1 - Land Supply and Employment Growth (Land Use) ■ 2.1 Diverse Economic Sectors (Economic Development) ■ 2.4 — Industrial and Business Site Analysis and Availability (Economic Development) • Support the priority projects set by the City Council, including the small area planning for Chelsea Commons (now The Pointes at Cedar) area and reinvestment in Block 52 in Downtown Monticello. Zoning Ordinance/Map Activities: Complete the recodification of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, including consideration of amendments as recommended in the Goals, Policies and Strategies of the Implementation Chapter of the Monticello 2040 Comprehensive Plan. o Review and revise the zoning ordinance consistent with the 2022-2023 Zoning Ordinance Strategy priorities set by the Planning Commission per Appendix A. Noted priorities: Review opportunities for larger lot development and other life -cycle housing consistent with Monticello 2040 Policy 2.1 for Neighborhood Diversity and Life - cycle Housing. Review regulations for outdoor storage and open sales. • Consider amendments to the Monticello Official Zoning Map in support of the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan guided land use, including, but not limited to the following. o Implementation Chapter, Land Use, Growth & Orderly Annexation ■ Strategy 2.7.1 - Amend the Zoning Map to be consistent with the Future Land Use Map and identify areas where mixed -density residential uses are appropriate. Subdivision Ordinance Activities: • Complete a review and amendment of the Monticello Subdivision Ordinance, including consideration of amendments as recommended in the Goals, Policies and Strategies of the Implementation Chapter of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan as follows. o Implementation Chapter, Land Use, Growth & Orderly Annexation ■ Strategy 2.5.1- Implement measures to slow down or "calm" traffic on local streets by using design techniques and measures to improve traffic safety, provide eyes on the street, and enhance the quality of life in Monticello's neighborhoods. ■ Strategy 3.8.2 - Require pedestrian and bike connections in new commercial development. ■ Strategy 6.5.1- Conduct regular review of parkland allocation and ensure sufficient amount of land is designated for parks and recreation activities in the City as the population increases. 21Page Research & City Department Update Topics As resources and time allow, the Planning Commission will consider research and information related to the following topic areas. Topic Annexation Process Transportation update Overview of economic development initiatives for business retention and employment attraction Status of municipal infrastructure Tree preservation —Zoning ordinance section 4.2 Discuss next steps for East Bertram Planning Area and Northwest Planning Areas identified in Monti 2040 31Page 2021-2022 Monticello Planning Commission Workplan: Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan Zoning Strategies ATTACHMENT A Goal 1: Growth & Change Policy 1.7: Zoning to Manage Growth Strategy 1.7.1 - Use Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and building height standards in commercial, industrial, and mixed - use areas to control the intensity of development. Use residential density standards (units/acre) in residential Goal 2: Complete Neighborhoods Policy 2.1: Neighborhood Diversity & Life -Cycle Housing Strategy 2.1.1 - Adopt zoning regulations that allow for a wider diversity of housing types, identify character defining features and encourage a center of focus for each neighborhood. Strategy 2.1.2 - Encourage opportunities for residents to stay in Monticello, with additional options for estate residential, senior living, and other life -cycle options. Goal 3: Commercial Centers and Corridors Policy 3.1: Connected Neighborhood Shopping Centers Strategy 3.1.1 - Amend zoning to allow small, neighborhood serving shopping centers and commercial uses in the Mixed Neighborhood (MN) land use designation. In the MN designation surrounding Downtown, these uses would typically be very small up to 1,000 square feet, while other areas designated MN may have larger neighborhoods which necessitate larger neighborhood centers. Policy 3.5: Redevelopment & Adaptation of Commercial Corridors Strategy 3.5.2 - Broaden permitted land uses in commercial centers to adapt to changing commercial demand while activating these spaces. Consider educational, medical office or other compatible uses. Policy 3.6: Commercial Building & Site Design Strategy 3.6.2 - Review and consider amendments to the City's commercial parking requirements based on changes in shopping and consumer behavior. Encourage the use of shared parking in along corridors and commercial centers, rather than independent parking lots on each commercial property. This can reduce the total land area dedicated to parking, result in more efficient land uses, and create a more pedestrian -friendly environment. Policy 3.8: Commercial Uses & Public Health Strategy 3.8.1 - Promote tood access by amending zoning regulations to allow retail and service based tood uses in all commercial districts and some residential districts as appropriate. These uses may include food stores, markets, community gardens and farmer's markets. Goal 5: Active Employment Centers Policy 5.4: Employment Generating Land Use Design & Regulation Strategy 5.4.1 - Utilize and maintain higher floor area ratio and building height allowances in certain industrial areas for manufacturing and warehouses than for other building types, due to their unique function and space requirements. Strategy 5.4.3 - Continue to support quality site design for industrial uses as an investment in the community and employment districts, including materials, landscaping and architecture. Policy 5.6: Industrial Land Use Compatibility Strategy 5.6.2 - Improve the visual quality and sustainability of industrial areas through requirements such as screening of storage areas, landscaping, prompt elimination of trash and roadside debris, and ongoing maintenance of buildings and properties. Chapter 8 - Community Character, Design & The Arts Goal 2: Site Design & Architecture Policy 2.1 High Quality Design Strategy 2.1.1 - Through zoning and PUD applications, encourage the location of infill new commercial, residential, or mixed -use developments where appropriate and needed to provide definition to the street and promote pedestrian activity. Strategy 2.1.5 - Continue to evaluate the zoning ordinance for opportunities to enhance design through landscaping, signage and building materials in all districts. Page 1 Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/22 3D. Community Development Director's Report Council Action on/related to Commission Recommendations Consideration to approve a Conditional Use Permit for Cross Easement for Parking in the Central Community District (CCD) Applicant: Bill & Penny Burt Approved on the consent agenda on February 14th1 2022. • Consideration to adopt the 2022 City of Monticello Official Zoning Map Applicant: City of Monticello Approved on the consent agenda on February 14th, 2022. City Council/Planning Commission Special Meeting A special joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission has been scheduled for Tuesday, March 1st at 4:30 PM to review a Concept Stage PUD submittal for Block 52. The Pointes at Cedar Project Updates The City Council and Planning Commission met in a joint workshop on February 14t" to review the direction and process for the proposed Pointes at Cedar zoning code. The primary direction resulting from the workshop was related to the proposed review process for projects within The Pointes. Specifically, there were suggestions related to refining and clarifying the criteria and scoring of projects. Detailed planning efforts also continue for The Pointes with consultant WSB and staff continuing to focus on Dundas Road coordination and timing of proposed improvements. The most current project update has been posted to https://www.ci.monticello.mn.us/276/The-Pointes-at-Cedar-Small-Area-Plan Upcoming Meetings/Events: Zoning Ordinance Work Group: TBD Compass Committee: 4/20 at 6:00 PM Public Engagement at MontiGlo Parade: 2/26 Public Engagement at Farmers Market: 3/12 Development Services Survey Each year, the Community Development Department requests feedback on the development process with the goal of continued improvement and stakeholder satisfaction. The survey is sent to all land use applicants from the prior year each December, with a number of reminders to complete the survey sent in January. The survey is set-up to allow for anonymous response. The average response rate is 10-15% Planning Commission Agenda — 03/01/22 This year's survey summary information is attached. As a result of the survey comments, staff is reviewing our checklist information and decision response letters for additional improvement, along with coordination with the Department of Building Safety for permit review and response. Resource Information The Wright County Economic Development Partnership's Annual Update and Strategic Plan are included for reference. A local real estate broker provided a Local Market Update for December 2021. Staff are passing along as an update of interest. For more City updates, visit the City Blog: https://www.ci.monticello.mn.us/Blog.aspx 2 2021 Post Development Survey Summary The 2021 Post Development Survey was completed on January 24, 2022. We received 9 responses out of a possible 33 (2021 applicants), with multiple attempts to encourage response. The responses came from land developers, contractors/project managers, home builders, local business owners and property owners. All responses indicated that staff provided applicants with adequate information about the design standards and review process. It was also indicated by all completed surveys, that the City provided assistance and good communication to keep projects moving forward to completion. When rating service areas provided by staff during the application process (Excellent, Satisfactory, and needs improvement), All categories except "Thoroughness of Review" and "Clarity of Process" received either Excellent or Satisfactory ratings on all completed surveys. There was no elaboration or further comment on why said categories needed improvement from either response. "Timeliness of Building Review" was the only service category on the list where satisfactory responses (57.14%) outweighed the excellent responses (42.86%). All but one (8/9) response indicated staff worked proactively with the applicant to overcome issues in development or the land use process itself. There was no elaboration from the completed survey addressing why they felt staff did not work proactively with the applicant to overcome obstacles. All completed surveys however, indicated the plan review and construction process encouraged them to invest in future projects in Monticello and all would recommend Monticello to other builders and developers. Two of the completed surveys offered suggestions to better improve the planning/development/land use review process. The suggestions included shortening the time frame of the entire process and reducing costs and fees associated with the development. A comment left at the end of one of the completed surveys is below: "I would suggest at some point looking at allowing for smaller lots sizes on single family developments as surrounding cities are allowing it and it is working in those cities. This would also allow some of the property owners that are trying to sell to developers be able to have enough value to be able to sell. This would also increase the Tax's for the city and enable the city to compete with neighboring cities." EXCELLENT SATISFACTORY IMPROVEMENT TOTAL REQUESTED RESPONDENTS Clarity of Application Materials 88.89% 22.22% 0.00% 8 2 0 9 Helpfulness & Cooperation 88.89% 11.11 % 0.00% 8 1 0 9 Staff Availability for Assistance 88.89% 11.11 % 0.00% 8 1 0 9 Staff Professionalism 88.89% 11.11 % 0.00% 8 1 0 9 Timeliness of Planning Review 62.50% 37.50% 0.00% 5 3 0 8 Timeliness of Engineering Review 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 4 4 0 8 Timeliness of Building Review 42.86% 57.14% 0.00% 3 4 0 7 Staff Response Time 77.78% 22.22% 0.00% 7 2 0 9 Creative Problem Solving 66.67% 33.33% 0.00% 6 3 0 9 Thoroughness of Review 75.00% 12.50% 12.50% 6 1 1 8 Clarity of Process Requirements & Timelines 62.50% 25.00% 12.50% 5 2 1 8 Consistent Application of Regulations 62.50% 37.50% 0.00% 5 3 0 8 Use of Technology - Availability of online resources and 62.50% 37.50% 0.00% information for your application submittal 5 3 0 8 *Q4 "Help us define service enhancement areas that will help you the most. Please check the box that best reflects your experience with the service Areas" - Response Statistics* Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ Entire State December Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings 4,190 3,591 - 14.3% 107,155 105,490 Pending Sales 5,246 4,595 - 12.4% 94,669 93,594 Closed Sales 7,435 7,137 - 4.0% 92,892 94,162 Median Sales Price* $277,825 $300,000 + 8.0% $275,000 $306,750 Percent of Original List Price Received* 98.5% 98.7% + 0.2% 98.6% 100.9% Days on Market Until Sale 43 36 - 16.3% 45 32 Months Supply of Inventory I 1.2 0.9 - 25.0% -- -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December A a ^^ 3,591 7,435 7,137 98.5% 98.7% - 1.6% -1.1% + 1.4% + 11.5% + 2.3% - 28.9% 2020 ■ 2021 0.9 - 14.3% - 4.0% + 0.2% - 25.0% New Listings Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Months Supply Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation Monthly Indicators December 2021 Residential real estate activity composed of single-family properties, townhomes and condominiums combined.. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Minnesota Realtors Activity Snapshot 4.0% + 8.0% - 14.3% One -Year Change in One -Year Change in One -Year Change in Closed Sales Median Sales Price New Listings Activity Overview 2 New Listings 3 Pending Sales 4 Closed Sales 5 Days on Market Until Sale 6 Median Sales Price 7 Average Sales Price 8 Percent of Original List Price Received 9 Housing Affordability Index 10 Inventory of Homes for Sale 11 Months Supply of Inventory 12 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Activity Overview Key metrics by report month and for year-to-date (YTD) starting from the first of the year. Ilu�..���u�um� New Listings 4,190 3,591 -14.3% 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Pending Sales 5,246 4,595 -12.4% 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Closed Sales 1111111 dft 7,435 7,137 -4.0% 12-2018 12-2019 122020 12-2021 Days on Market 110-011 43 36 -16.3% —'al 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Median Sales Price $277,825 $300,000 +8.0% 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Avg. Sales Price 11111. do $321,104 $351,135 +9.4% 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Pct. of Orig. Price Received 98.5% 98.7% +0.2% limbo 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Affordability Index Ilion 167 145 -13.2% 12-2018 12-2019 001111 12-2020 12-2021 Homes for Sale* 9,427 7,121 -24.5% 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Months Supply* 1.2 0.9 -25.0% 12-2018 12-2019 12-2020 12-2021 Statewide inventory before 2012 was overstated due to changes made in NorthstarMLS. However, an "Expired" field was made available in 2012 by some multiple listing services, allowing expired listings to be separated from active listings, providing more accurate views of inventory and supply. Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing service Minnesota RealtorsO 107,155 105,490 -1.6% 94,669 93,594 - 1.1% 92,892 94,162 +1.4% 45 32 -28.9% $275,000 $306,750 +11.5% $315,414 $352,520 +11.8% 98.6% 100.9% +2.3% 169 142 -16.0% is in the state of Minnesota. Report @ 2022 Showing -rime. 1 2 New Listings A count of the properties that have been newly listed on the market in a given month. December 4,190 2019 2020 2021 Year to Date 109,957 2019 107,155 105,490 2020 2021 Minnesota Realtors New Listings Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 5,395 6,004 -10.1 % February 2021 6,338 7,270 -12.8% March 2021 9,488 10,360 -8.4% April 2021 10,527 8,753 +20.3% May 2021 11,001 10,813 +1.7% June 2021 12,215 11,191 +9.2% July 2021 11,620 11,520 +0.9% August 2021 11,003 11,252 -2.2% September 2021 10,102 10,888 -7.2% October 2021 8,513 9,384 -9.3% November 2021 5,697 5,530 +3.0% December 2021 3,591 4,190 -14.3% 12-Month Avg 8,791 8,930 -1.6% Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 3 Pending Sales A count of the properties on which offers have been accepted in a given month. December 5,246 2019 2020 2021 Historical Pending Sales by Month 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2000, 1-2005 1-2006 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Minnesota Realtors Year to Date Pending Sales Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 5,046 4,669 +8.1 % 94,669 93,594 February 2021 5,834 5,806 +0.5% 85,534 March 2021 8,215 7,249 +13.3% April 2021 8,977 6,749 +33.0% May 2021 9,744 8,831 +10.3% June 2021 9,752 10,354 -5.8% July 2021 9,065 10,389 -12.7% August 2021 9,379 10,522 -10.9% September 2021 8,167 9,508 -14.1 % October 2021 8,079 8,939 -9.6% November 2021 6,741 6,407 +5.2% December 2021 4,595 5,246 -12.4% 2019 2020 2021 12-Month Avg 7,R' 7,889 -1.1 % Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 4 Closed Sales A count of the actual sales that closed in a given month. December 7,435 7,137 2019 2020 2021 Historical Closed Sales by Month 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2000, 1-2005 1-2006 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Year to Date 92,892 94,162 2019 2020 2021 Minnesota Realtors Closed Sales Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 4,847 4,123 +17.6% February 2021 4,498 4,190 +7.4% March 2021 6,013 5,741 +4.7% April 2021 7,232 6,375 +13.4% May 2021 8,151 6,986 +16.7% June 2021 10,673 9,224 +15.7% July 2021 9,780 10,522 -7.1 % August 2021 9,934 9,988 -0.5% September 2021 9,163 9,826 -6.7% October 2021 8,835 10,393 -15.0% November 2021 7,899 8,089 -2.3% December 2021 7,137 7,435 -4.0% 12-Month Avg 7,847 7,741 +1.4% Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 5 Days on Market Until Sale Average number of days between when a property is listed and when an offer is accepted in a given month. December 55 43 2019 2020 2021 60 40 20 1-2005 1-2006 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Minnesota Realtors Year to Date Days on Market Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 46 62 -25.8% February 2021 48 63 -23.8% March 2021 42 57 -26.3% 49 45 April 2021 37 48 -22.9% May 2021 29 46 -37.0% June 2021 25 46 -45.7% 32 July 2021 25 44 -43.2% August 2021 26 42 -38.1 % September 2021 27 41 -34.1 % October 2021 30 39 -23.1 % November 2021 33 38 -13.2% December 2021 36 43 -16.3% 2019 2020 2021 12-Month Avg 34 47 -27.7% Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 6 Median Sales Price Point at which half of the sales sold for more and half sold for less, not accounting for seller concessions, in a given month. Minnesota Realtors December Year to Date Median Sales Price Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 $272,000 $245,500 +10.8% February 2021 $282,500 $254,950 +10.8% $300,000 $306,750 March 2021 $295,000 $267,950 +10.1 % $277,825 $275,000 April 2021 $305,000 $275,000 +10.9% $251,000 $253,750 May 2021 $310,000 $268,000 +15.7% June 2021 $325,000 $273,000 +19.0% July 2021 $315,000 $280,000 +12.5% August 2021 $316,000 $284,000 +11.3% September 2021 $310,000 $279,900 +10.8% October 2021 $308,500 $285,000 +8.2% . , ; November 2021 $304,900 $284,000 +7.4% December 2021 $300,000 L$277,825 +8.0% 2019 2020 2021 2019 2020 2021 12-Month Avg $303,658 $272,927 +11.3% Historical Median Sales Price by Month $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2005 1-2006 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 7 Average Sales Price Average sales price for all closed sales, not accounting for seller concessions, in a given month. December $291,706 2019 $351,135 2020 2021 Historical Average Sales Price by Month $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150 000 1-2005 1-2006 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Minnesota Realtors Year to Date Average Sales Price Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 $310,713 $286,817 +8.3% February 2021 $320,381 $289,379 +10.7% $352,520 March 2021 $339,568 $302,717 +12.2% $315,414 April 2021 $345,131 $306,382 +12.6% $291,090 May 2021 $361,801 $299,601 +20.8% June 2021 $368,249 $308,213 +19.5% July 2021 $359,540 $318,731 +12.8% August 2021 $367,080 $323,876 +13.3% September 2021 $354,130 $322,101 +9.9% October 2021 $354,918 $335,093 +5.9% November 2021 $352,028 $328,037 +7.3% December 2021 $351,135 L$321,104 +9.4% 2019 2020 2021 12-Month Avg $348,723 $311,838 +11.8% Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 8 Percent of Original List Price Received Percentage found when dividing a property's sales price by its original list price, then taking the average for all properties sold in a given month, not accounting for seller concessions. December Year to Date 96.2% 98.5% 98.7% 97.6% 1 1 1 2019 2020 2021 2019 Historical Percent of Original List Price Received by Month 105% 100% i.............................................................................................................. 95% 90% 98.6% 2020 100.9% 2021 Minnesota Realtors Pct. of Orig. Price Received January 2021 98.3% February 2021 99.0% March 2021 100.7% April 2021 102.1 % May 2021 102.9% June 2021 103.2% July 2021 102.7% August 2021 101.5% September 2021 100.4% October 2021 99.7% November 2021 99.0% December 2021 98.7% 12-Month Avg 100.7% Prior Year Percent Change 95.8% +2.6% 96.8% +2.3% 98.0% +2.8% 98.8% +3.3% 98.5% +4.5% 98.5% +4.8% 99.0% +3.7% 99.2% +2.3% 99.2% +1.2% 99.3% +0.4% 99.0% 0.0% 98.5% +0.2% 98.4% +2.3% 85 1-2005 1-2006 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 9 Housing Affordability Index This index measures housing affordability for the region. For example, an index of 120 means the median household income is 120% of what is necessary to qualify for the median -priced home under prevailing interest rates. A higher number means greater affordability. December 168 r 2019 167 2020 2021 Year to Date 166 Historical Housing Affordability Index by Month 350 300 250 200 150 100 1-2007 1-2008 1-2009 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 2019 169 2020 Minnesota Realtors Affordability Index Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 169 176 -4.0% February 2021 155 171 -9.4% 142 March 2021 148 157 -5.7% April 2021 147 161 -8.7% May 2021 144 164 -12.2% June 2021 137 164 -16.5% July 2021 142 162 -12.3% August 2021 142 161 -11.8% September 2021 144 163 -11.7% October 2021 144 162 -11.1 % November 2021 150 163 -8.0% December 2021 145 167 -13.2% 2021 12-Month Avg 147 164 -10.4% Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 10 Inventory of Homes for Sale The number of properties available for sale in active status at the end of a given month. December 15,612 2019 91427 2020 Historical Inventory of Homes for Sale by Month 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1-2012 5-2012 9-2012 1-2013 5-2013 9-2013 1-2014 5-2014 9-2014 1-2015 5-2015 9-2015 1-2016 5-2016 9-2016 1-2017 5-2017 9-2017 1-2018 5-2018 9-2018 1-2019 5-2019 9-2019 1-2020 5-2020 9-2020 1-2021 5-2021 9-2021 7,121 2021 Minnesota Realtors Homes for Sale Prior Year Percent Change January 2021 8,764 15,238 -42.5% February 2021 8,353 15,456 -46.0% March 2021 8,728 17,181 -49.2% April 2021 9,457 17,689 -46.5% May 2021 9,903 18,127 -45.4% June 2021 11,309 17,341 -34.8% July 2021 12,648 16,861 -25.0% August 2021 12,869 15,954 -19.3% September 2021 13,345 15,760 -15.3% October 2021 12,229 14,383 -15.0% November 2021 9,723 12,033 -19.2% December 2021 7,121 9,427 -24.5% Note: Statewide inventory before 2012 was overstated due to changes made in NorthstarMLS. However, an "Expired" field was made available in 2012 by some multiple listing services, allowing expired listings to be separated from active listings, providing a more accurate view of inventory. Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 11 Months Supply of Inventory The inventory of homes for sale at the end of a given month, divided by the average monthly pending sales from the last 12 months. December 2.2 2019 1.2 1 • 45.5% ]MU on 111020 Historical Months Supply of Inventory by Month 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 1-2012 5-2012 9-2012 1-2013 5-2013 9-2013 1-2014 5-2014 9-2014 1-2015 5-2015 9-2015 1-2016 5-2016 9-2016 1-2017 5-2017 9-2017 1-2018 5-2018 9-2018 1-2019 5-2019 9-2019 1-2020 5-2020 9-2020 1-2021 5-2021 9-2021 Months Supply January 2021 February 2021 March 2021 April 2021 May 2021 June 2021 July 2021 August 2021 September 2021 October 2021 November 2021 December 2021 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.2 0.9 Minnesota Realtors Prior Year 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.2 Percent Change -47.6 % -47.6 % -54.2 % -52.0 % -53.8 % -41.7% -30.4 % -23.8% -19.0% -15.8% -20.0% -25.0% Note: Statewide inventory before 2012 was overstated due to changes made in NorthstarMLS. However, an "Expired" field was made available in 2012 by some multiple listing services, allowing expired listings to be separated from active listings, providing a more accurate view of supply. Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. 1 12 Local Market Updates for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ Minnesota Regional Development Organizations Minnesota Realtors Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report 0 2021 ShowingTime. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 1 — Northwest Region December Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings I 35 28 - 20.0% 614 550 Pending Sales 38 30 - 21.1 % 531 551 Closed Sales 43 49 + 14.0% 499 562 Median Sales Price` $144,000 $174,950 + 21.5% $134,000 $157,500 Percent of Original List Price Received" 92.8% 95.4% + 2.8% 92.5% 95.8% Days on Market Until Sale 73 62 - 15.1 % 94 63 Months Supply of Inventory I 3.0 1.3 - 56.7% -- I -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. December 35 440 28 - 20.0% New Listings 49 AA + 14.0% Closed Sales Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2016 - 10.4% + 3.8% + 12.6% + 17.5% + 3.6% - 33.0% 2020 ■ 2021 92.8% 95.4% 3.0 1.3 0 + 2.8% - 56.7% Pct. of Orig. Price Received Months Supply Statewide — 1 —Northwest Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 2 —Headwaters Region December New Listings 33 43 + 30.3% Pending Sales 59 63 + 6.8% Closed Sales 100 80 - 20.0% Median Sales Price` $197,500 $208,500 + 5.6% Percent of Original List Price Received* 94.5% 95.1 % + 0.6% Days on Market Until Sale 67 59 - 11.9% Months Supply of Inventory I 1.5 1.4 - 6.7% * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due December 43 33 0 + 30.3% New Listings 100 Minnesota Realtors Year to Date 1,366 1,355 - 0.8% 1,250 1,206 - 3.5% 1,208 1,214 + 0.5% $196,000 $225,000 + 14.8% 95.4% 97.8% + 2.5% 71 44 - 38.0% to small sample size. 94.5% 95.1 % - 20.0% + 0.6% Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2016 1.5 2020 ■ 2021 1.4 - 6.7% Months Supply Statewide — 2 —Headwaters Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 3 — Arrowhead Region uecemaer New Listings 174 190 + 9.2% Pending Sales 277 197 - 28.9% Closed Sales 459 392 - 14.6% Median Sales Price' $195,250 $195,550 + 0.2% Percent of Original List Price Received* 95.2% 97.0% + 1.9% Days on Market Until Sale 80 49 - 38.8% Months Supply of Inventory I 2.0 1.6 - 20.0% Minnesota Realtors Year to Date 6,056 5,805 - 4.1 % 5,668 5,314 - 6.2% 5,531 5,420 - 2.0% $189,500 $206,000 + 8.7% 95.3% 98.4% + 3.3% 78 49 - 37.2% * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. December 459 174 190 95.2% 97.0% + 9.2% - 14.6% + 1.9% New Listings Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2016 2020 ■ 2021 2.0 1.6 r E - 20.0% Months Supply Statewide — 3 —Arrowhead Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 4 — West Central Region Minnesota Realtors December Year to Date Key Metrics 020 New Listings 92 89 - 3.3% 3,331 2,974 - 10.7% Pending Sales 123 124 + 0.8% 2,949 2,784 - 5.6% Closed Sales 197 217 + 10.2% 2,903 2,788 - 4.0% Median Sales Price` $219,900 $274,000 + 24.6% $226,000 $246,000 + 8.8% Percent of Original List Price Received* 96.2% 96.0% - 0.2% 95.7% 97.9% + 2.3% Days on Market Until Sale 65 47 - 27.7% 66 44 - 33.3% Months Supply of Inventory I 1.8 1.4 - 22.2% -- -- -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December 92 89 - 3.3% New Listings 217 197 + 10.2% Closed Sales Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $325,000 $300,000 $275,000 $250,000 $225,000 $200,000 $175,000 $150,000 1-2016 2020 ■ 2021 1.8 96.2% 96.0% 1.4 r 1 - 0.2% - 22.2% Pct. of Orig. Price Received Months Supply Statewide — 4 — West Central Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 5 — North Central Region December Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings 112 97 - 13.4% 3,842 3,559 Pending Sales 177 116 - 34.5% 3,579 3,150 Closed Sales 237 242 + 2.1 % 3,488 3,218 Median Sales Price' $233,250 $259,800 + 11.4% $225,000 $250,000 Percent of Original List Price Received* 96.5% 97.3% + 0.8% 96.1 % 99.3% Days on Market Until Sale 62 44 - 29.0% 67 35 Months Supply of Inventory 1.3 1.0 - 23.1 % -- -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December 112 97 - 7.4% - 12.0% - 7.7% +11.1% + 3.3% - 47.8% ■ 202O ■ 2021 1.3 237 242 96.5% 97.3% 1.0 -13.4% +2.1% +0.8% New Listings Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $325,000 $300,000 $275,000 $250,000 $225,000 $200,000 $175,000 $150,000 1-2016 - 23.1 % Months Supply Statewide — 5 — North Central Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 6E — Southwest Central Region December New Listings 73 67 - 8.2% Pending Sales 104 102 - 1.9% Closed Sales 135 114 - 15.6% Median Sales Price` $179,000 $205,250 + 14.7% Percent of Original List Price Received* 95.7% 97.0% + 1.4% Days on Market Until Sale 57 38 - 33.3% Months Supply of Inventory I 1.1 0.9 - 18.2% Minnesota Realtors Year to Date 1,744 1,811 +3.8% 1,682 1,641 - 2.4% 1,638 1,624 - 0.9% $182,075 $210,000 + 15.3% 96.5% 99.3% + 2.9% 61 35 - 42.6% * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. December 135 73 67 95.7% 97.0% - 8.2% - 15.6% + 1.4% New Listings Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2016 2020 ■ 2021 - 18.2% Months Supply Statewide — 6E — Southwest Central Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ Minnesota Realtors 6W — Upper Minnesota Valley Region December Year to Date New Listings 16 35 + 118.8% 494 510 Pending Sales 47 28 - 40.4% 428 444 Closed Sales 38 38 0.0% 406 467 Median Sales Price* $113,000 $133,918 + 18.5% $105,000 $119,250 Percent of Original List Price Received* 91.6% 94.7% + 3.4% 90.4% 93.4% Days on Market Until Sale 87 38 - 56.3% 100 74 Months Supply of Inventory 3.1 I 3.0 - 3.2% -- I -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. December 35 16 + 118.8% New Listings 38 38 91.6% 94.7% 0.0% Closed Sales Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 $0 1-2016 3.1 + 3.2 % + 3.7% + 15.0% + 13.6% + 3.3% - 26.0% 2020 ■ 2021 3.0 + 3.4% - 3.2% Pct. of Orig. Price Received Months Supply Statewide — 6W — Upper Minnesota Valley Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 7E — East Central Region December Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings 172 129 - 25.0% 3,695 3,511 Pending Sales 156 140 - 10.3% 3,328 3,154 Closed Sales 258 257 - 0.4% 3,247 3,200 Median Sales Price' $263,950 $285,450 + 8.1 % $246,682 $280,000 Percent of Original List Price Received* 100.3% 98.8% - 1.5% 98.9% 101.2% Days on Market Until Sale 39 33 - 15.4% 45 31 Months Supply of Inventory I 1.2 1.0 - 16.7% I -- -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December 172 'EM 129 - 25.0% New Listings - 5.0% - 5.2% - 1.4% + 13.5% + 2.3% - 31.1 % 2020 ■ 2021 258 257 100.3% 98.8% 1.2 1.0 r = - 0.4% - 1.5% Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $325,000 $300,000 $275,000 $250,000 $225,000 $200,000 $175,000 $150,000 1-2016 - 16.7% Months Supply Statewide — 7E - East Central Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 7W — Central Region December Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings 438 361 - 17.6% 9,635 9,427 Pending Sales 419 393 - 6.2% 8,276 8,066 Closed Sales 635 595 - 6.3% 8,078 8,088 Median Sales Price' $274,900 $309,700 + 12.7% $265,000 $305,000 Percent of Original List Price Received* 98.8% 99.4% + 0.6% 98.9% 101.4% Days on Market Until Sale 39 33 - 15.4% 43 29 Months Supply of Inventory I 1.1 1.0 - 9.1 % -- I -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. December 438 361 - 17.6% New Listings - 2.2% - 2.5% +0.1% + 15.1% + 2.5% - 32.6% 2020 ■ 2021 635 1.1 595 98.8% 99.4% 1.0 - 6.3% + 0.6% Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $320,000 $300,000 $280,000 $260,000 $240,000 $220,000 $200,000 $180,000 1-2016 - 9.1 % Months Supply Statewide — 7W - Central Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 8 — Southwest Region December New Listings 57 58 + 1.8% Pending Sales 65 74 + 13.8% Closed Sales 98 79 - 19.4% Median Sales Price* $137,700 $140,000 + 1.7% Percent of Original List Price Received* 93.4% 92.5% - 1.0% Days on Market Until Sale 62 52 - 16.1 % Months Supply of Inventory I 2.6 1.5 - 42.3% * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due December 98 57 58 Minnesota Realtors Year to Date 1,287 1,269 - 1.4% 1,161 1,229 + 5.9% 1,139 1,234 +8.3% $129,500 $147,000 + 13.5% 92.5% 95.0% + 2.7% 82 60 - 26.8% to small sample size. 93.4% 92.5% + 1.8% - 19.4% - 1.0% New Listings Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2016 2020 ■ 2021 2.6 1.5 - 42.3% Months Supply Statewide — 8 — Southwest Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 9 — South Central Region December Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings 136 117 - 14.0% 3,405 3,457 Pending Sales 187 157 - 16.0% 3,354 3,228 Closed Sales 226 276 + 22.1 % 3,299 3,239 Median Sales Price' $185,000 $216,000 + 16.8% $190,000 $215,000 Percent of Original List Price Received* 95.7% 96.4% + 0.7% 96.3% 99.1 % Days on Market Until Sale 83 59 - 28.9% 91 63 Months Supply of Inventory 1.3 1.1 - 15.4% I -- -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December 136 117 - 14.0% New Listings 276 + 22.1 % Closed Sales Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 1-2016 95.7% 96.4% + 0.7% Pct. of Orig. Price Received 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 + 1.5% - 3.8% - 1.8% + 13.2% + 2.9% - 30.8% 2020 ■ 2021 1.3 1.1 - 15.4% Months Supply Statewide — 9 — South Central Region — 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 10 — Southeast Region Minnesota Realtors December Year to Date Key Metrics 020 New Listings 308 334 + 8.4% 7,891 7,981 + 1.1 % Pending Sales 426 405 - 4.9% 7,500 7,397 - 1.4% Closed Sales 635 606 - 4.6% 7,444 7,392 - 0.7% Median Sales Price' $235,000 $255,900 + 8.9% $228,500 $251,000 + 9.8% Percent of Original List Price Received* 97.1 % 98.1 % + 1.0% 97.8% 100.0% + 2.2% Days on Market Until Sale 50 36 - 28.0% 52 31 - 40.4% Months Supply of Inventory I 1.1 1.0 - 9.1 % -- -- -- * Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December 308 334 + 8.4% New Listings ■ 202O ■ 2021 635 606 1.1 97.1 % 98.1 % 1.0 - 4.6% + 1.0% Closed Sales Pct. of Orig. Price Received Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $325,000 $300,000 $275,000 $250,000 $225,000 $200,000 $175,000 $150,000 1-2016 - 9.1 % Months Supply Statewide — 10 -Southeast Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. Local Market Update for December 2021 A Research Tool Provided by the Minnesota REALTORS@ 11 — 7-County Twin Cities Region uecemaer Minnesota Realtors Year to Date New Listings I 2,543 2,046 - 19.5% 63,874 63,380 Pending Sales 3,172 2,768 - 12.7% 55,035 55,508 Closed Sales 4,382 4,195 - 4.3% 54,079 55,795 Median Sales Price' $312,000 $333,000 + 6.7% $312,000 $342,000 Percent of Original List Price Received' 99.7% 99.4% - 0.3% 99.9% 101.9% Days on Market Until Sale 33 32 - 3.0% 34 26 Months Supply of Inventory I 1.0 0.7 - 30.0% -- -- Does not account for sale concessions and/or down payment assistance. Note: Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size December 2,543 2,046 - 19.5% New Listings 4,382 4,195 - 4.3% Closed Sales Historical Median Sales Price Rolling 12-Month Calculation $350,000 $325,000 $300,000 $275,000 $250,000 $225,000 $200,000 $175,000 1-2016 99.7% 99.4% 1.0 - 0.8% + 0.9% + 3.2 % + 9.6% + 2.0% - 23.5% 2020 ■ 2021 0.7 - 0.3% - 30.0% Pct. of Orig. Price Received Months Supply Statewide — 11 — 7-County Twin Cities Region — 1-2017 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 Current as of January 7, 2022. All data from the multiple listing services in the state of Minnesota. Report © 2022 ShowingTime. Percent changes are calculated using rounded figures. c e d p Wrighl CounIg Economic Development Partnership Partnering for Opportunities 2021 ANNUAL REPORT LETTER FROM THE 2021 CHAIR, Phil Kern, City of Delano As we welcome 2022 and the promise it brings for Wright County, I want to take a moment to look back at the Partnership's accomplishments over the past year and what it means for the organization and its partners moving forward. On the surface, the past year brought a great deal of challenge and adversity, but with that comes tremendous opportunity. Capitalizing on those opportunities and setting the WCEDP up for success in the future is the best way to summarize the accomplishments of the organization over the past year. On behalf of the staff and Board of Directors, we are happy to present the newly adopted 2022-24 Strategic Plan. The process to create this plan has been a work in progress for several months and it's exciting to present the final product. The Strategic Plan contains the objectives and priorities that will guide both immediate and long-term action by the WCEDP. The Strategic Plan is outlined in greater detail within the Annual Report and will be presented at the Annual Meeting. In summary, this plan was developed with input from stakeholders in Wright County and will focus the actions of the Partnership around business retention and expansion, workforce development, marketing, and building economic development capacity across the County. The Strategic Plan outlines short-term actions that will be priorities in the coming year, both for staff direction and resource allocation. The WCEDP Board of Directors has also refocused the organization around the definition of its stakeholders, specifically that we are all "Partners" in economic development. While it may seem like a simple designation, it's important to revisit and think about what it means to be a Partner. In its basic sense, partners are people engaged together in the same activity or working together for the same purpose. Our organization consists of people in different roles and sectors of the economy working together for the purpose of economic development. Working together, the WCEDP is here to serve all business, residents, and communities in Wright County. While the organization has a key leadership role in promoting the growth of business and employment, it's through the actions of all our Partners that we best accomplish this mission. The past year has also brought additional strength to our region through the start of the Wright County Economic Development Authority. Created by the County Board, this entity will have the ability to access resources and utilize a different set of tools to assist the WCEDP and Wright County communities with economic development activities. While the WCEDP's status as a non-profit organization provides many benefits and flexibility, as a public agency the EDA will allow the ability to provide certain community and county benefits that only it can tap. Working with the EDA only strengthens the WCEDP's ability to achieve its mission and objectives of its Strategic Plan. We appreciate the continued support and leadership of the County Board to recognize economic development as an important part of making Wright County a great place to live, work, and conduct business. Lastly, it's been a pleasure to serve the organization and the County in the role of Chairperson for the past year. The strength of the Partnership is truly in the people that contribute so much for the betterment of our County and the team as a whole. We are blessed to have an excellent staff - Jolene and Missy are outstanding professionals and wonderful people - and it's been a pleasure to be working with a dedicated and talented Board of Directors. The future of the WCEDP is in great hands and I look forward to continuing to be an active Partner in the future. 2021 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Hats off to our Board of Directors for always pushing forward and finding solutions instead of excuses. Phil Kern, Scott Johnson, Randy Voeller, Brian Koslofsky, 0 Chair Vice Chair Sec./Treasurer Past Chair IN City of Delano Xcel Energy CorTrust Bank Wright Tech Center Darek Vetsch Kelly Gene Janikula 0Mike Melton Wright County Hinnenkamp Woodland Grindstone Commissioner City of Township Construction Annandale 0 riRyan O'Connor, Marc Weigle Brian Streich Sheila Zachmann Wright Hennepin, City of ' Bekkala CRS CEA St.Michael Engineering �_ Tim Zipoy Rob Stark Patrick Baumgard 0 CMJ&TS Edward Jones Citizen's State Bank/ Sentry Bank LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR, Jolene Foss, Executive Director Hello Friends of the Wright County Economic Development Partnership! As we enter the 28th year of partnership with businesses, chambers, cities, and the county we are very excited to see continued growth and economic vitality. 2021 provided many opportunities for change. We are navigating a new landscape as we are still battling COVID. Uncertainties about workforce, supply chain and mandates seem to change by the hour. Despite those challenges, the first full year of leading this organization has been rewarding and exciting. The Workforce Pathways Initiative is still going strong as we continue to identify and assist Wright County businesses with their workforce needs. This will continue to be our main focus in 2022. The CEO program (Creating Entrepreneurial Opportunities) is exceeding expectations in its 7th year serving 9 Member School Districts and helping to foster an atmosphere of entrepreneurialism in Wright County. The Partnership, Wright County Cities and the Wright County EDA worked with the U of M Extension to complete a Retail Market Area Profile Study for all communities within the County. This will help calculate gaps in retail and identify areas prime for growth. WCEDP Board, Staff, and Myres Consulting completed an intensive Strategic Plan which will help guide us through 2024 and has solidified programming to support the Partnership's Vision and Mission. Business Retention, Expansion (BRE) and Recruitment remains a key activity with over a dozen in person visits completed in 2021 to many of the largest employers in Wright County. These BRE visits help us to support and promote key industries and learn how we can better serve their needs, keeping the economy diverse and strong. The Partnership has continued to be the first stop in Wright County for all businesses looking for support. We respond to businesses of all types looking for support with business planning, relocations, startups, and much more. Ongoing relationships with the 11 Chambers of Commerce and 7 City Economic Development Authorities keeps us on top of new growth patterns and allows the Partnership to remain a subject matter expert in Wright County Economic Development. Some of the exciting activities that will be implemented in 2022 include marketing the county to attract talent, helping Wright County communities build economic development capacity and support growth, continue to build relationships with Central MN Jobs and Training Services/ CareerForce, area higher education facilities, and Wright Technical and Training Center to provide needed training to fill Wright County jobs. Thank you to our Partners, Board Members, County Commissioners and Executive Assistant Missy Meidinger for the confidence you have continued to show in this organization. We look forward to our 20th Annual Golf Fundraiser in September of 2022 and look for a few new events we hope to bring to you in the coming year! On behalf of the entire Partnership, a dedicated Board of Directors, and staff: THANK YOU! We look forward to working with you in 2022! VALUE AND SUPPORT STATEMENT: WHAT IS IT THAT THE PARTNERSHIP DOES? Wright County communities and businesses are prepared for growth! We invite you to explore the opportunity of working together with us to further our impact! Mission Statement To support a healthy and diverse environment for businesses and residents that provides employment opportunities and enhances the overall economic vitality of Wright County WCEDP fulfills its mission by providing technical and financial assistance to businesses in Wright County and those looking to locate in Wright County. The Partnership also provides economic development assistance to the 16 communities. WCEDP is a non-profit corporation financially supported by local community governments, the county, and area businesses dedicated to supporting and creating a sustainable economic profile in Wright County. We maintain a powerful and resourceful website at www.wrightpartnership.org. 2021 Financial Summary 2021 WCEDP REVENUES AND SUPPORT 2021 WCEDP EXPENDITURES Membership Service/Fees/Interest Events/Sponsorships ■ CEO Contributions ® i 3% 45 7! 17% ■ Exec Director ■ Exec Assistant ■ Overhead ■ Dues/Subsciptions ■ Education ■ Events ■ CEO ■ Printing, marketing, external relations The certified public accounting firm Schlenner Wenner & Co. prepares taxes each year. 2021 PARTNER INITIATIVES SUPPORTING WRIGHT COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • WCEDP processed 179 applications for $2.5 M to small businesses and non -profits and assisted 9 Townships with CARES Funds. • A new Executive Director has continued to lead the Partnership with integrity and positivity as stewards of Wright County resources. • WCEDP has responded to many requests from businesses for information, demographic data, and sources of financial assistance. • The Partnership has been a guiding force in the creation of the CEO (Creating Entrepreneurial Opportunities) class which will begin its seventh year in September and run throughout the school year for junior and senior high school students from 9-member school districts. • The Partnership is continually nurturing its relationship with the 11 Chambers of Commerce located throughout the County and hosted Chamber Summits with all the Chambers and the MN Chamber of Commerce. • In 2021 the Partnership continued efforts by leading Workforce Pathway Initiative and creation and ongoing implementation of the Workforce Pathways Wheel to better understand the needs of the Wright County employers and their ongoing struggle to find, train and retain employees to allow them to grow their businesses. • We are the Fiscal Agent for the Central Minnesota Job Fair in Monticello each spring. • Our Marketing Program efforts have included website updates, social media campaigns, magazine articles, and radio spots along with our monthly newsletter which is sent to over 1100 contacts. • Began an outreach effort to re-establish relations with Community Colleges in the region including the St. Cloud Tech & Community College and Ridgewater Community College. • Participated in the Wright County EDA Advisory Committee and participate on the Wright County Economic Development Authority, as well as Waverly EDA, Clearwater EDA, Hanover EDA, Monticello IEDC, Maple Lake IEDC, St. Michael EDA. • Advocate for Wright County Dental Access and Wright County Childcare Retention. • Applied for and received grants from Initiative Foundation for Workforce Pathways and Childcare Retention. • Participated in 12 Business Retention and Expansion visits with largest employers in Wright County. • Participated in MAPCED, Central Mississippi River Regional Partnership, 7W Regional Broadband Committee, etc. • Created and hosted 4 Capacity Building Seminars that were free to Wright County businesses and focused on Energy Efficiency, Pedestrian Experience, and Small Business Financing. • Created and proposed programming for ARPA Funds in the areas of Regional Economic Development, Higher Education Opportunities, Workforce Training, Childcare Retention and Mental Health Initiatives. 2021 Citizen of the Year Laura Franklin 2021 High Vitality Business of the Year Pellco 2021 Outstanding Partner of the Year Rob Stark with Edward Jones outDowork' 2021 Start -Up Entrepreneur of the Year OutDo Work ANNUAL GOLF EVENT: Our annual golf event is the largest fundraiser of the year it is held the second Tuesday after Labor day. Our 2021 Premiere Sponsor was APT Technologies. The event was held at Southbrook Golf Course in Annandale We look forward to another great tournament on September 13, 2022 with location TBD with CRS as the 2022 Premier Sponsor! ANNUAL EVENTS & FUNDRAISERS ANNUAL MEETING: This event is held annually in January. The event is free event and we treat our members to breakfast along with a great speaker. During the event we nominate our slate of officers for the Board of Directors for the upcoming year. We take the time to showcase our Member Investors and to remember the past year's events, we honor our Award Recipients in the following categories: Outstanding Start-up Entrepreneur of the Year, High Economic Vitality Business of the Year, Outstanding Member Investor of the Year and Outstanding Citizen of the Year. HOLIDAY SOCIAL: 2021 we were able to bring back our annual Holiday Social with Commercial Realty Solutions. With some new faces at the event it was a great time for everyone. THANK YOU TO OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES lbcrtvill£rrg- AbS _ o D Small Town LWIn9, 919 Cityi1rs. esrnsu11555 CITY OF au FFALO. MINNESOTA CITY up In ray f Cokato The Spirit of Community fN''0" gD1 a, CITY OF a MAPLE LAKE _ Monticello NNEs good to be home. - g MISOTA (�j 012 lz�1 p �r� City of Lt.,a i r r r r rr rs t Michel `4 wAyIcht MN . . f O. IHAVEN, �� WOODLAND TOWNSHIP THANK YOU TO OUR LOCAL CHAMBERS f10HY I1caut 0IMP uakq Cokato Chamber of Commerce r Y ��� ✓yJ�J I r OW)z Sffi us B—d..r s. P.O. B.. B19 " Area Chamber of Commerce C.1k ,Min.. 55321 Area Chamber of Commerce &Tourism Bureau ■ ❑Elan Area Chamber Of COmmErCE PPImonticello Chamber of Commerce & Industry Ayk,E GOOt) d HowARD LAKE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 10Y, Irrriirlr; r � u�itrxt cc�ic zIy I)vvest Chamber of Commerce Rockford -Greenfield CHAMBER of COMMERCE MAPLE LAKE Chamher of Commerce clearvalley BUSINESS CONNECTIONS WRIGHT TECHNICAL CENTER THANK YOU TO OUR PARTNERS CONTINUED EI=� Wright -Hennepin CMJTSBnUCooperative Electric Association DESIGN BUILD A Touchstone Energy Cooperative Is AN1E�AS Xcel EnergyS Initiative S13DC F O U N D A T I O Nwii=�11111111111 STATE BANK ,�� TM F I N N E O I A CHLENNER �AMPL101 .�', . WENNEA&O. Mrnnesnta Business Finance Cur LAKES BA CERTIFIED PUBLM AGCGOIJNTANTS Expanding Possibilities For Business pareTrOi 8 BI,1 $1 NE$$ QQN$i STARBANK The Bank That Cares" EdwardJones MAKING SENSE OF INVESTING OUTDOOR ADVERTISING crsGREATER MSP `, u�i uy� Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership COMMERCIAL REALTY SOLUTIONS www.crsmn.com CIVIL ENGINEERING ��- I GRINDSTONE Now SITE DESIGN CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONNECTS kk landscape structures® M L� LARSON B U I L D I N G bee Integrity. The Cornerstone. VANTAGEPOINT z- of� Wright County S 1. CLOUD Fire & Water - Cleanup & Restoration— TECHNICAL& 763-295-161 COMMUNITY servprowrightcounty.com COLLEGE PARTNERS TRILITE STONE, INC. elc�e��ziu•c �2�rfu fia�(itian CorTrustBank. wsb QBOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. FIn tegrWrin t ,`:; CENTIZACAF?E Health DESIGN] PRINT/ MARKETING co T r wow IV pQitaL MARKETING Rademacher Family Limited Partnership PARTNER NEWS In tegr"PriRnNt 2021 New Member IntegriPrint All 11na Health BUFFALO HOSPITAL Buffalo Hospital named one of the top 20 small community hospitals in the US. of Wright County Fire & Water - Cleanup & Restorations^^ 763-295-1161 servprowrightcounty.com 2021 New Member SERVPRO of Wright County TRTLiTE STONE, INC. 2021 New Member TriLite Stone, Inc. zo BEST OF ,ter EMPLOYER AKESBANK 2021 Best of Delano Area Winner- - Best Overall Business • Best Customer Service • Best Bank • Best Local Employer • Best Mortgage Lender Work in Wright County — - Workforcepathw.ys. org w.;g,,, orkPorce / othwoys You Cou/dAlready Be... a .= Workforce Pathways was on the move Thank You Franklin Outdoor! CMJTS CMJTS will be holding their 17th Annual Job Fair on March 9, 2022 Buffalo new business Gather Kitchen 0.6 l� r.. Delano welcomes TGK Automotive Specialists GRINDSTONE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 2021 Best of Delano Area Construction Contractor 1 Wright -Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association hosted its first -ever Electric Vehicle (EV) Ride and Drive Event on September 16, 2021. Members had the opportunity to learn about EVs and take a test drive. Approximately 260 members attended, and 17S members test drove a vehicle! More than 20 members also brought their EVs to display at the event. WRIGHT TECH CEO: CEO - THE CEO CLASS TEACHES LEADERSHIP. ENCOURAGEMENT. CREATIVITY. WCEDP continues to be a guiding force in the operation of the Wright Tech CEO (Creating Entrepreneurial Opportunities) class which began its Seventh year in September with 20w students and runs throughout the school year. Entrepreneurship education seeks to prepare our high school youth, to be responsible, enterprising individuals who become entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial thinkers and contribute to economic development and sustainable communities. The CEO program is much more than a textbook course. Rather, students are immersed in real life learning experiences with the opportunity to take risks, manage the results, and learn from the outcomes. Business and community support is growing each year as they meet the kids and see the immeasurable benefits for Wright County. Students 2021-2022 2021-2022 CEO Class Class Visit with past students Jagger & Layton Class Visit to IntegriPrint with Jackie Wurm Class team building �IRIGHI TECHCEU° WHAT IS CEO? Creating Entrepreneurial Opportunities (CEO) is a new class from the Wright Technical Center for students who are The Wright Tech CEO program services eight member interested in starting their own business someday. school districts in both Wright and Sherburne Counties. SOME HIGHLIGHTS: Students practice and develop people skills in a variety of business settings. Lessons aren't taught by teachers, but by local entrepreneurs who share their business story and give students advice for starting their own business. Students tour local companies twice a week where they can see firsthand what goes into running a business. Every student in the class writes a business plan and starts their own business with help from a local business mentor. The eight local districts include: Annandale Buffalo Delano BiZ ake 11 Iowrdke Maple Lake aver y • msted Monticello St. Michael - Albertville Mark was born into an entrepreneurial family and saw firsthand the ups and downs of owning a business. When he started teaching after a career in the Ag Industry, he wanted all students to have that exposure. CEO is making that happen! He had this so say about CEO: I believe in the phrase "it takes a village to raise a child." It's powerful when local entrepreneurs are sitting down with students and talking to them not only about business, but also the struggles of life, the rewards of putting yourself out there and the need to work your tail off day -after -day -after -day if you really want to succeed. Please visit our online calendar at WrightTechCEO.com and join us someday to see for yourself what an impact this class is having on students. Strategic Planning Executive Update Wright County is located Northwest of Minneapolis and has a population of approximately 141,000 people with a mix of rural and suburban communities including residential, agriculture, retail and commercial industrial development. The county has seen significant growth over the last several decades and is expected to continue to be part of a high growth area of the state out to 2053. Wright County advantages for economic development: • The county's proximity to the metropolitan areas of Minneapolis/St. Paul and St Cloud. • Access to good transportation (access to I-94, rail and state highways) • Quality of the workforce (work ethic) • Lower land costs compared to more urban areas • Supportive local regulatory environment • Age of the working population • Diversity of industries currently in the county • Favorable cost of housing compared to metro • Favorable cost structure of labor compared to metro • Established EDA's at county and several cities • WCEDP reputation, engagement and collaboration with business, governmental units, non -profits and educational institutions. Wright County opportunities to enhance economic development: • Expansion of available workforce • Enhance higher educational opportunities in the county • Expand on the full continuum of housing options • Enhance infrastructure assets • Enhance quality child care resources • Enhance broad band in rural areas • Improve brand awareness in areas outside of the county Resource Constraints: Given the partnership has a staff of two people with a large agenda and a volunteer board, it is important that the staff and WCEDP resources are allocated toward the strategic priorities with the greatest impact in the county. Additionally, staff and the board needs to determine when contractors or other organizations may be needed to perform certain tasks when staff does not have the resources to perform these tasks. Roles of WCEDP: The role of the WCEDP is to collaborate with the county and city EDA's, chambers, educational institutions, non -profits and the private sector to promote economic development in the county. Its primary roles are: • Providing economic development technical expertise, support and connections • Conducting business, retention and expansion visits • Attracting, developing and retaining talent • Marketing the county to promote the attraction and retention of talent and increased commerce • Building countywide economic development capacity that promotes healthy economic development. Our Mission: To support a healthy and diverse environment for businesses and residents that provides employment opportunities and enhances the overall economic vitality of Wright County Our Vision: Wright County is a highly desirable place to live, work and own a business. Our Strategic Imperatives: Business retention and expansion Workforce development and attraction Marketing the County as a great place to live, work and do business Build economic development capacity across the county Building bridges to a brighter future! It's all about partnership and collaboration. Attracting and retaining great employers Strategic Imperatives detail Business development, expansion and retention: • While the Partnership's focus is to serve the economic development needs of all businesses in the county, it also encourages engagement by all businesses, governmental units, educational institutions and non -profits to work in partnership to expand the resources working toward greater economic development in the county. • Business retention and expansion will be a primary focus of the organization. • While business attraction is a secondary focus given the labor shortage and the resources available for this activity, the WCEDP will continue to work with MN DEED on business attraction and work collaboratively with chambers, EDA's and cities and townships as opportunities develop. • In 2021 the WCEDP made 13 business development, expansion and retention visits. During 2022-2024 the WCEDP will make 12-15 of these visits per year. • Since many of these visits involve area city, county and chamber representation, it is necessary to have great coordination with the other collaborators and solid agendas to make the meetings as productive as possible. • Great follow up is key to these visits and making sure that the needs of the businesses are heard and that the businesses are connected with the resources they need. Workforce development and attraction: • Given the labor shortages existing across the country and specifically in Wright County, it is essential that there is a focused effort to attract and develop talent. • For there to be success in workforce development and attraction, it is essential that the WCEDP lead in this collaborative effort with the businesses and educational institutions within the county. • Strong partnerships with higher educational institutions outside the county is key to both recruiting and developing the talent pool. • Given Wright County's proximity to both the Mpls/St Paul and the St Cloud metropolitan areas, there is great opportunity to attract talent either commuting to or from Mpls/St Paul or living in the St. Cloud area. • The Workforce Pathways program has been very useful in promoting career readiness and creating exposure to the careers available in the county. This program will be expanded to more schools during the planning horizon. • The CEO program has been successful and will be expanded to grow the impact of the program. • With high competition for workforce, the WCEDP will continue to advocate for county amenities that will improve the quality of life in the county to attract and retain talent in the county. • Given the homogeneous nature of the current population, it may be difficult to attract workers of different races to the community. Encouraging the schools, business and local government to develop strategies to be an inclusive community could help the recruitment of future workers. Marketing the county as a great place to live, work and do business: • Based upon the board's analysis and comments in the stakeholder survey, it is evident that the WCEDP needs to lead the marketing of the County as a great place to live, work and do business. • This is an opportunity to promote the tangible assets of the county and help all businesses in the county attract commerce and a quality workforce. • There was a comprehensive marketing strategy developed in 2015 which was focused primarily on the attraction of new businesses to Wright County. Many of the strategies outlined in the document have been implemented and have been successful. • Given the need to attract talent to the region, a new marketing strategy will be developed with its primary focus on the attraction of talent. The audiences for this marketing will be workers in the St. Cloud area who commute to the metro and workers in the metro that want to live in a safer, less busy, smaller community with great amenities and quality of life. • The website and the e-letter have been very successful in communicating with the business community. With the new focus on attracting talent, the site will be upgraded to better feature the quality of life and the great careers available in the county. • A web site and SEO audit will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of the current we site and inform the digital marketing strategy going forward. • A countywide resource guide will be developed to promote the different communities and their unique characteristics. • Through this marketing campaign there is an opportunity to show Wright County as a we coming community to all. Economic development capacity building across the county: • Given the need for additional resources to promote economic development in the county, it is essential that the WCEDP continues to collaborate with the county and city EDA's and chambers and work to build additional economic development capabilities within these organizations. • Since there are a variety of different sized cities and chambers with different levels of skills and tools available to promote economic development, staff will conduct an inventory of its collaborators and create a roadmap to help build the capacity of these organizations. • WCEDP has been a leader in bringing economic development organizations together and will use these relationships to expand the collaboration through educational seminars on relevant topics to economic development and workforce well being. • The partnership will continue to promote its networking events as a means of building enthusiasm for economic development, collaboration between various sectors and create additional community engagement. • The partnership will continue to be an advocate and community resource to promote infrastructure necessary to promote the economic development of the county MEMBER INVESTOR INFORMATION WCEDP fulfills its mission by providing technical and financial assistance to businesses in Wright County and those looking to locate in Wright County. The Partnership also provides economic development assistance to the 16 communities. WCEDP is a non-profit corporation financially supported by local community governments, the county, and area businesses dedicated to supporting and creating a sustainable economic profile in Wright County. We maintain a powerful and resourceful website at www.wrightpartnership.org. Wright County, its communities, and businesses are prepared for growth —we invite you to explore the opportunity of working together with us to further our impact! Work in - Wright--- ------ ___ __ County workforcepathwd Sorg _ Wright corvrtt�F orhforc 12thways You Could Already Be.., NEW PARTNER INVESTORS WELCOME! CONTACT US: Jolene Foss, Executive Director - 763-496-5593 - jolenef@wrightpartnership.org Missy Meidinger, Executive Assistant - 763-496-5632 - missym@wrightpartnership.org www.wrightpartnerhsip.org T/.ed Wdg h r Ccunrg Economic Development Partnership R7APejIng for Opnrje� Strategic Plan �Tly*&Tfy� I MYRES CONSULTING, LLC BRIAN MYRES 320-260-6681 brian.myresOgmail.com 7491 86th Ave SE Clear Lake MN 55319 Building bridges to a brighter future! It's all about partnership and collaboration. K r_ Sim 0 a uburban MANUFACTURING, INC. .. • . .� xrv'... 1 . � � j,• "T..iL„..2. Mix-i p.TCL:il i. fn'l. i . �' .. .. .... ni rt 1 r....� .x.11L. t. . ..f i ..... .. - aL ..�. .�� .. ... .... .. .. 'f�>•� y i�g' �., y�u�i1 ..� i� � ! h l d. - c M.:� 7-� �3 ��a �t •F s i- r; �.-+,a Y .. � �'ai� � � )' S �q. Executive summary Wright County is located Northwest of Minneapolis and has a population of approximately 141,000 people with a mix of rural and suburban communities including residential, agriculture, retail and commercial industrial development. The county has seen significant growth over the last several decades and is expected to continue to be part of a high growth area of the state out to 2053. Wright County advantages for economic development: • The county's proximity to the metropolitan areas of Minneapolis/St Paul and St Cloud. • Access to good transportation (access to 1-94, rail and state highways) • Quality of the workforce (work ethic) • Lower land costs compared to more urban areas • Supportive local regulatory environment • Age of the working population • Diversity of industries currently in the county • Favorable cost of housing compared to metro • Favorable cost structure of labor compared to metro • Established EDA's at county and several cities • WCEDP reputation, engagement and collaboration with business, governmental units, non -profits and educational institutions. Wright County opportunities to enhance economic development: • Expansion of available workforce • Enhance higher educational opportunities in the county • Expand on the full continuum of housing options 11 • Enhance infrastructure assets • Enhance quality child care resources • Enhance broad band in rural areas • Improve brand awareness in areas outside of the county Resource constraints: Given the partnership has a staff of two people with a large agenda and a volunteer board, it is important that the staff and WCEDP resources are allocated toward the strategic priorities with the greatest impact in the county. Additionally, staff needs to determine when contractors or other organizations may be needed to perform certain tasks when staff does not have the resources to perform these tasks. Role of WCEDP The role of the WCEDP is to collaborate with the county and city EDA's, chambers, educational institutions, non -profits and the private sector to promote economic development in the county. Its primary roles are: • Providing economic development technical expertise, support and connections • Conducting business, retention and expansion visits • Attracting, developing and retaining talent • Marketing the county to promote the attraction and retention of talent and increased commerce • Building countywide economic development capacity that promotes healthy economic development. 5 Our Mission To support a healthy and diverse environment for businesses and residents that provides employment opportunities and enhances the overall economic vitality of Wright County Our Vision Wright County is a highly desirable place to live, work and own a business. Strategic imperatives: • Business retention and expansion • Workforce development and attraction • Marketing the County as a great place to live, work and do business • Build economic development capacity across the county For additional detail regarding the strategies, tactics and resource allocation see plan details below. m Strategic Imperatives detail Business development, expansion and retention • While the Partnership's focus is to serve the economic development needs of all businesses in the county, it also encourages engagement by all businesses, governmental units, educational institutions and non -profits to work in partnership to expand the resources working toward greater economic development in the county. • Business retention and expansion will be a primary focus of the organization. • While business attraction is a secondary focus given the labor shortage and the resources available for this activity, the WCEDP will continue to work with MN DEED on business attraction and work collaboratively with chambers, EDNs and cities and townships as opportunities develop. • In 2021 the WCEDP made 13 business development, expansion and retention visits. During 2022-2024 the WCEDP will make 12-15 of these visits per year. • Since many of these visits involve area city, county and chamber representation, it is necessary to have great coordination with the other collaborators and solid agendas to make the meetings as productive as possible. • Great follow up is key to these visits and making sure that the needs of the businesses are heard and that the businesses are connected with the resources they need. 7 2022-2024 Priorities Strategies Business development, expansion and retention Tactics Role Business Prioritize businesses with greater needs Collaborate with area chambers, cities and Lead expansion and and businesses with 20 to 30 employees EDA's to conduct these visits to identify needs retention visits for BRIE visits and provide assistance where needed Grant Research, Continue to assist with administration of Administration Federal and State grant funding to businesses where needed by local government entities Responding to individual business needs Budget impact Full Board / Task Force/ Staff 0 2021-13 visits completed Average goal for2022-2024 12-15 visits per year Work with area cities, county and EDNs to I Partner $3000 x 5 years = I Staff administer and seek additional opportunities $15,000 for funding area businesses, research other available grant opportunities and be able to have a matching amount available when required Respond and track all types of inquiries to Continue to build positive relationships with Lead and $3000 x 5 years = Staff/Full Board identify resources to assist businesses partners in the county and state to bring collaborate I $15,000 with growth, retention and expansion greater resources to Wright County opportunities businesses and engage with contracted individual to assist with business planning, technical assistance, etc. Participation on Prioritize involvement based upon EDA's Develop an EDA and chamber GAP analysis Lead local city EDA's with greatest needs and highest to identify those with greatest needs. opportunities. i Financial Mq Seek connections with businesses I Continue to be main point of contact to SBA, Partner packaging seeking financing and make referrals to SBDC,bankers, accountants and legal Assistance professionals to support appropriate funding options 01 Staff 0 I Staff/Finance Task Force Administer revolving loan fund Continue to promote and administer Work with individual businesses to complete Lead revolving loan fund if funds become applications, have Finance Task Force review uncertified. and make determination, present to County Board for final approval and administer funds in an efficient manner, follow up with loan recipients for repayment completion Partner Continue to grow the membership and Develop deeper relationships with existing Lead Development sponsors of the partnership to increase and new partners to retain and expand the public/private collaboration in economic membership through regular personal and development electronic contact Map relationships Allocate time based upon the individual After completion of the mapping of the Lead with EDA's, needs of each entity various EDA's, chambers and cities, each chambers and entity will be evaluated and an individual plan cities to identify made to help fill any economic development collaborative gaps gaps, build relationships and identify ways to improve collaboration. Partner communications Determine how partners want to communicate with the partnership (in by phone, email, zoom) to provide Continue to be a convener of local chambers, EDAs and cities to build county wide economic development focus, hold special events/training sessions to provide technical assistance Use membership invoices and thank you Lead notes to encourage connections by various means. vice to each entity. Reinforce WCEDP imperatives in newsletter, Lead provide links to website, feature business news about partner and non partner organizations Revive the production of a member directory/ Lead resource guide, review spnsorships/ad sales to offset costs i 0 I Staff/Finance Task Force $3000 x 5 years = $15,000 0 Staff $1200 x 5 years I Staff = $6000 01 Staff Staff $3000 x 5 years I Staff = $15.000 Staff/ Full Board 9 Workforce development and attraction • Given the labor shortages existing across the country and specifically in Wright County, it is essential that there is a focused effort to attract and develop talent. • For there to be success in workforce development and attraction, it is essential that the WCEDP lead in this collaborative effort with the businesses and educational institutions within the county. • Strong partnerships with higher educational institutions outside the county is key to both recruiting and developing the talent pool. • Given Wright County's proximity to both the Mpls/St Paul and the St Cloud metropolitan areas, there is great opportunity to attract talent either commuting to or from Mpls/St Paul or living in the St Cloud area. • The Workforce Pathways program has been very useful in promoting career readiness and creating exposure to the careers available in the county. This program will be expanded to more schools during the planning horizon. • The CEO program has been successful and will be expanded to grow the impact of the program. • With high competition for workforce, the WCEDP will continue to advocate for county amenities that will improve the quality of life in the county to attract and retain talent in the county. • Given the homogeneous nature of the current population, it may be difficult to attract workers of different races to the community. Encouraging the schools, business and local government to develop strategies to be an inclusive community could help the recruitment of future workers. 10 2022-2024 Support the workforce development needs of the county Build strong relationships with educational institutions for recruiting Support the development and retention of resources to improve the competitiveness of Wright County in attracting talent 2022 Strategic Plan - Workforce development Work with educational institutions to develop workforce skills to meet the needs of local businesses Focus on recruitment of students to work in Wright County Childcare, transportation, a continuum of housing, broad band, improved infrastructure, skill development and mental health are priorities in attracting talent Identify hard and soft skills Advocacy and including leadership support development needed by business and work with educational institutions to improve the skills of the Wright County workforce Inventory CTE programs in Partner schools and help connect with local businesses Further develop relationships Lead with SCTCC, Bridgewater, Wright Technical Center, CMJTS and others to develop and recruit workforce Support county wide efforts for Advocate increased childcare resources, improved transportation, broad band and workforce flexibility and benefits Staff/Full Board/ Task Force/Committee Staff Staff Staff/Full Board Staff / Full Board 11 Continue to administer and promote the CEO program Workforce pathways program Expand the reach of the CEO program in the county Further develop the workforce pathways program Continued development of 'Partner CEO program, expanding the reach toward schools in effort to increase sponsor relationships, marketing program, additional hourly wage to facilitator for additional meetings with schools, mentors, sponsors, reserve fund for lean years Develop curriculum for 9 school districts to engage students in Workforce pathways, soft skills, work ethic etc. Ongoing marketing of available jobs, training opportunities, County amenities, 000 x 5 years = $30,000 Lead/partner $6,000 x 5 years = $30,000 Staff/ Full Board/ CEO Board Staff/ Marketing - Membership Task Force/ Workforce Pathways Committee Staff/Workforce Pathways Committee `N Marketing the county as a great place to live, work and do business • Based upon the board's analysis and comments in the stakeholder survey, it is evident that the WCEDP needs to lead the marketing of the County as a great place to live, work and do business. • This is an opportunity to promote the tangible assets of the county and help all businesses in the county attract commerce and a quality workforce. • There was a comprehensive marketing strategy developed in 2015 which was focused primarily on the attraction of new businesses to Wright County. Many of the strategies outlined in the document have been implemented and have been successful. • Given the need to attract talent to the region, a new marketing strategy will be developed with its primary focus on the attraction of talent. The audiences for this marketing will be workers in the St Cloud area who commute to the metro and workers in the metro that want to live in a safer, less busy, smaller community with great amenities and quality of life. • The website and the e-letter have been very successful in communicating with the business community. With the new focus on attracting talent, the site will be upgraded to better feature the quality of life and the great careers available in the county. • A web site and SEO audit will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of the current website and inform the digital marketing strategy going forward. • A countywide resource guide will be developed to promote the different communities and their unique characteristics. • Through this marketing campaign there is an opportunity to show Wright County as a welcoming community to all. 13 2022 Strategic Plan - County wide marketing 2022-2024 Priorities Tactics Role Budget impact Staff/ Full Board/ Task Strategies Nw Force Develop a marketing plan for the attraction of talent, promoting local commerce and attraction of businesses to Wright county Develop countywide brand, tagline Select marketing firm to assist in Lead $20,000 x 1years = and brand guidelines that appeal to developing strategy and $20000 target audiences promoting jobs, implementation of tactics to $10,000 x 4years = safety, schools, cost of living, successfully market the county $40,000 workforce pathways program etc. Identify target audiences NW/SE of Explore sponsorship opportunities Lead Wright county to be reached with to assist in funding marketing Develop cost efficient marketing tactics to influence target audiences Develop content based upon target audiences, brand guidelines and attributes of the county Revamp website to reflect branding, I improve SEO and promote Wright county to target audiences Develop attribution measurements By monitoring web traffic, clicks etc, to measure return on investment staff can determine the and review quarterly Complete annual marketing review to review results and refine strategy effectiveness of marketing spend Staff/Marketing- Membership Task Force Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff/Marketing- Membership Task Force `E Develop strategy to Work with area commercial real estate Maintain Site Selectors Page on Partner $1200 x 5 years = $6000 Staff promote non- firms to enhance links to realtors on website county owned the WEB site and other channels commercial and industrial property for sale in Wright County Create a Showcase the high quality of life, safe Feature all cities and special sites Lead $3000 x 5 years = $15,000 Staff Countywide living and low cost of living in Wright within townships, as well as special Resource guide County events for the year Ilia 1 .11�� Promoting the county's assets 15 Economic development capacity building across the county • Given the need for additional resources to promote economic development in the county, it is essential that the WCEDP continues to collaborate with the county and city EDA's and chambers and work to build additional economic development capabilities within these organizations. • Since there are a variety of different sized cities and chambers with different levels of skills and tools available to promote economic development, staff will conduct an inventory of its collaborators and create a roadmap to help build the capacity of these organizations. • WCEDP has been a leader in bringing economic development organizations together and will use these relationships to expand the collaboration through educational seminars on relevant topics to economic development and workforce well being. • The partnership will continue to promote its networking events as a means of building enthusiasm for economic development, collaboration between various sectors and create additional community engagement. • The partnership will continue to be an advocate and community resource to promote infrastructure necessary to promote the economic development of the county mewY ' .F'A Helping main street! 16 2022 Strategic Plan - Economic development capacity building 2022-2024 Priorities Strategies Partner to build Identify city EDA's and economic chambers in the county development that have economic capacity for area development gaps and cities collaborate with them to build their capacity Economic development capacity building for cities, townships, businesses and residents Conduct three capacity building seminars annually Tactics Role Build economic Lead development checklist of best practices in BRE and train/assist in implementing in EDA's and chambers Seminar ideas: mental healthiness, zoning pros & cons, workplace innovations to retain and recruit talent, working from home pros and cons, education of elected officials in economic development strategies, How to start a business - Budget $1200 x 5 years = $6000 Full Board/ Task Force/ Staff Staff Lead $2000 per Event x 3 4events in Staff/ Special Events events per year x 5 2021-1)Energy Task Force years = 30 000 Efficiency-Amplio, Xcel, Venue, SME, Wright Hennepin Marketing, Food Electric 2)Downtown Pedestrian Experience - Peter Bruce 3)Small Business Financing - Edward Jones, CorTrust Bank, USDA RD, CMDC, Amplio 4)State of the Economy- Wright County --DEED Commissioner Steve Grove, GreaterMSP, DEED Labor Analyst 17 --7 --F Develop networking Annual meeting Continue to develop Lead $6,000 per year for Possible future Staff Special Events opportunities to Golf Fundraising Event sponsorships for 5 years = $30,000 Networking events- Task Force support economic Annual Holiday Social events and provide Quarterly Chamber development Event Attendance -Director quality networking Summits (Invite all opportunities Chamber Directors/ Presidents to get together to discuss best practices, WC Brewery/ Orchard Tour, WC Occasional Shops Tours, Motorcyle/Classic Car Show and Run and Hiring Event at the WC Fairgrounds Infrastructure Advocate for infrastructure Work with local Advocate Broadband, Childcare, Staff/Full Board that enhances county governments to Housing, Transportation economic development understand infrastructure needs and opportunities W Strategic planning process: The process used to complete this strategic plan was to survey stakeholders utilizing an online survey which was sent out by email to approximately 1200 businesses, educators, non -profits and local government officials asking participants about their impressions of the work of the WCEDP, the state of the local economy and what the greatest challenges were in growing their businesses. This survey was completed in November 2021 with 49 individual respondents. The board of the WCEDP participated in a half day retreat at the Wright Technical Center where they reviewed the survey results, demographic data, population trend data and discussed the work of the WCEDP. Based upon this review, the group prioritized the importance of the various activities and discussed where higher or lower emphasis should be placed over the planning horizon. The Executive Director of the WCEDP worked with the consultant to further develop the strategies, tactics and focus of the strategic plan, which was presented to the management committee of the WCEDP for review and comment in December 2021. After the plan had its final review and edits, it was approved by the full board and communicated to the Partnership at its January 2022 annual meeting. Economy As the global and national economy is responding to the impacts of the pandemic and its aftermath, there will continue to be impacts on the local and regional economy as well. Inflation has spiked to forty year highs. Workforce participation rates have fallen dramatically as many people have left the workforce. Supply chains continue to be slow due to a lack of truck drivers and port workers along with pent up demand for products by consumers. 19 Housing costs have risen dramatically over the past year and demand for all types of housing is driving rents and home prices higher. Workforce housing is in very high demand. Pandemic related fiscal and monetary policy continue to stimulate the economy which is causing an increased need for workers as consumer demand increases. Wage rates are escalating as businesses struggle to find qualified applicants. The state of Minnesota has a $7.7 billion surplus and additional government funding for infrastructure will be forthcoming from the federal government. • All of the above factors are impacting the economy in Wright county and present both opportunities and threats to economic development. • The economy of Wright County is diversified with a mix of manufacturing, health care, retail sales and accommodations and food sales. Median household income is $84,974 and per capita income is $36,260 with 5.2% of the population in poverty. The county has about 3400 employers providing products and services both inside and outside Wright County. • Given the inflationary pressures and lack of available workforce, economic development will be challenged across the country. • Inflation plus increasing crime in urban areas and the ability to work remotely has the potential to cause workers to seek more suburban and rural areas which could be an opportunity for Wright county. 20 Below is a snapshot of key economic statistics for the county provided by DEED as of July 1 2019 which is the latest information available. ® Population estimates, July 1, 2019, (V2019) 138,377 Economy e In civilian labor force, total, percent of population age 16 years+, 2015-2019 74.2% ® In civilian labor force, female, percent of population age 16 years+, 2015-2019 70.3% ® Total accommodation and food services sales, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 123,821 6 Total health care and social assistance receipts/revenue, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 397,728 Total manufacturers shipments, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 1,184,940 8 Total retail sales, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 1,713,538 e Total retail sales per capita, 2012 (c) $13,457 Transportation Mean travel time to work (minutes), workers age 16 years+, 2015-2019 30.5 Income $ Poverty 9 Median household income (in 2019 dollars), 2015-2019 $84,974 6 Per capita income in past 12 months (in 2019 doliars), 2015-2019 $36,260 ® Persons in poverty, percent a 5.2% Businesses ® Total employer establishments, 2019 3,413 ® Total employment, 2019 39,381 0 Total annual payroll, 2019 ($1,000) 1,753,184 6 Total employment, percent change, 2018-2019 2.6% 8 Total nonemployer establishments, 2018 9,887 ® All firms, 2012 11,975 6 Men -owned firms, 2012 6,487 ® Women -owned firms, 2012 3,471 6 Minority -owned firms, 2012 302 8 Nonminority-owned firms, 2012 11,318 8 Veteran -owned firms, 2012 900 0 Nonveteran-owned firms, 2012 10,475 21 Understanding each community Demographics • The population of Wright county is approximately 141,000 and has been growing steadily over the last several decades and is projected to be one of the faster growing counties in the coming decades. • The population is 94% white, with 3.1 % hispanic or latino and 1.4% asian. The county has significant opportunities to attract workers from other backgrounds with the higher non white populations in Hennepin and other adjacent counties. • 28% of the population is under 18 years of age which has the potential to provide a good future workforce if they can be retained in the county. 22 • 7% of the population are veterans which is a good source of workers. • 2.8% of the population is foreign born which is significantly below some neighboring counties. This population is expected to be one of the higher growth population segments in the state over the next several decades and provides opportunities for growth of the workforce. • Over time the diversity of the county by race will change as is happening across the state and ensuring that the educational institutions and employers are adapting to this demographic shift will be key to economic growth in the long term. Retaining the workforce now and in the future 23 Population 8 Population estimates, July 1, 2019, (V2019) 138,377 ® Population estimates base, April 1, 2010, (V2019) 124,697 ® Population, percent change -April 1, 2010 (estimates base) to July 1, 2019, (V2019) 11.0% ® Population, Census, April 1, 2020 141,337 ® Population, Census, April 1, 2010 124,700 Age and Sex ® Persons under 5 years, percent 66.8% ® Persons under 18 years, percent 6 27.7% ® Persons 65 years and over, percent 8 13.0% 0 Female persons, percent 8 49.4% Race and Hispanic Origin 0 White alone, percent 6 94.4% ® Black or African American alone, percent (a) 61.8% ® American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent (a) © 0.4% ® Asian alone, percent (a) © 1.4% ® Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent (a) Q Z ® Two or More Races, percent © 1.9% ® Hispanic or Latino, percent (b) © 3.1 % ® White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent 6 91.7% Population Characteristics ® Veterans, 2015-2019 6,895 ® Foreign born persons, percent, 2015-2019 2.8% Fz! Figure 9: Relative population charge by county, 2018 to 2053 *Source: Minnesota State Demographic Center 25 Monticello Planning Commission Update Transportation Improvements (Regional and Local) March 3, 2022 t � Monticello MNDOT- Current Projects o I-94 • 6-lanes Monticello to Clearwater o 2021- Westbound lanes reconstructed, and additional lane installed o 2022 - Eastbound lanes scheduled to be reconstructed and additional lane added. • St. Michael to Maple Grove - Complete in 2021 o Additional lane each way between Hwy 610 in Maple Grove to Wright County Road 19 in Albertville o New interchange in Dayton o Replace Hwy 241 bridge over I-94 in St. Michael o Construct roundabout at 241 and O'Day Ave. in St. Michael o Replace I-94 bridge over County Road 19 in Albertville eastbound - westbound has been delayed until 2024. t � Monticello MNDOT- Proposed o Elk River — US 169 interstate conversion — April 2022-November 2024 • https://www.dot.state.mn.us/d3/elkriverfreewa, /ages/Hw, 1 Rfinalayout.pdf • https://www.dot.state.mn.us/d3/elkriverfreewayZ o Buffalo - Hwy 25 Reconstruction • https://www.dot.state.mn.us/d3/buffalo/index.html o Monticello — Hwy 25 Mississippi River Bridge Overlay- 2024 o I-94 pavement improvements- Monticello to Albertville - 2024 CITY OF Monticello Wright County Projects o Five Year Plan - htt-ps://www.co.wright.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/23352/5-Year- CIP-2021-2025 o 2022 httl2s://www.co.wright.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/22850/2022- Construction-Pro gram-Worksheet o 2023- o httl2s://www.co.wright.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/22851/2023- Construction-Pro gram-Worksheet o 2024- o htti2s://www.co.wright.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/22860/2024- Construction-Program-Worksheet o 2025- o htt-ps://www.co.wright.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/22861/2025- • Construction-Program-Worksheet 0 t � Monticello City of Monticello Projects o School Boulevard Safety Improvements o https://www.ci.monticello.mn.us/514/School-Boulevard-Safety-Improvements- Pro 0 2022 Street Improvements Project o Proposed Future Projects • Elm Street/3rd Street Pedestrian Upgrades • Walnut Street Corridor Improvements • Pointes at Cedar • Flashing Yellow Arrows • School Blvd/ Cedar Roundabout • Fallon Avenue Reconstruction • Edmonson Avenue Reconstruction • 90th Street Reconstruction 0 2022 Project Areas North Residential Project Area • Briar Oaks Boulevard • Hawthorne Place North • Hawthorne Place South • Endicott Trail • Briar Court • Shady Oak Circle • Eastwood Circle • Eastwood Lane South Residential Project Area • Badger Street/Circle • Bakken Street • Fox Street • Bear Avenue • Deer Street • Troy Marquette Drive • Wildwood Way • Wildwood Court • Troy Marquette Lane • Wildwood Boulevard Hart Boulevard Project Area • East Broadway • Hart Boulevard Monticello rru• � Hart Boulevard Area North Area 1:4, l r South Area 0 CITY Monticello x GONSTRUGT CURB RRFB PEI SIAL 8-FT CURB EXTENSION RELOCATE CATCH MonticeTY llo PROPOSED 6-FT WALK WITH 4-FT BLVO CURB RAMP RRFB PEDESTAL sT CURB TYPE V RECONSTRUCT PARKING LOT (PORTION WfTHIN PUBLIC ROW) AND DRFVrEWAY APRON CURB EXTENSION BOUNDARY OF INTERSECTION PROPOSED 6-FT WAV WITH 4-FT BLVO TY Monticello s BROADWAY ST/ PINE ST INTERSECTION .'I,( l 40 SCALE IN FEE Monticello Questions?