Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda 11-06-2007 e e e AGENDA MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, November 6th, 2007 6:00 PM Commissioners: Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, William Spartz, and Barry Voight Council Liaison: Brian Stumpf Staff: Angela Schumann, Gary Anderson, Kimberly Holien - NAC I. Call to order. 2. Consideration to approve the minutes of October 2nd, 2007. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. 4. Citizen comments 5. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage in the B-3 District. Applicant: Olson Property Management 6. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for the regulation of Grading, Erosion & Sediment Control. Applicant: City of Monticello 7. Consideration to review and recommend for the expiring terms of Planning Commissioners. 8. Consideration to review for update expiring Conditional Use Permits and Plats. 9. Consideration to review for recommendation proceeding with a Request for Proposal for a Natural Resource Inventory. 10. Adjourn. e MINUTES CITY OF MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007 6:00 PM Commissioners Present: Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, Barry Voight Commissioners Absent: William Spartz Council Liaison Present: Brian Stumpf Staff Present: Angela Schuman, Gary Anderson, Kimberly Holien and Steve Grittman, NAC I. Call to order. Chairman Dragsten called the meeting to order and declared a quorum, noting the absence of Commissioner Spartz. 2. Approval of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 4th. 2007. e MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4th, 2007. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. Chairman Dragsten requested an update on the status of the land use plan as item 9.and added a review of the City task list provided by the City Administrator for comment at the last meeting as item 10 4. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Preliminary Plat for the proposed River Citv Station. a commercial plat in a B-3 (Highwav Business) District. and a request for rezoning from B-3 (Highwav Business) to B-4 (Regional Business). e Planner Holien presented the staff report, stating that the applicant is proposing a commercial plat consisting of 12 lots on an 18.29 acre site. The site is proposed to be platted as Lot 1-5 of Block 1 and Lots 1-7 of Block 2. The proposed lot sizes range from a minimum of. 75 acres to a maximum of 2.48 acres. Holien Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 stated that Lot 6, Block 2 is the largest lot proposed at 2.38 acres and will contain a detention pond on the north half of the site to accommodate stormwater. tit Holien reported that with the preliminary plat, the applicant is requesting vacation ofa 6,093 square foot piece of right-of-way in the northeast comer of the site, at the intersection of Chelsea Road and Edmondson Avenue. The applicant is also proposing a slight adjustment to the existing lot line along the west boundary of the site. This adjustment results in vacation of a 2,933 square foot section of Cedar Street right-of-way. Additionally, the applicant is requesting rezoning from B-3, Highway Business to B-4, Regional Business. Holien indicated that the Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial land uses, and the requested B-4 designation is generally consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Holien explained that the purpose of the 8-3 and B-4 Districts are identical, but the 8-4 Zoning District allows for a wider variety of commercial uses. The site is bordered by land designated for commercial land uses to the north, south, and west. Holien stated that the 8-4 District has no minimum lot area, lot width, or setback requirements. The applicant is proposing a minimum lot width of 122 feet, and a minimum lot size of. 75 acres. While the applicant is requesting rezoning from B-3 to 8-4, the 8-3 District requires a minimum lot width of 1 00 feet. The applicant has exceeded the minimum requirement for the current zoning designation with all lots. Holien noted that no structures have been sited for the proposed lots. Holien commented that any future buildings would be evaluated at the time of development to ensure that each lot will function properly with adequate space for required parking and landscaping. tit In terms of access, Holien reported that primary access to the site is provided via a north-south street, 60 feet in width, ending in a cul-de-sac. This is proposed to be paved to approximately 32 feet in width. A right-turn lane onto Chelsea Road has also been provided for. Additional accesses are provided off Cedar Street. The applicant is proposing two shared drives off Cedar Street, extending east into the site. The width of these drives has not been specified. The applicant has also noted shared access at two locations off Edmondson Avenue, extending west into the site. Holien explained that intemal access drives off the north-south street are anticipated, but have not been indicated on the plat. Conditional Use Permits for all shared access arrangements will be required at the time of development. As part of the plat, the applicant is proposing to dedicate the Chelsea Road easement currently running along the north side of the property to right-of-way. Holien stated at this time, no signage has been proposed as part of the Preliminary Plat. However, a monument sign easement has been noted in the northwest comer of the site. The easement is partially located within the City's drainage tit 2 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 e and utility easement and will need to be adjusted as signs are not allowed within the easement area. All future signage proposed for the site shall be required to comply with the ordinance and would be processed as a part of a separate application. Holien also recommended that an individual landscape plan be provided for each lot at the time that lot develops. Holien referred to the City Engineer's recommendations, which were included in the staff report and provided to the applicant. Holien stated that staff finds the plat is consistent with the performance requirements of the existing 8-3 District, which are more restrictive than the requested 8-4 zoning designation. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat, subject to the conditions identified in Exhibit Z. e Dragsten asked about the vacation of Edmonson. Holien stated that the applicant is working through details related to that for the City Council. Dragsten asked the purpose of the engineer's recommendation for changing the right of way width from 60' to 80'. Holien stated that the City Engineer had indicated that the City generally requires an 80' ROW. In this case, if the road were to be extended to also allow access to the south, the 80' width would be preferred. The City Engineer has talked with applicant's engineer on potential options. Dragsten stated his concern with not setting the width now would be with trying to selllots. Hilgart commented that it may be likely that a user will come and buy multiple lots. He inquired if there is a similar plat like this in town. Holien replied that a replat would be needed to accommodate the combination or further splitting of lots. Dragsten noted that if the plat meets all the requirements, the configuration of the lots is up to the applicant. Grittman stated that one of the issues staff discussed with the applicants is that the commercial lots might be too small prior to users identifying what their needs are. Gabler asked if the alignment of the road shown includes where the existing pond is. Holien confirmed. Gabler asked if the applicant would fill the existing pond and build a new one. Holien stated that was correct. Hearing no further comment, Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing. The applicant, Robert Lamont, Chelsea Road LLC, addressed the Commission. Lamont thanked the Commission for their consideration. Lamont stated that he had reviewed the comments from staff and the City Engineer, and realizes an approval is subject to comments and conditions. e Lamont stated that he does object to the widening of the right of way to 80'. He stated that he would like to keep it at 60' and keep the cul-de-sac, as he feels the 3 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 roadway size is adequate. Lamont requested that the Commission recommend allowing the 60' ROW, subject to the other conditions in Exhibit Z. e Lamont stated that he is satisfied with outcome of the review process. He indicated that the time spent on the review is a reflection of the importance of this property and the pressure on this area for development. In tenus of the zoning, staff recommended the B-4 zoning, as they believed it to be consistent with comp plan, more so now than in the past. Lamont indicated that the B-4's regional business purpose would seem to be consistent with potential future uses, and would have a positive effect on the surrounding land uses. He commented that he believes that the entire area will be a B-4 zoning district. Lamont noted that in discussing this plat with some of the surrounding land owners, they believe it will be a benefit to their properties. In regard to the lot size, Lamont explained that the configuration will allow him the ability to attract different size users. He stated that it is easy to envision twelve users, but it is harder to see how the lots could be combined for larger specific users. Lamont concluded by asking the Commission to recommend approval of the plat and rezoning. Voight asked Lamont about the property to the south, inquiring ifhe is perhaps looking to acquire that piece in the future. Lamont stated that would only happen ifhe secured a major user for the site; but not for a development like this. Voight stated that it seems a larger user of both pieces is within the realm of possibility. In that case, it seems possible that the road will go through to the south. He inquired what Lamont's major objection is on the width. Lamont responded that he thinks the width is adequate given traffic flow through the site. Lamont referenced other streets that have 80' ROWs, such as School Boulevard, and stated that he doesn't think there will be that volume of traffic. He stated that it is also a matter of economics. The 60' ROW, which was taken out of the City's subdivision ordinance, allows for more saleable square footage. e Gabler inquired if perhaps some compromise in width might be acceptable. Hilgart stated that at some time the southern property will be developed. Grittman stated that if the southern property developed in a plat configuration similar to the one proposed, it would need the road to come through. For a big box arrangement, it may not. Grittman commented that it seems that the engineers have negotiated a compromise and it may be possible to develop some development agreement language that addresses the potential for the road to go through. Dragsten asked if all B-4 streets are 80'. Grittman stated that the current standard is 80' for new plats. e 4 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 e Grittman stated that he is going to assume that the engineer's position is that for a temporary cul-de-sac, 60' is adequate. However, ifthis road extends to the south, 80' would be needed. He indicated that he would be reluctant to say that some recommendation in the middle is acceptable. Dragsten commented that once the ROW is platted, he is unsure how widening of the ROW could even be accomplished. Lamont stated that he didn't think it is possible. Stumpf asked if the road will be private. Grittman replied that it would be public. Stumpf stated that if it is public, he would recommend an 80' ROW. Dragsten asked about the ownership and maintenance of the entrance monument. Lamont stated it will be a landscaped median. Schumann explained that the City has a required specification for medians within City right of way. She also noted that if no other provision is made in the development agreement, because the median is in the public ROW, the City would be required to maintain the median. In that case, she indicated that City would most certainly require the developer to assign maintenance to a common association through the development agreement. e Dragsten referred to Hilgart's comment that Lamont may have a user who wants a larger lot. He inquired whether Lamont had considered fewer lots and then using outlots. Lamont stated that staff did bring that up, but this is the approach he would like to take. Hilgart asked if Lamont has any users. Lamont responded that he has no one signed. Hearing no other comment, Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing. Dragsten asked for Commission consensus on road width. Gabler stated she would prefer to keep it at 80'. Hilgart stated that ifthe City knew it wasn't going through it might be different, but he preferred the 80'. Voight concurred, stating that he thought the number of accesses and turning movements may require the 80' ROW. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONING FROM B-3 TO B-4, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE REQUESTED ZONING DESIGNATION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. Stumpf sought confirmation that the vacations would be considered separately. Schumann confirmed that they would go to the City Council. e MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. 5 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RIVER CITY STATION, SUBJECT TO A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE B-4, REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT Z. e MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. 6. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit for ()Pen & Outdoor Storage in the B-3 District. Applicant: Olson Propertv Management. Chairman Dragsten asked for the reason for continuation. Grittman stated that there are storm water issues associated with this request and at this time, the applicant is working with the City Engineer to get these items resolved. Gabler noted that the applicant is already using the site for the requested purpose. Grittman stated that traditionally the City has delayed enforcement action for property owners who are working through the process to legalize their use. The City hasn't taken any specific action against them. Grittman stated that at some point, if the applicant continues to delay the item, the City will have to think differently about enforcement. At this point, the applicant is still making a good faith effort for proper application. e Chairman Dragsten stated that he would prefer to continue for only one more month; after that the weather impacts the site. Grittman stated that staff would bring that message back to applicant. Gabler asked if Monticello is the Local Government Unit (LGU) for the wetland. Grittman confirmed and explained that like any wetland, responsibility it split with the DNR. Gabler asked if the applicants were made aware of that. Grittman stated that the applicant is aware of the issues regarding stormwater drainage and the protected wetland. Drasgten stated that the building was built in the early 80's, prior to many of the new regulations. MOTION TO CONTINUE THE CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OPEN & OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE B-3 DISTRICT BY OLSON PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FOR ONE MONTH BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED,4-0. e 6 e e e Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 Dragsten asked that it be made clear to the applicant that the request needed to come forward in November. 7. Consideration of a request for Preliminary Plat and a Conditional Use Permit for Development Stage Planned Unit Development approval for a multi-tenant office complex. a commercial plat in a B-4 (Regional Business) District. Applicant: Ouad Development. Planner Holien presented the staff report. Holien indicated that Quad Development is seeking Preliminary Plat approval and a Conditional Use Permit for development stage Planned Unit Development for Phase II of a multi-tenant office complex. She noted that Phase I was approved by the City in August, 2007. The subject site is located on Outlot A of the Monticello Business Center 3rd Addition, west ofWal-Mart and east of Autumn Ridge. The site is 4.5 acres in size an is zoned B-4, Regional Business. Holien reported that the applicant is proposing five office buildings. Development Stage PUD for Building Five was approved in August as part of Phase I of the project. The four remaining buildings are to be included in Phase II. The remaining four buildings proposed as part of Phase II are identical to what was reviewed at Concept Stage. The footprint of each building is proposed at 6,400 square feet (40' x 160') in area. The applicant is proposing to plat the site as Monticello Business Center 6th Addition. Phase II is to be platted at Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Block 1. All four lots are proposed to be 50 feet by 170 feet, or 8,500 square feet in area. Holien stated that as the proposed buildings are consistent with what was reviewed at Concept Stage, the parking requirement for the site has not changed. The parking requirement for office uses is three spaces plus one space for each 200 square feet of building area. In determining the building area, 10% of the building is presumed to be reserved for utilities, hallways, bathrooms, and other facilities. The parking proposed for the site is 243 stalls. The applicant is requesting flexibility for the 5 remaining stalls as part of the PUD. Holien reported that the landscape plan is nearly identical to that approved with Phase I of the project. Five ornamental crabapple trees have been added to the center island, and additional landscaping is proposed at the base of the feature on the north side of the center island. These changes were made per the recommendation of the City at Concept Stage. Holien indicated that the applicant has proposed 51 overstory trees, satisfying the minimum requirement. The majority of the overstory trees are proposed along the east property line, to provide a buffer between the site and the townhome development to the east. Sod is proposed between the buildings and on the back side of each building. All parking lot islands and building foundations will also be landscaped with shrubs and perennials. 7 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 In conjunction with the minimum landscaping requirements, a landscaped buffer yard is also required between the site and the townhomes to the east. Holien stated that the conflict in uses between high density residential development and commercial development is classified as Class B, or moderate. Therefore, a minimum landscaped yard 20 feet in width containing at least 80 plant units for each 100 feet of property line are required. The applicant is responsible for planting one half of this buffer yard. As stated above, the majority of the trees proposed are in the required buffer yard area. The applicant has provided 540 plant units over approximately 700 feet of property line, exceeding the minimum requirement. e A photometric plan has been submitted for the site, Holien indicated. This plan indicates that no glare exceeding one footcandle will spill over onto the adjacent right-of-way or adjacent properties. The maximum footcandle reading at the centerline of School Boulevard is 0.2. The maximum footcandle reading along the east property line, adjacent to Autumn Ridge, is 0.2. The maximum footcandle reading along the south property line is 1.0 As a condition of approval, Holien stated that any wall mounted lighting shall require a full cutoff fixture. For signage, Holien explained the applicable ordinance and stated that each of the one story buildings is allowed 181 square feet of signage. The applicant is proposing approximately 178 square feet of wall signage for the building. The wall signage proposed is within the parameters of the ordinance, and is identical to that approved with the Concept Stage PUD application. The two-story building is allowed 219 square feet of wall signage. The applicant is proposing seven signs each 31 square feet in area for a total of 217 square feet of wall signage per building. The signage proposed is within the parameters of the ordinance and consistent with that approved at Concept Stage. e In addition to wall signage, Holien stated that the applicant is proposing two monument signs, one in the northeast comer of the site and one in the northwest comer of the site. These signs will contain placards for up to six tenants. Said signs are each 96 square feet in area and 15.33 feet in height, for a total of 192 square feet of signage. The speed limit on School Boulevard is 45 miles per hour, allowing a freestanding sign up to 150 square feet in area and 26 feet in height. The applicant exceeds the maximum allowance by 42 feet. Flexibility is being requested on the signage requirement as part ofthe PUD. The applicant is not proposing any pylon signs for the site, and the proposed wall signage is under the allotted height. Therefore, this flexibility may be appropriate. She indicated that all signage proposed is identical to that approved at Concept Stage. Holien discussed the site's access and circulation, stating that the site has one primary access point extending south from School Boulevard. The access is 40 feet in width, excluding the island, with adequate space for turn lanes. All e 8 Plarming Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 tit internal drive lanes are proposed at 24 feet in width, wide enough to accommodate two-way traffic. In response to Concept Stage items, the applicant has revised drive aisle width between the northernmost parking stalls and the proposed "feature" from 50 feet to approximately 30 feet, per staff recommendation. Holien noted that reducing the drive aisle width in this location provided an opportunity to increase the amount of green space on the site, add additional plant units in the center island, and will assist in guiding traffic circulation. Pedestrian access will be accommodated by a concrete sidewalk running along the front of each building. Holien explained that crosswalks are proposed to connect the east side of the site to the west side of the site. Crosswalks are also proposed to connect the southernmost building to the remainder of the site and the center plaza. At the direction of the City, the applicant has extended the sidewalk proposed in front of Building One and Building Two to connect with the sidewalk along School Boulevard. Holien reported that the applicant has submitted elevations for the four buildings proposed, which have been slightly revised from Concept Stage, addressing concerns of the City. Vertical details have been added to the back side of each building at the direction of the City. The two-story buildings are of a similar design, revised per staff direction at Concept Stage. e Three detached trash enclosures are proposed on site, one each on the south, east, and west sides of the site. The proposed materials for these structures have not been provided. Staff recommends that all trash enclosures be required to match the color and materials of the principal structures. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and all recommendations of the engineer have been added as part of Exhibit Z. Holien stated that she could answer any questions related to the staff report. However, the public hearing would be held on October 22nd. Dr~sten asked to have color elevations of the buildings made available for the 22 , as they are important to the review ofthese projects. tit Dragsten asked about the revised access arrangement. Holien responded that the previous width, at 50', allowed for too many movement options for motorists. By reducing the width, it eliminates those potential conflicts and allows for additional plantings. Dragsten asked if the reduced width would create problems for delivery trucks. Grittman responded that the 30' width is typical and is sufficient to accommodate trucks. The City hasn't experienced a significant problem with that in the past. Dragsten asked about the proposed grading in terms of crossing onto adjacent properties. Holien stated that question might be more appropriate to ask the applicant. 9 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 Gabler asked about the requirement for another hydrant. She asked if commercial buildings have to have sprinklers. Holien stated that these buildings are within the parameters which allow them not to sprinkle. Anderson stated that the sprinkling requirement is based on the type of structure and the area around the structure. By not sprinkling these, the fire department is asking for the additional hydrant. . Dragsten asked for clarification on the difference in pavement depths for the drive aisles. Grittman clarified that the depths might be to accommodate delivery vehicles. It was noted that no action was needed, as the public hearing and final action will occur on the 22od. 8. Consideration to review an update regarding the illumination of downtown signs. Holien indicated that a memo addressing the illumination for projecting signs had been prepared and was included in the packet. Essentially, projecting signs are required to be illuminated from the exterior. Projecting signs should also be considered wall sign for this purpose. 9. Comprehensive Plan. . Schumann explained that although it seemed as though the process in completing the plan had slowed, in reality staff had received and revised two drafts of the plan. It was felt that the first drafts needed much more content and revision before it was appropriate to bring them forward. She stated that the revisions will hopefully lead to a document that better reflects the directives provided through the neighborhood and task force meetings. 10. Task List Dragsten referred to the task list provided by the City Administrator at the last meeting. Dragsten asked if any ofthe other Commissioners had any comment. Commissioner Voight responded that he had forwarded his comments directly on to Administrator O'Neill. Dragsten stated that he would like the amendment of the R-I, R-IA and R-2 districts to be a priority. Schumann responded that the task list groups all of the potential zoning amendments together under a potential zoning ordinance re-write. The draft comprehensive plan actually cites the complete revision of the zoning ordinance as an implementation strategy needed to support the comp plan objectives. . 10 Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/07 e Drasgten asked if it is reasonable to re-write the entire ordinance, rather than trying to take on individual items. Grittman stated it is reasonable and is actually a very effective way to go through the ordinance. One of the keys will be to talk about is the structure of the ordinance. Grittman stated that he would recommend a structural change of the current ordinance in order to make it clearer for users. Grittman explained that the current ordinance has been cobbled together in parts over 30 years. It was developed based on a 20-year old model. Going through it in an all-encompassing manner is actually is a good idea, as it would be very difficult to do piece by piece. A piecemeal approach wouldn't result in a well- functioning ordinance. Dragsten asked if the re-write would be a workshop Grittman stated that the City would do a series of meetings. Depending on the volume, it may take a series of workshops. At some point, the Commission had talked about having a second meeting as an option, at which time the ordinance re-write could be taken in steps. II. Adiourn MOTION TO ADJOURN BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. e e 11 e e e Planning Commission Agenda- 1110612007 5. Continued Public Hearinl! - Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storal!e in the B-3 District. Applicant: Olson Property Manal!ement (NAC). BACKGROUND Olson Property Management has applied for a Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage to allow for the storage of vehicles in the rear yard of the property. The subject site is located at 19 Sanberg Road and is 4.58 acres in size. The property is zoned B-3, Highway Business. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a CUP for Open and Outdoor Storage to allow exterior storage of vehicles related to Jerry's Towing and Repair. Jerry's Towing and Repair will also be leasing a small space within the principal building for an office. A similar Conditional Use Permit was previously approved for the site, but has since expired due to non-use. The site currently contains a 6,400 square foot storage area in the rear yard of the site, south of the existing building. Jerry's Towing will be utilizing the south half of this storage space, approximately 3,200 square feet in area. The site is currently in violation of the Ordinance by operating the proposed use without a Conditional Use Permit. In addition to the outdoor storage area, the site contains a large bituminous parking area, a building approximately 7,176 square feet in area, and part ofa wetland. Access is provided via a driveway extending west into the site from Marvin Road. Existing Conditions. The applicant is currently storing a variety of items on the site, outside of the existing fenced storage area. As a condition of any approval for the proposed CUP, the applicant shall be required to clean up the site, transferring any items that are not used on a regular basis into the storage area. The applicant has indicated that items used regularly include vehicles and trailers. All items other than licensed vehicles and trailers shall be moved into the fenced storage area. Conditional Use Permit. Open and outdoor storage is permitted as a conditional use in the B-3 District, provided that: I. The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential uses or if abutting an R district in compliance with Chapter 3 Section 2G of this ordinance. Comment: The site does not abut any residential uses or residentially zoned property. 2. Storage is screened from view from the public right of way. I Planning Commission Agenda- 11/0612007 Comment: The storage area is surrounded by an existing chainlink fence with slats. a The applicant is not proposing any changes to the existing fence as part of the ., application. 3. Storage area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. Comment: The storage area is currently surfaced with crushed concrete. In a narrative submitted by the applicant, it is indicated that 3-4 loads of crushed concrete were recently added to the site. 4. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right of way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3 Section 2 H ofthe Zoning Ordinance. Comment: No additional lighting is proposed for the site as part of the project. If at any time additional lighting is proposed, said lighting shall be required to comply with Chapter 3 Section 2 H of the Zoning Ordinance. Parking. The existing building contains office, retail, and warehouse uses. The parking requirement for office uses is three spaces plus one space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area (minus 10 percent). The parking requirement for retail stores and service establishments with 50 percent or more of gross floor area devoted to storage, warehouses, and/or industry is at least eight spaces or one space for each 200 a square feet devoted to public sales or service plus one space for each 500 square feet ., of storage area. Based on information in the floor plan provided by the applicant, the parking requirement for the site is as follows: Use Office Space Retail Warehouse/Shop Total Required Floor Area 253 square feet 1,620 square feet 3,312 square feet Soaces Reauired 5 spaces 9 spaces 7 spaces 21 spaces As stated above, the site contains a large bituminous parking area on the east side of the principal building. However, the parking lot is not striped to delineate available parking stalls. Section 3-5 [D] (9) (1) of the Zoning Ordinance states that, except for single, two-family, and townhouses, all parking stalls shall be marked with white painted lines not less than four inches wide. Each of these striped parking stalls shall be a minimum of 9 feet wide and 20 feet in length exclusive of access aisles. To accommodate the existing parking needs and the additional parking expected for the Jerry's Towing use, the applicant shall be required to stripe the parking lot, delineating a minimum of 21 spaces as a condition of approval. Grading and Drainage. The City Engineer, Bruce Westby, performed a site visit in reference to the existing wetland on the site. Previously, it appeared as though stormwater runoff from this site would drain into the wetland immediately south of e 2 Planning Commission Agenda- 11/06/2007 e the site. However, the applicant has now graded the site to direct stormwater runoff from the storage area to a ditch west of Marvin Road that drains to a stormwater pond that is physically separated from the wetland noted above. The City Engineer performed a second site visit to verify that stormwater does in fact drain to the storm water pond and not the protected wetland. It was found that stormwater does now drain into the stormwater retention pond. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Regarding the request for a Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage, the City has the following options: 1. Motion to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage, based on a finding that the proposed use is consistent with the conditions of approval and the performance requirements for the B-3 District, subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to deny the request for a Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage, based on a finding that the proposed use is not consistent with the performance requirement of the B-3 District and it will have a detrimental affect on neighboring properties and wetlands. e RECOMMENDATION Regarding the requested Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage, staff recommends approval of the request. The proposed use is consistent with the conditions of approval, and the intent ofthe B-3 District. The applicant has addressed issues with additional stormwater runoff, and the measures taken have been found acceptable by the City Engineer. In that regard, staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit Z. SUPPORTING DATA: Exhibit A: Site Location Map Exhibit B: Applicant narrative Exhibit C: Site plan Exhibit D: Site photos Exhibit E: Aerial photos Exhibit F: Floor plan Exhibit G: Memo from City Engineer dated October 30,2007. Exhibit Z: Conditions of approval e 3 Planning Commission Agenda- 11/0612007 Exhibit Z Conditions of Approval Olson Electric - Open & Outdoor Storage 1. The applicant shall stripe the parking lot to delineate a minimum of 21 stalls. 2. All materials stored outside on the site, other than licensed vehicles and trailers, shall be stored within the fenced storage area at all times. 3. The Conditional Use Permit is subject to annual inspection of the site to ensure compliance with the CUP. 4 e e e SA . J , $.,. "" ........ Ow OIl.... ~\!: z'" :i 7TH e e tit i?B (}pM Olson Property Management 19 Sandberg Road, P.G. Box 686, Monticello, "'IN 55362 Phone 763-295-2690, Fax 763-295-2691 August 27, 2007 City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, Mn 55362 Olson Property Management is applying for a conditional use permit for Jerry's Towing and Repair (Jerry Foley) to lease one-half of our fenced in area. At this time we have made office space available inside our facility for him to use. See attached drawing. I know the city may have some concerns regarding the wetland area located on the south side of our property. I contacted WSB Engineering two weeks ago for copies of topographies that were made during the Marvin/Chelsea Road reconstruction. They are having trouble locating the files. You may have a copy of these on file. The fenced in area measures 80 ft x 80 ft. We have not increased or decreased the size of this area since Jerry's Towing and Repair had used it previously. Jerry's Towing and Repair has had a conditional use permit in the past with the City of Monticello. We have added 3-14 yard loads of crushed concrete to minimize the rutting from his vehicles to and from the area. See attached pictures. At this time we are having a feasibility study on our entire 4.6 acre site which we expect back mid-September. We anticipate Jerry's Towing and Repair to be a part of our development and bring him back to this community. Please approve the conditional use permit required for us to proceed. S~~ ~ ~ ------- Mark D. Olson Olson Property Management ,;~. '[".'; !".:" ':'........ Pil ----"--~,' ~j ~- -~': t I ': c1' ~ t~. .. 1,1; ? rl~_ 8 I' - , - i~i:1 ;il., !~i "'I' I ,';o,j' , '~f!' ,'1.1-'; ;y~ ~ 1.0 ili " /I, . "11) 1j"l: '-'~ .," .' 't., I}:':, ,~; '" g I\;f~ ~j" I:'. f-' / (/ II I '" i ~~ ~ t ~~ ~:'i ... - . 8 11) j'~lk,; ~,'; Iw;:': !,:;~ ..w- ,",","',',,':';..'........._ I 'f-': _-.::.l ':'" I' :.Ji e lA/rEi Irsr..- ,.,rc f.; I CI-A.. , '0'Y4 r- "~ 75' '. "2;,.... -.. ~-f{# I#' 400; ,1';01\1 :;r: sc[ OfT';' , f'. -'- -__ \ '8/r,~/ct:.o ct:; -'"",",,-} rL Or ""'-<q -4 " \ -- -<.:- :~~ s. ~ ~ -- " J.<e. .,;, 7.'_ .~ '.'~a.- ",", , . . i , , , , , tg.9 50 I I [:KIS"NG . . ~ . . . ,; ~ ~ fMjllf)I/oC '" 50 BI TWINQUS PARKI/IC LOr 4.577 ACRES . , ~,_~____..___._--.---J . / ,v/ /' ,/'.. ~ ~ ,LH~~ .'Rf.,:r>a _ I , , .... o . .... ;; , , ('\\ ,i .... / ~' 'V , ., ~ -, ~ .' . ,.-P 0,9 ~T LAND ~ .... -"- 1\0, 94 :k 1\ !'i" ~(> .-@-, 1 SCALE: '" fEE T GRAPHIC ~- .] 50 . t I ~____ C <1:>- 'C. ,,~ <1:>",- /_\- N 75'22'20' I ;>.J4, 43 \ ' 1 - I " \ \ ~~ \ ii ;~ 33 I I \ II ~ \ ~ ~ Cl: ~ '20 11/0 ____ D['5)'[5 ----.... IRa;' ~NT rCUVC ':' -IRCN 4KWI.MNT .">t r .t (APPrO Rl' \--, I I 33 \ \ I ~J ,,51 Ol '" 1 l~\ V;~ ~2. ~ " ~ " ~ \ ~} ,-~ ; ~\-. '-i' ~) :I: " i\ "l: Q Ol ... , '" - . ~ ~ I I \ U !.'i,,''.I) e e e 5P e e e e . . e e e 15~ I Fenced in area 80' X 80' Property Location: 19 Sandberg Road Monticello, MN 55362 5F': e " OJ !.::: 4-i o c.. o ..c: CIl ... .3 o ~ " OJ " ~ e " - '" '" ;::l - <l) 0 :s ..c: <l) l;; :s "Cl g " OJ !.::: 4-i 0 <l) ... o - CIl "00 ~ e . . . ~C1 October 30, 2007 MONTICELLO Ms Kimberly Holien Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202 Golden Valley, MN 55422 Re: Olson Property Management Open & Outdoor Storage CUP Application City of Monticello Project No. 2007-021 Dear Ms Holien: Previously much of the stormwater runoff from the project site discharged into an adjacent wetland that is listed on the National Wetland Inventory. Since there would now be a greater potential for stormwater runoff from the site to contain waste fluids from the towed vehicles stored on site, the Public Works Director and I visited the site and discussed our concerns with the applicant. Upon hearing our concerns the applicant stated he would grade the site to direct stormwater runoff from the proposed storage area into a ditch west of Marvin Road that drains to a stormwater pond that is physically separated from the wetland noted above. Upon notification from the applicant that he had completed the grading I inspected the site today and believe that stormwater runoff from the proposed storage area does in fact now drain to the stormwater detention pond and not into the wetland. As such I see no reason to deny the request for Open & Outdoor Storage CUP. Please feel free to can me at 763-271-3236 should you have any questions regarding any of my comments. Sincerely, CITY OF MONTICELLO ;OAM.e-L U~ ~ Broce Westby, P .E. City Engineer c: Jeff 0 'Neill, City Administrator John Simola, Public Works Director Angela Schumann, Commwrity Development Coordinator Shibani Bisson, WSB and Associates Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite I, Monticello, MN 55362.8831 . (763) 295-2711 . Fax (763) 295-4404 Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362' (763) 295-3170 . Fax (763) 271-3272 e e e Planning Commission Agenda - 11/06/07 6. Public Rearm!!: - Consideration of a reauest for Amendment to the Monticello Zouin!! Ordinance for the re!!:ulation of Gradin!!: & Erosion Control. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to consider an amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for the regulation of grading and erosion control. The ordinance amendment proposed consists of a new chapter specific to the regulation of grading and erosion control, as well as amendments to the current ordinance for consistency with the new chapter. The purpose of the ordinance is to consolidate existing practices in order to better address the envirorunental issues created by the disturbance of soil. The ordinance is intended to safeguard water quality and aid in the preservation and maintenance of land cover as appropriate during development. The ordinance also brings the City in line with state and federal regulations. Development of this ordinance is one of the requirements identified in the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control. The development ofthis ordinance has been a year-long process of research and development, which has included both staff and the development community. To date, Monticello's regulation of grading and erosion has been contained in various documents and policies. Current regulations are also somewhat inconsistent, due to lack of uniform definitions of control measures and implementation. The City is seeking to condense current practice into one standard, making regulation more practical for both the City and the development community. The ordinance covers the following areas: . Application . Application requirements . General standards . Inspection . Enforcement measures For the most part, the ordinance proposed represents current City policy, with some exceptions. Perhaps the most notable change is related to the standard for permit. Currently, the City requires no permit for grading under 400 cubic yards of material. For reference, 400 cubic yards is approximately equivalent of 40 dump trucks of material. In developing the ordinance, City stafffelt some circumstances would require the review of projects which may disturb less ground cover than this previous standard. This is particularly true for developed areas. As such, the proposed permit criteria include both volume and area triggers, as well as a requirement for disturbances adjacent to waterways. Grading development in these areas may currently fall below under either the volume or area requirement. Other modifications to current practice include the requirement for individual site developers (most often general contractorslbuilders) to supply a security guaranteeing maintenance of on-site prevention measures and clean-up during construction. While the City has and will continue to hold a security with an overall site developer, it is critical to be able to handle on- site issues as quickly as possible. An individual security makes that communication possible. 1 Planning Commission Agenda - 11106107 For example, the City holds a letter of credit from a developer, guaranteeing development- .. wide erosion control and conformance to the grading plan for residential projects such as .- Hunters Crossing. However, to-date the City has held no security from an individual lot developer. If a subcontractor for a home project within Hunters Crossing destroys silt fence or drags silt onto the street, the City had to contact the developer, and then in turn the developer contacted the builder. To streamline the process, the securities are held with both to ensure compliance and direct communication. The ordinance refers in many locations to the Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines (aka the Design Manual). The ordinance does not provide detailed specification information for erosion and grading measures, as those requirements are covered in the Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines, which reference the City Specifications For Street and Utility Construction, a specifications book published by the City of Monticello. The City specifications are provided to all contractors working on projects within the City. The inclusion of detailed specifications within that document, rather than the ordinance, serves two purposes. First, because the City specifications are updated annually, they are current and consistent with new development practices and state and federal regulations. Second, it eliminates the need for the ordinance to be continually updated in response to those changes. The City will be completing updates to the Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines in support of this ordinance. In meetings with builders, many ideas came forward on modifications needed to support best management practices for grading and erosion control. Those are very detailed specifications that are better suited to the manual for reasons noted above. e Other practices and requirements outlined within the ordinance are those currently being used by the City of Monticello at various stages ofthe development process. The items being deleted from the current ordinance are incorporated into the proposed ordinance, or will be incorporated into the Design Manual as part of the revisions associated with the addition of the Grading and Erosion Control ordinance. In summary, the proposed ordinance changes help formalize current practice so that the development community has a clear guideline for what to expect, and what expectations are, for grading and erosion control within the City. Ultimately, the goal of the ordinance is better communication regarding grading and erosion control at all levels of the development process. AL TERNA TIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to recommend approval of Chapter 33 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for Grading and Erosion Control and corresponding amendments, based on a finding that the proposed ordinance is consistent with current City policies and strategies for the protection of Monticello's water and soil resources. e 2 Planning Commission Agenda - 11106/07 e 2. Motion to recommend approval of Chapter 33 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for Grading and Erosion Control and corresponding amendments, based on a finding that the proposed ordinance is consistent with current City policies and strategies for the protection of Monticello's water and soil resources, subject to the following modifications (to be made by the Planning Commission). 3. Motion to recommend denial of Chapter 33 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for Grading and Erosion Control and corresponding amendments, based on a finding that the proposed ordinance is consistent with current City policies and strategies for the protection of Monticello's water and soil resources, subject to the following modifications (to be made by the Planning Commission). 4. Motion to table action. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The City Engineer, Public Works Director and Chief Building Official have reviewed the proposed ordinance and amendments and recommend approval. Additionally, supporting staff, including building inspectors, the Street Superintendent, consulting engineers (including the senior project manager, erosion inspector and hydrologist), and Community Development staff, have reviewed this ordinance and recommend it for approval. SUPPORTING DATA e A. B. Proposed Ordinance Proposed Current Ordinance Amendment e 3 e e e IpA CHAPTER 33 Grading and Erosion Control 33-1: PURPOSE During the construction process, soil is highly vulnerable to erosion by wind and water. Eroded soil endangers water resources by reducing water quality and causing the siltation of aquatic habitat for fish and other desirable species. Eroded soil also necessitates the maintenance of sewers and ditches and the dredging of lakes and ponds. As a result, the purpose of this local regulation is to safeguard persons, protect property, and prevent damage to the environment in Monticello. This ordinance will also promote the public welfare by guiding, regulating, and controlling the design, construction, use, and maintenance of any development or other activity that disturbs or breaks the topsoil or results in the movement of earth on land in Monticello. This ordinance is to be used in supplement to any other regulations as required by state agencies. 33-2: DEFINITIONS [AA] As-Built Plans Record drawings of approved and as constructed improvements. [AB] Best Management Practices (BMPs) Erosion and sediment control and water quality management practices that are the most effective and practicable means of controlling, preventing, and minimizing degradation of surface water, including avoidance of impacts, construction-phasing, minimizing the length of time soil areas are exposed, prohibitions, and other management practices published by state or designated area-wide planning agencies. [AC] City Engineer A person who has received training and is given authority by the City of Monticello to design, review, authorize, approve, inspect, and maintain erosion and sediment control plans and practices. [AD] Clearing Any activity that removes the vegetative surface cover. [AE] Conservation Easement A conservation easement is legal land preservation agreement between a landowner and a municipality or a qualified land protection organization. The easement confers the transfer of usage rights from one party to another. [AF] Construction Activity A disturbance to the land that results in a change in the topography, or the existing soil cover (both vegetative and non-vegetative). Examples of construction activity may include clearing, grading, filling and excavating. 1 [AG] Dewatering The removal of water for construction activity. It can be a discharge of appropriated surface or groundwater to dry and/or solidify a construction site. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources permits are required to be appropriated and if contaminated may require other MPCA pennits to be discharged. e [AR] Erosion Control A measure tbat prevents erosion including but not limited to: soil stabilization practices, limited grading, mulch, temporary or permanent cover, and construction phasing. [AI] Erosion Control Inspector A designated agent given authority by the City of Monticello to inspect and maintain erosion and sediment control practices. [AJ] Final Grade Excavation or fill of material to final plan elevation. Final grade completed as part of individual site development. [AK] Final Stabilization: a. All soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed and a uniform (e.g., evenly distributed, without large bare areas) perennial vegetative cover with a minimum density of 70% of approved vegetative cover for the area has been established on all unpaved areas and areas not covered by permanent structures, or equivalent permanent stabilization measures bave been employed; e b. For construction projects on land used for agricultural purposes (e.g., pipelines across crop or range land) final stabilization may be accomplished by returning the disturbed land to its preconstruction agricultural use. Areas disturbed that were not previously used for agricultural activities, such as buffer strips immediately adjacent to surface waters and drainage systems, and areas which are not being returned to their preconstruction agricultural use must meet the final stabilization criteria in (a) above. [AL] Grading Excavation or fill of material, including the resulting conditions thereof. [AM] Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Permit A permit issued by the municipality for the construction or alteration of the ground and for the improvements and structures for the control of erosion, runoff, and grading. Herein after referred to as "Grading Permit". [AN] Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plans A set of plans prepared by or under the direction of a licensed professional engineer. Plans are required to indicate the specific measures and sequencing to be used to control grading, sediment and erosion on a development site during and after construction as detailed in the City of Monticello "Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines". e 2 e [AO] Impervious Surface A constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than prior to development. Examples include rooftops, sidewalks, patios, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, and concrete, asphalt, or gravel roads. [AP] National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) The program for issuing, modifying, revoking, reissuing, terminating, monitoring, and enforcing permits under the Clean Water Act (Sections 301, 318, 402, and 405) and United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 33, Sections 1317, 1328, 1342, and 1345. [AQ] Perimeter Sediment Control A barrier that prevents sediment from leaving a site by filtering sediment-laden runoff or diverting it to a sediment trap or basin. [AR] Permanent Cover Final site stabilization. Examples include grass, gravel, asphalt, and concrete. [AS] Phasing Clearing a parcel of land in distinct phases, with the stabilization of each phase completed before the clearing of the next. e [ AT] Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines Manual detailing City specifications for all plan requirements. [U] Public Waterway Any body of water, including, but not limited to lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, and bodies of water delineated by the City of Monticello or other state or federal agencies. [A V] Rough Grade Excavation or fill of material to a condition suitable for general maintenance. [A W] Sediment Control Measures and methods employed to prevent sediment from leaving the site. [AX] Site A parcel of land or a contiguous combination thereof, where grading work is performed as a single unified operation. [A Y] Site Development Construction or alteration of ground. [AZ] Stabilized The exposed ground surface has been covered by appropriate materials such as mulch, staked sod, riprap, wood fiber blanket, or other material that prevents erosion from occurring. Grass seeding is not stabilization. e 3 [BA] Standard Plates General drawings having or showing similar characteristics or qualities that are representative of a construction practice or activity. e [BB] Start of Construction The first land-disturbing activity associated with a development, including land preparation such as clearing, grading, excavation and filling; [Be] Storm Water Defined under Minn. R. 7077.0105, subp. 41(b), and includes precipitation runoff, storm water runoff, snow melt runoff, and any other surface runoff and drainage. [BD] Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) A program for managing and reducing storm water discharge that includes erosion prevention measures and sediment controls that, when implemented, will decrease soil erosion on a parcel of land and decrease off-site nonpoint pollution. [BE] Surface Water or Waters All streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, wetlands, reservoirs, springs, rivers, drainage systems, waterways, watercourses, and irrigation systems whether natural or artificial, public or private. [BF] Temporary Erosion Control Methods employed to prevent erosion on a temporary basis. Examples of temporary cover include; straw, wood fiber blanket, wood chips, and erosion netting. e [BG] Waterway A channel that directs surface runoff to a watercourse or to the public storm drain. [BH] Water Conveyance System Any channel that conveys surface runoff throughout the site. [BI] Wetland or Wetlands Defined in Minn. R. 7050.0130, subp. F and includes those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Constructed wetlands designed for wastewater treatment are not waters of the state. e 4 e e e 33-3: PERMITS [A] APPROVAL: No person shall be granted a Grading Permit for land-disturbing activity that would require the uncovering or distributing of material in excess of any of the following measurements without the approval of a Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan by the City of Monticello. 1. 2000 square feet. 2. 400 cubic yards undeveloped land, or 40 cubic yards developed land. 3. Within 200 feet of a waterway [B] EXCEPTION: No Grading Permit is required for land disturbances under the amounts specified above, or for the following activities: 1. Any emergency activity that is immediately necessary for the protection of life, property, or natural resources. 2. General establishment of new construction lawns, or the addition of four (4) or fewer inches of topsoil. 3. Existing nursery and agricultural operations conducted as a permitted main or accessory use. [C] APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: 1. Each application shall bear the name(s) and address(es) of the owner or developer of the site, and of any consulting firm retained by the applicant together with the name of the applicant's principal contact at such firm 2. A filing fee and security as outlined by City ordinance and paragraph [D] below. 3. A Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan meeting the requirements of this ordinance. Each application shall include the required number of plans and other required materials as specified on the application form. 4. The application form shall include a statement by the applicant that any land clearing, construction, or development involving the movement of earth shall be in accordance with the Approved Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. [D] SECURITY: 1. The permittee will be required to file with the City of Monticello an irrevocable, automatically renewing letter of credit, or other improvement security in the amount specified by the current City ordinance for fee schedule. This security shall be in addition to the required non-refundable filing fee as specified by City Ordinance, which shall be submitted under separate payment. 5 a. The security shall cover all costs of engineering and inspection, site improvements, street sweeping, repairs to erosion control measures, and maintenance of improvements for such period as specified by the City of Monticello. Such deposit shall be provided prior to the release of the Grading permit. b. Deposit shall be released after fmal stabilization is complete, erosion control measures have been removed and their removal area inspected. e 2. Individual lot developers shall be required to provide a bond with a building permit application. a. The security shall cover City costs for street sweeping, installation, maintenance and repairs to erosion control measures. The bond will be in an amount as specified by the current City ordinance for fee schedule. b. The security shall be released after turf is established is specified in the City Design Guidelines and Plan Requirements Manual. [E} PROCEDURE: The City of Monticello will review each application for Grading Permit to determine its conformance with the provisions ofthis regulation and other applicable requirements. The City of Monticello requires complete application no less than fifteen (15) working days in advance of the desired Grading Permit release date. Upon complete application, the City of Monticello shall, in writing: I. Approve the permit application; e 2. Approve the permit application subject to such reasonable conditions as may be necessary to secure substantially the objectives ofthis regulation, and issue the permit subject to these conditions; or 3. Deny the permit application, indicating the reason(s) and procedure for submitting a revised application and/or submission; 4. Appeals of denial of permit shall be processed in accordance with Appeal to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 33-4: GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [A] PLAN REQUIREMENTS: Grading, erosion control practices, sediment control practices, and waterway crossings shall meet the design criteria set forth in the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, and shall be adequate to prevent transportation of sediment from the site to the satisfaction of the City of Monticello. The Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan shall comply with the NPDES General Storm Water Permit requirements and include the following as applicable: I. A natural resources map identifying soils, tree cover including size and type, significant native plant communities, and resources protected under other chapters of this code. e 6 e 2. A sequence of construction of the development site, iocludiog stripping and clearing; rough grading; construction of utilities, iofrastructure, and buildiogs; and fInal grading and landscapiog. Sequenciog shall identify the expected date on which clearing will begin, phasiog of clearing or gradiog, the estimated duration of exposure of cleared areas, areas of clearing, iostallation of temporary erosion and sediment control measures, and establishment of permanent vegetation. 3. All erosion and sediment control measures necessary to meet the objectives ofthis local regulation throughout all phases of construction and after completion of development of the site. Depending upon the complexity of the project, the drafting of intermediate plans may be required at the close of each season. 4. Seediog mixtures and rates, types of sod, method of seedbed preparation, expected seeding dates, type and rate of lime and fertilizer application, and kind and quantity of mulching for both temporary and permanent vegetative control measures. Required specifIcations are referenced io the City of Monticello Plan Requirements and Design Guidelioes. 5. Provisions for maiotenance of erosion and sediment plan, specifically in boulevards, easements and other public areas, and estimates of the cost of maiotenance. e 6. Provisions for regular permittee inspections of all control measures in accordance with the inspection schedule outlined on the approved Grading, Draioage and Erosion Control Plan(s). 7. ModifIcations to the plan shall be processed and approved or disapproved io the same manner as 33-3[E] of this regulation, may be authorized by the City of Monticello by written authorization to the permittee, and shall include: a. Major amendments of the erosion and sediment control plan submitted to the City of Monticello. b. Field modifIcations of a minor nature. 33-5: CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS [A] CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: I. Grading, erosion and sediment controls as specified in the City's Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines. 2. Clearing and grading of natural resources, such as forests and wetlands, shall not be permitted, except when in compliance with all other chapters of this Code. Clearing techniques that retaio natural vegetation and drainage patterns shall be recommended as necessary and used to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3. Clearing, except that necessary to establish sediment control devices, shall not begio until all sediment control devices have been iostalled and have been stabilized. e 7 4. Phasing may be required on all sites based on site specifics, with the size of each phase to be established at plan review and as approved by the City Engineer/City of Monticello. e 5. Soil stabilization shall be completed within 14 days of clearing or inactivity in construction. 6. Final stabilization on all sites shall become established within 6 months. The City of Monticello may require the site to be reseeded or a nonvegetative option employed. 7. Seeding shall be in accordance with the City's current seeding specification as detailed in the Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. 8. Special techniques that meet the design criteria outlined in Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines shall be in place on steep slopes or in drainage ways shall be used to ensure stabilization. 9. Soil stockpiles which shall be inactive for a period of 7 or more days shall include provisions for perimeter sediment controls. The placement of soil stockpiles adjacent to public rights-of-way or waterways is prohibited. 10. The entire site must be stabilized to a minimum of70% coverage, using a heavy mulch layer or another method that does not require germination to control erosion, at the close of the construction season. e 11. Techniques shall be employed to prevent the blowing of dust or sediment from the site. 12. Techniques that divert upland runoff past disturbed slopes shall be employed. [B] WATERWAY AND WATERCOURSE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS: The Permittee(s) shall implement the following waterway and watercourse measures on the site: I. A temporary stream crossing installed and approved by the local government unit and regulating agency if a wet watercourse will be crossed regularly during construction. 2. Stabilization of the watercourse channel before, during, and within 24 hours after any in-channel work. 3. All on-site stormwater conveyance channels designed according to the criteria outlined in the Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines. 4. Stabilization adequate to prevent erosion located at the outlets of all pipes and paved channels. [C] POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES: The Permittee(s) shall implement the following pollution prevention management measures on the site: e 8 e e e 1. Solid Waste: Collected sediment, asphalt and concrete millings, floating debris, paper, plastic, fabric, construction and demolition debris and other wastes must be disposed of properly and must comply with MPCA disposal requirements. 2. Hazardous Materials: Oil, gasoline, paint and any hazardous substances must be properly stored, including secondary containment, to prevent spills, leaks or other discharge. Restricted access to storage areas must be provided to prevent vandalism. Storage and disposal of hazardous waste must be in compliance with MPCA regulations. 3. External washing of trucks and other construction vehicles must be limited to a defmed area of the site. Runoff must be contained and waste properly disposed of. No engine degreasing is allowed on site. 33-6: INSPECTION [A] NOTIFICATION: The Erosion Control Inspector shall make inspections as hereinafter required and either shall approve that portion of the work completed or shall notify the permittee wherein the work fails to comply with the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as approved. [B] PROCEDURE: The City shall inspect all permit sites once per week and within 24 hours after a rain event. The City shall also require inspections at other development benchmarks as follows. To obtain inspections, the permittee shall notify the City of Monticello at least two working days before the following: 1. Installation of sediment and erosion control measures 2. Start of construction 3. Close of the construction season 4. Completion of final stabilization/landscaping 5. Removal of erosion control measures 6. Final project compliance and acceptance close-out [C] MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS: Seed tags should be submitted to the Erosion Control Inspector for approval prior to commencing work. Proof of application rates should be provided. [D] PERMITEE INSPECTION: The permittee or his/her agent shall also make regular inspections of all control measures in accordance with the inspection schedule outlined on the approved Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Planes). The purpose of such inspections will be to determine the overall effectiveness of the control plan and the need for additional control measures. All inspections shall be documented in written form and submitted to the City of Monticello at the time interval specified in the approved permit. [E] AUTHORIZATION: The City Engineer or Erosion Control Inspector shall enter the property of the applicant as deemed necessary to make regular inspections to ensure the validity of the reports filed under Section B. 9 33-7: SITE MAINTENANCE [A] RESPONSIBILITIES: The permittee shall clean dirt and debris from streets that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, home builders, subcontractors, their agents or assigns. Prior to any construction in the plat, the Developer shall provide the City Engineer with a schedule for erosion and sediment control inspection, street cleaning, and street sweeping. e [B] LAPSE: If the Grading permittee repeatedly fails to meet or maintain sediment and erosion control measures per the Approved Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, the City may, in its discretion, perform the work or contract to have the work completed and drawn down on the escrow deposit to pay any costs. I. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. 2. If the Developer does not reimburse the City for any cost the City incurred beyond that covered by the deposit, for such work within ten (10) days from the date notice of the amount owed to the City is mailed, the City may draw on the security to reimburse City for such costs. 33-8: CERTIFICATION [A] APPROVED GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Plans for grading, stripping, excavating, and filling work bearing the stamp of approval of the City Engineer shall be maintained at the site during the progress of the work. e [B} AS-BUILT GRADING PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Within thirty (30) days after completion of site development as per the approved Grading, Drainage and Erosion Plan, and prior to the approval of individual building permits, the Developer shall provide the City with an As Built Grading Plan and Development Plan as defined in the City of Monticello Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines. [C] PROCEDURE: The City will withhold issuance of building permits until the approved certified As-Built Grading Plan and As-Built Development Plan are on file with the City, all securities as required by this ordinance are received, conservation easement posts are installed, and all erosion control measures are in place as determined by the City Engineer. [D] REMOVAL OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES: The above specified requirements will be authorized for removal upon the sodding of the rear yards, completion of punch list items involving ponds and slopes, fmal stabilization, completion of proper turf establishment and placement of the proper conservation easement posts and signs asspecified. Inspection is required after the removal of erosion control measures to verify proper restoration. Please refer to City of Monticello Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines for specifications. e 10 e 33-9: ENFORCEMENT [A] STOP WORK ORDER/REVOCATION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. 1. In the event that any person holding a site development permit pursuant to this ordinance violates the terms of the permit or implements site development in such a manner as to materially adversely affect the health, welfare, environment, or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or development site so as to be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, the City of Monticello may suspend or revoke the site development permit through the issuance of a stop work order or the revocation of the Grading or Building Permit. 2. The City of Monticello City may draw down on the Grading Permit security, with 30 days written notice to Developer, for any violation of the terms of this Contract related to landscaping if the violation is not cured within such thirty (30) day period or if the security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the security is drawn down, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default. 3. No development, utility or street construction will be allowed and no Building Permits will be issued unless the development is in full compliance with the requirements of this Paragraph. e [B] VIOLATION AND PENALTIES: 1. No person shall construct, enlarge, alter, repair, or maintain any grading, excavation, or fill, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any terms of this ordinance. Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and each day during which any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continued, or permitted, shall constitute a separate offense. 2. Upon conviction of any such violation, such person, partnership, or corporation shall be punished by a fine as specified by the City ordinance for fee schedule for each offense. In addition to any other penalty authorized by this section, any person, partnership, or corporation convicted of violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be required to bear the expense of such restoration. 33-9: SEPARABILITY The provisions and sections of this ordinance shall be deemed to be separable, and the invalidity of any portion of this ordinance shall not affect the validity of the remainder. e 11 e e e 013 Planning Commission Agenda- 11/06/07 ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE REGULATING PROJECTING SIGNS, AMENDING SECTION 3-2[E] OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 3-2[E] of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended as follows: [E] D~\IN.^,GE PLXNS: In the ease ef all apartmeffi, Business, aDd industrial develepffients, a ffiiniffillffi ef 3 sets sf drainage plans shall Be suBmitted te the City Engifteer fer revie';I, ana the final arainage plans shall Be sOOjeet te written appr-oval. Elle8flt as otherwise llflprevea BY the City Engineer and/or Building Official ana Uflen a8HlSlliltration of pssitive drainage, all dwelliags and cSffiHlercial ana indHstrial Buildings shall Be censtrueted sush that the ground elevatien at the Building site will Be a mini_ of t';ielve (12) inches aBs'le finished street eh"'/atien at the builtling access peint. The ellact ele>.,atien will Be detwRined by the Builtl-ing Official. .\11 glH"ages and parking faGilities shall be situated such that there will be direct and pesitiye drainage te the street assess at finished graae elevatien. All ele'/atiens shall be estaBlishea pRer to issuanse ef a BuilEiing permit. Oeoopans)' shall net be granted antil the Builder sertifies 6enfomanee ',.,.ith the grading plan for the lot. The de'/eleper shall ha'le a registered lane sar/eyer or engineer certify that the aevelopffient flaS Been r-ollgfl graded to v:ithintoleraRse limits aeeortl-iHg te the gratl-ing plaH. (11279,6/10/98) Section 2, Effective Date, This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota on the _ day of ,2007. 1 . . . ATTEST By: Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator Planning Commission Agenda- 11/06/07 CITY OF MONTICELLO By: Mayor Clint Herbst 2 e e e Planning Commission Agenda - 11/06/07 7. Consideration to review and recommend for the eXDirinl! terms of Planninl! Commissioners. (AS) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The Deputy City Clerk has indicated that the terms of Commissioners Hilgart and Gabler are due to expire at the end of 2007. The Commission is asked to consider additional terms for the Commissioners, if desired, or consider the process for interview and appointment of Commissioners to fill vacant positions. Planning Commissioners serve three year terms by ordinance. I e e e Planning Commission Agenda - 11106/07 8. Consideration to review for update expirinl! Conditional Use Permits and Plats. (AS) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND With the recent slowdown in development, City staff believed a review of recent Conditional Use Permits and plat applications was necessary in order to determine whether any recently approved projects were set to expire under the terms of the current ordinance. The ordinances relating to lapse of permit and expiration of plat are attached, as is a listing of recent projects that have or will be expiring. After a review of files and the current ordinance, many conditional use projects would technically have already expired, or are set to expire. This is due to ordinance language requiring that CUPs be "completed" as permitted within one year. Many of the City's residential developments and large-scale commercial projects have been approved as Planned Unit Developments, which are Conditional Uses by ordinance. However, there are a few cases in which CUP approval has been given and no work, or very limited work, has commenced on a project. This may be of concern, particularly for smaller projects or applications. The limitation on preliminary plats requires that approved preliminary plats must be followed by an application for final plat within one year and that any multi-phased final plat be finally platted into lots and blocks within three years. As such, there are a limited number of preliminary plats and final plats which have expired, or which were recently extended. Regarding these potential expirations of CUPS and plats, City staff has consulted with the City attorney, who indicated that the City could send a letter noting date of expiration and allow a one-time ability to apply for an extension. The Planning Commission and City Council would consider any extension requests on an individual basis. In relationship to the current ordinance requiring that CUPs be completed as permitted within one year, it has been rare that projects (until recently) have not at least commenced within the one year requirement. As such, the City has not enforced this clause of the ordinance. It also seems somewhat unreasonable to require large- scale projects to be completed within one year. With the proposed full-scale update of the zoning ordinance, it is recommended that this provision be altered to address the CUP expiration issue more appropriately. However, staff believes that the current ordinance standards for platting are reasonable. Commission is asked to review the expiration listing, ordinance, and recommended course of action as an update, and provide comment as desired. 1 Planning Commission Agenda - 11106/07 AL TERNTIVE ACTIONS No action is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends sending a letter to conditional use permit and plat approval holders as detailed by the City Attorney. At this time, staff would not recommend expiration- action related to PUDs for multi-unit development, as those projects may be better addressed under an ordinance amendment. SUPPORTING DATA Exhibit A - Monticello Zoning Ordinance 22-3[3} Exhibit B - City Code 11-3-3 FlNAL PLATS Exhibit C- Inventory of Expiring or Expired CUPs and Plats 2 e e e e e e SA 22-2: AMENDMENTS -INITIATION: The City Councilor Planning Commission may, upon their own motion, initiate a request to amend the text or the district boundaries of this ordinance. Any person owning real estate within the city may initiate a request to amend the district boundaries or text of this ordinance so as to affect the said real estate. The Zoning Administrator may initiate a request to amend the district boundaries or text of this ordinance, placing the request on the next Planning Commission meeting for public hearing at which proper public notice can be provided according the requirements of state law. (#426, 7/11/05) 22-3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: [A] PURPOSE: The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide the City of Monticello with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health, and safety. In making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the City may consider the nature of the adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands immediately close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads, and all such other or further factors as the City shall deem a requisite of consideration in determining the effect of such use on the general welfare, public health, and safety. [B] RECONSIDERATION: Whenever an application for a conditional use permit has been considered and denied by the City Council, a similar application for a conditional use permit affecting substantially the same property shall not be considered again by the Planning Commission or City Council for at least six (6) months from the date of its denial; and a subsequent application affecting substantially the same property shall likewise not be considered again by the Planning Commission or City Council for an additional six (6) months from the date of the second denial unless a decision to reconsider such matter is made by the City Council. [C] LAPSE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY NON-USE: Whenever within one (1) year after granting a conditional use permit the work as permitted by the permit shall not have been completed, then such permit shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has been granted by the City Council. Such extension shall be requested in writing and filed with the City Clerk at least thirty (30) days before the expiration of the original conditional use permit. There shall be no charge for the filing of such petition. The request for extension shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete the work permitted in the conditional use permit. Such petition shall be presented to the Planning Commission for a recommendation and to the City Council for a decision. Further, whenever a conditional use has not been in operation for a period of six (6) months, the conditional use shall be considered to be null and void. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 22/3 e e e 11-3-3 : 90 (C) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REPORTS: After the public hearing has been set, the City Administrator shall instruct the 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: When appropriate, the City Administrator shall file copies of the preliminary plat with the Park and Recreation Commission and/or Wright County for their review and comment. (E) REPORT TO COUNCIL: The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council within sixty (60) days following the public hearing. (F) CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 1. The Council shall act upon the preliminary plat within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date on which it was officially filed. If the recommendation of the Planning Commission has not been received in time to meet the requirement, the Council may act on the preliminary plat without such recommendation. 2. If the preliminary plat is not approved by the City Council, the reasons for such action shall be recorded in the proceedings of the Council and transmitted to the applicant. If the preliminary plat is approved, such 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 ordinance to be indicated on the final plat. The City 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 of Monticello. FINAL PLAT: After the preliminary plat has been approved, the final plat may be submitted for approval as follows: (A) APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Following approval of the Preliminary Plat by the City Council, a Final Plat may be submitted for approval. The Zoning Administrator shall place the proposed Final Plat on the agenda for the next City Council which is no less than three (3) weeks later than the date of submission. No Final Plat application shall be considered complete unless that applicant shall have also submitted a revised Preliminary Plat which as been revised to reflect all required conditions of approval, a signed copy of the Development Agreement for the area subject to the Final Plat, shall have paid all bills due for processing of the Preliminary Plat, and has provided evidence of adequate financial security for completion of the construction work in the proposed plat. If the City Council determines it is MONTICELLO SUBDMSION ORDINANCE TITLE XI/Chapt 3/Page 2 e necessary, the final plat shall be filed with the City Clerk and submitted to the Planning Commission at least twenty (20) days prior to a Commission meeting at which consideration is requested. During the said twenty (20) days, the City staff shall examine the final plat and prepare a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Approval, disapproval, or any delay in decision of the final plat will be conveyed to the subdivider within ten (10) days after the meeting of the City Planning Commission at which such plat was considered. In case the plat is disapproved, the subdivider shall be notified in writing of the reason for such action and what requirements shall be necessary to meet the approval of the Commission. If the plat is disapproved, a waiting period of one hundred eighty (180) days shall lapse before another application can be filed on that tract of land. In cases where the preliminary plat is approved, the final plat must be filed within one (1) year of the preliminary plat approval or the approval is not valid. (#426,7/11105) e (B) AFPROV AL OF THE CITY COUNCIL: After review of the final plat by the Planning Commission, if necessary, such final plat, together with the recommendations of the Planning Commission, shall be submitted to the City Council for approval. The City Council has the option of requesting a public hearing if it is determined necessary on the final plat. If accepted, the final plat 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. (#8, 2/23/76) (C) RECORDING FINAL PLAT: If the final plat is approved by the City Council, the subdivider shall record it with the County Recorder within one hundred (100) days after said approval. If the subdivider fails to so record the final plat, the approval shall be considered void, unless a request for time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the City Council prior to the expiration of the one hundred (100) day period. The subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the City Clerk with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of recording. No building permits shall be let for construction of any structure on any lot said plat until the City has received evidence of the plat being recorded by the County. (#412,8/23/04) e (D) RECORDING OF MULTIPLE-PHASED PLATS: Ifa preliminary plat is final platted in stages, unless otherwise provided for in the development contract, all stages must be fmal platted into lots and blocks (not outlots) within three (3) 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 City Council prior to the expiration of the three (3) year period. (#412, 8/23/04) MONTICELLO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TITLE XVChapt 3/Page 3 & ~ <l <l = ] 1! e ~ ~ v ~ Jj Jj '" . e '" .... -< ...l !l. ~ Z ~ ...l ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ !l..... ~o ",0 ;,!::l - ~= z o ... .... ~ z o u ~ ~ E2 !l. X ~ lli o " z ~ ~ ~ = c: .~ .i;! ... g ';: " Ii 5. 'i3 ;a 8. ~ ~ ~ 0 ;> ~ ~ ~ = 3 .5 ~ ~ [ ~ ~ 'S OIl :3 !3 i ~ ~ ~ :6 .~ u ~ 5 ~ .g ~ ~o.::: ~]O!] Ii _" ~gi :;'4~~ l i ]i '" liS ~ ~ .Q .~ 0. ~ ~ - .e~..!!! ..!!!Q.,~::E ~ 0 cQo"s iijlllQ. A..(:~~ J] .9;=:.)~ ~ r ~ ~ ,~~... ~ 0 ~ e = ~u"'.-..,i5:....... SO; <-;;8: ~:~~f~~ll:~~':l ~i~ ~1)(~1'~ ~~;._~ ~~~ ;! .; ;;;. "", .. i ~ ~ ~ .~ 1j1J' .~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ t t '5 ~ ~ ~ ~~~]~~~~=.~~~;~~~~ ~-'2Q..!llIo~= !:le ~""'_1aN .!:l Q., U "'Cl S U c.. (ll '';: .::: ~ .E Q., '? i:: '"' Q:::; i':~"C;j"'''''o...5~~'a~ id~~ ~s ~~5cS""= 5:g:9 :>1:f);S~";j 1-0< !:lOll :Jsmu8fjrc;aQ'c..>..s- Q.,c"ffi.c..c. c:1g.~~~,?O:::R~gJ""":O ~i~:S!-l".ilu-a---~- !:l- u.,. -lJQ..Cl~<S<S ,.s~Lo..1ir''''' t':lQ. S>I!)lIlu 8...c:::"O... 9 B,gIl)V1..g~8Q]Jj!:l.s_=..:s ....... j .~ i "'Cl ~ < ~ Q., Q., s Q., ~ = Q. Q. e '5 ~'" s Ii ~ =;:> ""!2."o "~~.e 1~~fliiJJJ~J]Jfj] . .E . ~ " .9 '<l .. ~I '" 8 ""- Hi ~ .g <<: .- ~ ~ c::: ~ ... v = 0 l3 .;: 6 5 8 .8 go i5 .@ -E ~ ::;: ~ ~.g s:: ~ ~ B ~ .9 '" Ii '" <l ~ ~ .~ ~ .~ ~ ~B:~.8~ i)..8.... .s "0 '" ..s 19 ot> ~!~ii ~~BjQ ~ ] '5 J: ~ "0 -;; ~ ~ .s .~o- 0. 0 '" .. ;:> S ;:> ;:> U u -<: c.. U ~ O! ll"n - = ,Q c.. :a 3: =v ,.Q :::; '0..... (1) >-:I:: ~ [j ~~9<l "'O-6aC=:: e 5 'U lS '" ~ ~ '" ~ .~ ~ e '" (,) I'J ~ 1",~ ~ ~ i 8~~ ~ .@ ~ ~ ~ S~o.gg~ >ouoSQ:; ~ ..!S 1-0 A-. ~ a c;,; c.. '* l) ,.g == ~.5e~,~~ U>ViVl_< " ~ gf .... :::I .;:; ~~]~~s~ - a Ii t; !l :t I'J -ac.:g~~:5~ ~~:Cr;n.J~= ~ = ~ '" l~ E .3 c ~ c c E ;;; II s "E g- .go C2 [; . '" = - o " .1J = Cl:l Oiij (,) 0; '5 .g '55~ "~~ [ [~ 5 u> ~ U ~ :G 0 0 Q., 01) !Ll .:I .....l .- e"i31::ia-.~ ,(cS2..J ~ ~<.<.::>~~o x,.-1) ....~ 8c.5lU~~>~s e f!'"caCll'1jo-g~~~l::Q., ~ 0 -'a'- ~ 0 (,) v ~ =o~ J3 .~ .~ ~ ..:3 <il Q.. 5 aJ :5 == ~]]~(';iiiS8J: ~ ~ "E J5 <3 ~ ~ S .S .6 0_'" II ,2 1 ~ e ~ c.. ~ g.u=~ ~~&i= ~~~~~ <<I 0 :E U -. 'C '0 ..~ a ~ ~~G&:E ~ II s g- o 8 t; ::l ~..J Z 0 ,,= _ v <30 ... ~ ~888 g 888 g gg gg 8gSgg 88888 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N e e e Planning Commission Agenda - 11/06/07 9. Consideration to review for recommendation proceedinl! with a ReQnest for Proposal for a Natural Resource Inventory. (AS) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission has received a working draft of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan update for review and conunent. The draft is subject to change pending Commission, Council and public input. Plans for future land use are a primary component of the preliminary comprehensive plan draft. The land use concepts presented in the document are a result of conununity conunents and those from policymakers and staff. One of the conunon themes, particularly among citizens, was the protection, preservation and enhancement of parks and open space. As a result, the comprehensive plan presents conceptual ideas for future open space planning, including a specific chapter on Parks. The Land Use chapter references conservation design and building greenway connections within the city. The Land Use chapter also discusses strategies for incorporating conservation design into new developments, where appropriate. In support of accomplishing the vision for open space outlined within the draft plan, the Planning Framework Chapter has detailed the completion of a Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) as a "Next Step". NRls are defined as a set of natural resource information for a given geographic area. The NRl most often includes a series of maps and analysis information on land, water and air resources. In building an NRl for a conununity, consultants use existing data resources, such as DNR inventories, and combine them with field research and new analysis. An NRl is an important foundation tool in conununity planning. NRls assist a conununity in defining which areas are most critical for preservation or conservation and which are best suited to traditional development patterns. Though at first glance, Monticello's cache of natural resources may seem limited, as the city continues to grow and expand, there are numerous natural features that will be impacted, including lakes, streams, wetland complexes and mature forests. Identifying the location and quality of these resources, then developing a plan to protect them or to incorporate them appropriately into development will become more critical as the City continue to grow. The ability to protect natural resources also affects fiscal and service quality for the conununity, as development decisions regularly impact ground water and other natural resources citizens may depend on. City staff is requesting that the Commission consider proceeding with a request for proposals for the completion of an NRl for Monticello. Regardless of how ideas about land use may change as the comp plan is completed, the identification of the resources present in the Monticello area is important in laying the groundwork for future zoning ordinance revisions and for more specific development planning. I Planning Commission Agenda - 11106/07 If the Commission chooses to recommend that the RFP process move forward, the next step will be to request formal approval from Council. If approved, the City will prepare the RFP e and a schedule for the review and selection of a proposal. BUDGET IMPACT This item has been included in the preliminary budget for 2008 at an estimate of $20,000. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to recommend that the City of Monticello proceed with a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a Natural Resource Inventory. 2. Motion to recommend that the City of Monticello not proceed with a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a Natural Resource Inventory at this time. 3. Motion of other. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The City Administrator and Community Development Coordinator support alternative 1 above. The draft comprehensive plan specifically outlines this process as a next step in achieving the outcomes of the plan. Although the plan is still preliminary, the results of an NRI would essentially lay the groundwork for future land use planning. The results would also help the Planning Commission as it undertakes the complete revision of the Zoning Ordinance, as it may consider incorporating natural resource design principles in the construction of the document. e SUPPORTING DATA A. Excerpt - Working Draft, Monticello Comprehensive Plan Update B. MnDNR - Natural Resource Guidance Checklist C. Metropolitan Council- Natural Resource Inventory Facts D. Case Study for Natural Resource Planning - Blaine E. Case Study for NRI - Goodhue County, MN e 2 e e e 9A and the zoning regulations act in concert to manage land use. The zoning regulations do not specifically require the City Council or Planning Commission to consider relevant provisions of the Comprehensive Plan as part of the review of proposed amendments to zoning regulations. Acquisition and Disposition of Public lands According to State Law (M.S. Section 462.356, Subd. 2), publicly owned land within the City cannot be ac- quired or disposed of until the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and reported in writing to the City Council as to the compliance of the proposed action with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council may, by resolution adopted by two-thirds vote, dispense with this requirement when it finds that the proposed acquisition or disposal of real property has no relation- ship to the Comprehensive Plan. Construction of Public Improvements The Comprehensive Plan guides capital improvements by all political subdivisions. No capital improvements shall be authorized by the City (and its subordinate units) or any other political subdivision having jurisdic- tion within Monticello until the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and reported in writing to the City Council as to the compliance of the proposed action with the Comprehensive Plan (M.S. Section 462.356, Subd. 2). As with land transactions, this requirement can be dispensed by Council resolution if the capital improvement has no relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. Provision of Financial Assistance Tax increment financing is the only finance tool for- mally tied to the Comprehensive Plan. State Law requires that the City find that a TIF plan conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. As a matter of policy, similar evaluation should apply to other forms of public financial assistance. In agreeing to provide financial as- sistance to private development, it is reasonable that the City Council determines that the development furthers the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Next Steps Updating the Comprehensive Plan is one step in the ongoing process of guiding development and public investments. The Comprehensive Plan identifies a series of next steps in this process. Zoning Ordinance A priority should be given to the review and updating of zoning regulations. This vision and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan will not be achieve unless zoning regulations are aligned with the Plan. Outside of the seven-county metropolitan area, zoning regulations control the use of land, regardless of their consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Subdivision Regulations Subclivision regulations are another important land use management tool for the City. These regulations should be reviewed to identify and adopt changes that enhance the ability to implement the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the review of the subdivision regulations should focus on compliance with current State Law, support for zoning regulations, protection of natural resources, and dedication of park land. Park Dedication Ordinance The statutory power to require the dedication of park land is an essential tool for implementing the Compre- hensive Plan. The park dedication ordinance should be updated to provide consistency with the Comprehen- sive Plan and compliance with current State Law. Natural Resources Inventory A natural resources inventory (NRI) would identify the type, location and significance of natural features in Monticello and the orderly annexation area. Informa- tion from a NRl is invaluable in: ~ Identifying areas of environmental significance that need public protection. ~ Coordinating development proposals with the natural environment. ~ Planning for a greenway system around Monti- cello. 2008 Comprehensive Plan (DRAFT - October 2007) Planning Framework I 1-7 3. Traffic. Institutional uses should be oriented to designated collector or arterial streets. 4. Lighting and signage. Site lighting and signage needs may resemble commercial uses. These site factors should be managed to fit the character of the surrounding residential development. Urban Reserve The Urban Reserve contains all property in the Orderly Annexation Area that it not shown for development in the near term in this Plan. The objective is to encourage rural and agricultural uses, preventing barriers to future development opportunities. It is anticipated that the City will grow into portions of the Urban Reserve as planned land use areas become fully developed and ca- pacity for future growth in needed. The Urban Reserve is not simply a holding area for future development. Parts of the Urban Reserve are likely to be preserved as natural resource areas or for agricultural purposes. Future planning will consider the locations in the Urban Reserve best suited for development. Infrastructure This category applies to Xcel Energy's power plant and railroad right-of-way. This category recognizes the unique role of the power plant in Monticello. Greenway The Land Use Plan Map shows a "potential greenway" ringing the western and southern edges of Monticello. The Greenway is intended to provide an environmental corridor that connects large community parks and open spaces to neighborhoods, schools, shopping areas and places to work. They serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas such as natural habitat, wetlands, tree canopy, and drainage ways. Land within this corridor could be comprised of a combination of public and pri- vate open space. Development would not be prohibited within the greenway but would be reasonably restricted to ensure that development is carefully integrated with the natural environment. The Greenway is intended to shape development pat- terns in a manner that is sensitive to the existing en- e vironment and harmonious with the landscape. The Greenway creates opportunities for a continuous trail corridor connecting neighborhoods with large parks and open spaces. A trail within this corridor is intended to be fully accessible to tile general public. The following are tile City's goals for the Greenway: 1. To provide (where possible) a continuous green corridor connecting large community parks and open spaces to neighborhoods, shopping areas, schools and places to work. 2. To connect people to significant places. 3. To protect tile community's natural resources (trees, ponds, wetlands, slopes, etc). 4. To create environmentally sensitive development and design. 5. To provide opportunities for corridors for wildlife movement and ecological connections between natural areas. Focus Areas e For certain parts of Monticello, the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan cannot be adequately described solely with the land use map and the related category descriptions. The following Focus Areas provide a more detailed examination of the plans and issues in key loca- tions that will shape the future of Monticello. Northwest Monticello This focus area includes the entire northwest corner of the community. The land use objectives in this area include: 1. Encourage development in this part of the com- munity to utilize infrastructure investments and to provide the capacity to develop in high amenity areas, 2. Provide for a variety of housing alternatives based on the natural features and the surrounding land uses. Areas with high natural amenities or proxim- ity to the planned regional park should be reserved for move up housing. 3. Expansion of existing Places to Work in a manner that creates more "head of household" jobs. e 2008 Comprehensive Plan (DRAFT - October 2007) land Use I 3-15 e e e Figure 3-4: Life Cycle of Housing Supply City may be needed to promote the creation of housing in underserved segments of the market. 2008 Comprehensive Plan (DRAFT. October 2007) Neighborhood Design A priority for the community is diversification of the housing stock by providing more "move up" housing. In this context, the term "move up" housing refers to larger homes with more amenities in structure and setting. This type of housing may not be exclusively single-family detached or low density. Attached forms of housing with medium or high densities may meet the objectives for move up housing in the appropriate loca- tions. In this way, the objectives for move up housing and life cycle housing are compatible and supportive. While every community wants a high quality housing stock, this issue has particular importance in Mon- ticello. It is a key to retaining population. Without a broader variety of housing options, families may encouraged to leave Monticello to meet their need for a larger home. It is a factor in economic development. One facet of attracting and retaining professional jobs is to provide desirable housing alternatives. It must be recognized that creating move up housing requires more than policies in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan provides a guide for achiev- ing the desired results. The desired outcomes require private investment. This investment occurs when demand exists or the City can provide an incentive to attract investment. Part of attracting move up housing comes from cre- ating great neighborhoods - places that will attract and sustain the housing options sought by the City. Neighborhoods are the building block of Places to Live in Monticello. The goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to create and maintain attractive, safe and functional neighborhoods. The following policies help to achieve this objective: 1. Neighborhoods should incorporate the natural characteristics of the setting. Trees, terrain, drainageways, and other natural features provide character to the place. 2. Housing should be oriented to the local street, minimizing access and noise conflicts with collec- tor streets. land Use I 3.7 3. The City will use public improvements to enhance the appearance and character of a neighborhood. Some examples of improvements that define an area include streets with curb and gutter, trees in the public boulevard, street lighting systems, and storm water ponding. 4. Sidewalks, trails, and bikeways will connect the neighborhood to other parts of the community. 5. Every neighborhood should have reasonable access to a public park as a place for residents to gather and play. All of these elements work together to create a desirable and sustainable place to live. Balancing the Built and Natural Environments The natural amenities of the growth areas (west and south) in Monticello should serve as a catalyst for residential development. The proposed regional park (YMCA property) offers the dual assets of natural fea- tures and recreational opportunities. Lakes, wetlands and other natural amenities exist throughout the or- derly annexation area. Studies have shown that parks and open space have a positive economic effect on adjacent development. An article published by the National Park and Recreation Association states that "recent analyses suggest that open spaces may have substantial positive impacts on surrounding property values and hence, the property tax base, providing open space advocates with con- vincing arguments in favor of open space designation and preservation:' Balancing the built and natural environments should provide a catalyst to the types of development desired by the City and in the expansion of the property tax base. In attempting to meet residential development obj ec- tives, the City should not lose sight oflong-term public benefit from access to these same natural areas. The original development of Monticello provides an ex- cellent illustration. The majority of the riverfront in Monticello is controlled by private property. Public access to the River comes at points provided by public parks. - . .. Figure 3-5: Relationship Between Development and Natural Feotures - Parkway e Figure 3-6: Relationship Between Development and Natural Features - Trail Corridor e A well known example of balancing public use with private development is the Minneapolis chain of lakes and Minnehaha Creek. Public streets (parkways) and trails separate neighborhoods from the natural features, preserving public use and access. These neighbor- hoods are some of the most desirable in the region, demonstrating that public use and private benefit are not mutually exclusive. The figures below show two options for integrating housing, natural features and public use. Figure 3-5 is the parkway concept. An attractive street forms the edge between the park (or natural area) and the hous- ing. A multi-use trail follows the street while homes face the street and draw on the attractiveness of both the parkway and the natural amenities. e City of Monticello e e e Figure 3-7: Example af Conservation Design Development (Chevalle - Chaska, MN) The alternative is to use a trail corridor to provide public access to these areas (see Figure 3-6). The trail follows the edge of the natural area. Access to the trail between lots should come at reasonable intervals. There are a variety of real world examples of how Min- nesota cities have used conservation design strategies to promote high quality development and preserve the natural environment. The illustrations in Figure 3-8 shows elements of the Chevalle development in Chaska. Using open space design and rural residential cluster development techniques, HKGi's concept plan provides for a variety of housing options while preserving a ma- jority of the area as permanent open space, including public and common open spaces. Amenities would include access to protected open spaces (lakeshore, woods, meadows, pastures, wetlands), walking/biking trails, equestrian trails and facilities, common outdoor structures and an environmental learning center. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan (DRAfT - OClober 2007) experience of other cities and developments can guide future planning and decision making in Monticello. Attractive Places Attractive physical appearance is one of the most common attributes of Places to Live in Monticello. Attractiveness is a combination of design, construc- tion and maintenance. These characteristics apply to buildings and sites. Attractiveness is relevant for both private and public property. Attractiveness reflects individual pride in property as well as an overall sense of community quality. The City may use a variety of regulatory tools to influ- ence the potential for attractive neighborhoods: ~ Building codes and additional regulations to pro- mote quality construction. ~ Subdivision regulations control the initial configu- ration ollots. Land Use I 3-9 ~ Zoning regulations establish limitations on the size oflots, placement of the house on a lot, relationship of structure size to lot area, and building height. Nuisance ordinances enable the City to prevent and correct undesirable uses of property. ~ Other City regulations control other ancillary uses of residential property. Maintenance of property is a factor in sustaining quality neighborhoods. The tenure (form of ownership) influ- ences the responsibility for housing maintenance. The owner-occupant of a single family detached home is solely responsible for the maintenance of building and grounds. If this same home is rented, maintenance responsibilities are often shared between tenant and owner. This relationship may include a third party property manager retained by the owner to perform maintenance duties. Owners of attached housing may act collectively through a homeowners association. In multiple family rental housing, the tenants have no direct responsibility for property maintenance. This discussion does not imply a preference, but is intended solely to highlight the differences. This understanding becomes relevant when public action is needed to ad- dress a failure of the private maIntenance approach. Nuisance ordinances are one tool used by the City to address failures in private maintenance and use of property. Economics also influences property maintenance. The greater the portion of income devoted to basic housing costs (mortgage/rent, taxes, utilities), the less money available for maintenance activities. Maintenance can be deferred, but not avoided. If left unchecked, this cycle of avoided maintenance produces negative effects. Safe Places Safety is frequently identified as the most desired characteristic of Place to Live. Several aspects of the Comprehensive Plan and city government influence safe neighborhoods. 1. The City will encourage a community and neigh- borhoods where people are involved in the com- munity, interact with their neighbors and support each other. 2. The City will design, build and maintain a system of streets that collects traffic from neighborhoods, allows movement within Monticello to jobs, shop- ping and other destinations and minimizes traffic that "cuts through" neighborhoods on local streets seeking other destinations. 3. The City will provide, directly or by contract, ser- vices needed to protect people and property. 4. The City will support the Land Use Plan with a water supply that provides clean water at pressures needed to support fire suppression. 5. The City will protect the natural environment by requiring new development to connect to the sanitary sewer system and by adequately treating all municipal wastewater. e Places to Work This land use is primarily intended for industrial de- velopment. Places to Work seeks to provide locations for the retention, expansion and creation of businesses that provide jobs for Monticello residents and expan- sion and diversification of the property tax base. In order to be a center of employment with a wide range of job opportunities, it is critical that Monticello preserve sufficient land for Places to Work over the next twenty-five years. These land uses can be one of the most challenging to locate because of its need for convenient transportation access and influence on surrounding land uses. In planning for future Places to Work, the Comprehensive Plan considers the goals of the community; what type of industrial development is sought; and what factors should be considered when locating an industrial land use. e In planning for sustaining existing businesses and at- tracting new development, it is necessary to understand why Places to Work are important to Monticello. The objectives for this land use include: ~ Expanding and diversifying the property tax base. ~ Providing jobs with an increasing opportunity for people to work and live in Monticello. ~ Promoting wage levels that provide incomes need- ed to purchase decent housing, support local busi- nesses and support local government services. e - City of Monticello e e e 9f'/ Minnesota Department of Natural Resource - Natural Resource Guidance Checklist Natural Resource Inventory and Analysis for City or County 8 Why Use This Checklist? This checklist is for a Natural Resource Inventory and Analysis, covering a fairly large land area (e.g., the whole city or county). This kind of inventory is useful to the local unit (e.g. city or county government) in developing policies, informing land use decisions, and identifying areas for natural resource conservation and management. A natural resource inventory should be done at least every 10 years or sooner if the resources have changed significantly. A. Purpose o What is the intended purpose or use for this natural resource inventory and analysis? For example, is its intended use one of the following and how does that suggest what it should entail? o to guide development of goals and strategies for resource conservation and management o to identify priorities for resource conservation o to evaluate current natural resource management practices o to guide policy development o to provide information for parks, open space, trails and/or greenway planning o What are the specific products which the inventory needs to produce to be useful? (e.g. maps, data sets, etc - see section F below) o How will specific inventory scope, methods and products be chosen to help the community answer its questions, address its issues, and progress towards sound decision making? B. Context Larger landscal'e Some natural resource issues are best addressed in the context of the larger landscape, often across jurisdictional boundaries. o What needs and opportunities exist to address key issues at a larger scale? (e.g., at a watershed level) o Have larger landscape patterns been addressed (e.g. using the Ecological Classification System - see box on next page) and how might that information be used to suggest opportunities and needs to coordinate with other communities in the same zones? o What are the economic, social and/or ecological roles of natural areas, commercial forestry lands, and/or agricultural lands, both within the municipality and among municipalities and counties? NR Checklist Series This is one of a series of "checklists" produced for local units of government (LUG) by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Metro Region. Each checklist is intended to help the community integrate natural resources into a particular type of local policy or plan. Each checklist is an outline of key components of a typical LUG planning document with important natural resource- related questions to consider and some examples, definitions, and references. See Another Checklist natural area management plan Once a site is identified for a specific use, a more detailed inventory and management plan tailored to that use is needed. This finer scale is addressed in the "Natural Area Management Plan" Checklist. Definition natural area a site largely unaltered by modem human activity, where vegetation is distributed in naturally occurring patterns. Natural Resource Guidance Checklist - Natural Resource Inventory & Analysis for City or County - December 2001 1 Community values Resources e 0 What is known about local values and concerns regarding natural resources? DNR web pages 0 Is this inventory process coordinated with a community Many natural resource data layers, including native plant communities participation or visioning process in which local people are mapped by the Minnesota County identifying the importance they place on natural resources? Biological Survey, are available on 0 Are such processes being used to help give direction or identify the "data deli" at priorities for natural resource conservation? deILdnr.state.mn.us. Information about rare species, C. Inventory Content native plant communities, and land Natural resources to be inventoried protection options are available on The community needs to develop a list of the types of natural the DNR's web site at resources whose locations and characteristics should be identified www.dnrstate.mn.us/ecological_se and mapped in the natural resource inventory. The decision on rvices/nhnrp. which resources to inventory should be based upon which natural resources are most important to the local economy and its citizens and/or it may be ones most unique and/or threatened. Natural Definition resources which may be inventoried include the following (with native plant community more specifics provided on some of these in the next sections): A group of native plants (plants 0 existing land cover, including the types of forests, wetlands, indigenous to the site) that interact other types of vegetation, agricultural lands, impervious with each other and their abiotic environment in ways not greatly surface, etc. altered by modem human activity or 0 significant or sensitive native plant communities (see below) by introduced organisms. e 0 ecological landscapes (e.g., using the Ecological Classification System) 0 species that are endangered, threatened or of special concern Resources (see below) Ecological Classification System 0 game and non-game wildlife and wildlife habitat (ECS) 0 forest resources (see below) The ecological land classification is 0 wetlands, rivers, streams, and lakes part of a nationwide mapping 0 surface and groundwater quantity and quality system developed to improve our 0 soil types and suitabilities ability to manage natural resources 0 landforms, such as hills, streams, and watersheds on a sustainable basis. It is a 0 geological hazards, such as floodplains, highly erodible soils, method to identify, describe, and and areas of karst geological formations map progressively smaller areas of 0 aggregate resources, such as sand and gravel deposits land of increasingly uniform ecological characteristics. 0 mineral resources, including precious and ferrous minerals Associations of biotic and 0 local energy sources environmentai factors that directly 0 greenways and habitat connections between sensitive areas affect or indirectly express 0 status ofland conservation (e.g., public ownership as protected differences in energy, moisture, and open space and/or as park, emollment in CRP, etc.) nutrient suppiies are used. These 0 existing trails and public accesses and their distribution relative factors include ciimate, geology, to human populations topography, soil, hydrology and vegetation. e Natural Resource Guidance Checklist - Natural Resource Inventory & Analysis for City or County - December 2001 2 e e e Native ulant communities o Does the inventory identify locations of native plant communities in both upland and lowland areas? o Does the native plant community inventory incorporate these basic standards? o Make use of Minnesota County Biological Survey (MCBS) data. New information should be incorporated using an adapted version of their methodology. o Standard names for plant communities, etc. should be used. o An ecological quality ranking, such as that described in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) handbook, should also be assigned to each native plant community location (polygon). Rare suecies o Does the inventory identify locations of state listed species (endangered, threatened and special concern)? Forest resources Forest resources include any rural forest lands (e.g., native forest communities, woodlands, plantations, etc.) as well as urban forests (trees within towns and developed areas such as those along streets, on public property and in private property). o What are the community's forest resources that should be inventoried? For example, does it include resources such as the following? o native forests and woodlands (e.g. mesic oak forest, maple basswood forests, oak savanna, etc.) o plantations (e.g., managed for timber, Christmas trees, orchards, etc.) o woodlots, oldfields dominated by trees o trees on public (city and/or county, etc.) property (e.g., street trees) o historic or champion trees o hazard trees o What type and level of inventory is needed to address the forestry issues of concern? o For example, does an inventory of rural forests provide information such as the following? - site characteristics - composition and condition of existing stands - presence and condition of wildlife populations - presence of any historic or cultural features Resources Natural Heritage Information System and Minnesota County Biological Survey (MeBS) The Natural Heritage Information System provides information about rare species and native plant communities. The MCSS has collected these data for many counties. For a MCSS map of your county, call (651) 296-2835. For a printout of rare species and native piant community occurrences in your area, submit a completed data request form, available on the DNR web site (see box below) or by calling (651) 296-7863. To obtain rare species data electronically, call (651) 296-7863. Electronic native plant community data are available on the DNR's "data deli' (see box at top of previous page). Resources standard names for plant communities see Minnesota's Native Veoetation: A Kev to Natural Communities. MnDNR, Natural Heritage Program. 1993. Resources native plant communities A regional plant ecologist with the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program can provide information about the Ecological Classification System, original vegetation, existing natural areas, and native rare plants and animals in your area. In the greater Twin Cities metro area, call 651-772- 7570. Natural Resource Guidance Checklist - Natural Resource Inventory & Analysis for City or County - December 2001 3 Soecial concerns In addition to examining particular natural resource characteristics, the community may want to investigate issues of special concern that may be affecting or impacting natural resources. Some of these can only be assessed through field survey work and ground- truthing. Depending on the purpose of the inventory they might include: o invasive-exotic species o tree canopy cover o impervious surface o forest health problems o fIfe-prone property o water management D. Inventory Methodology Methodolol!V The methods used should be based on a standard protocol suitable for the scale and purpose of the inventory. o Does the inventory methodology incorporate these basic standards? o It combines delineation ofland cover on infrared aerial photos/digital orthoquads (DOQs) and field checking and/or uses other data layers which are geo-referenced to DOQs. o The information is digitized and incorporated into a geographic information system (GIS). o The inventory is done by trained natural resource professionals and ecologists familiar with the particular Minnesota natural resources to be inventoried. o Should the inventory incorporate a method being used by other communities within the region (e.g., the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System) to assist with sharing data and coordination? Existing information Design the inventory to gather missing information or improve the usefulness of existing data (e.g., National Wetlands Inventory, soil data, etc.). o How will the format of newly-collected information be integrated with existing information? o How will both be used? E. Analysis Conducting analvses on inventorv data Once the inventory data is collected, it is used for conducting various analyses based upon the intended purpose for this work. e e Resources Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) is a new GIS-based inventory method useful in providing land cover information for land use decision making which is being used throughout the Twin Cities Metro Region. It uses aerial photo interpretation and ground truthing to deveiop a GIS data layer with detailed native plant community and cultural land cover mapping to 1-2 acre polygon resolution. Contact MnDNR, Metro Region, bart. richardson(a)dn r.state .mn. us. e Natural Resource Guidance Checklist - Natural Resource inventory & Anaiysis for City or County. December 2001 4 . . . Analysis could be done on the following: o existing habitat for particular wildlife o potential greenway connections (for natural habitat and/or recreation purposes) o opportunities for native plant community or habitat restoration (see below) o areas needing vegetation management (e.g., street tree pruning or prairie burning or weed control) o wildfire risk assessment o overall state of natural resource health (e.g., including insect and disease problems, invasive exotic species, etc.) o threats to unique plant communities o lands with natural resource-based economic resources (e.g., tree farms, gravel pits, etc.) Conservation/nreservation areas The community may want to conserve or protect from development areas such as commercial forest lands, agricultural lands, and/or significant natural areas. o Does the analysis include identifying areas which the community would like to conserve and protect from development? o Has the following information been identified for these areas to conserve? o specific sites for different types of conservation or protection o specific land protection tools, such as conservation easements, conservation overlay districts, etc. for each parcel o preliminary management goals, objectives, and/or recommendations for each parcel. F. Results Products Typically, the most useful products of a natural resource inventory and analysis are coordinated sets of computer databases and GIS map layers which are compatible with the tools used by the local unit for planning and management purposes. This allows for the natural resource information (data layers) to be easily accessed, frequently used, and as needed updated by local staff. o What products will make the results of this inventory and analysis most useful to the local unit? o Which of these typical products should be included? o a series of GIS data layers and maps (and related databases), e.g. on: - land cover type (with each polygon mapped and Natural Resource Guidance Checklist - Natural Resource Inventory & Analysis for City or County - December 2001 5 referenced to a table of attributes) - soils, by type - wetlands, by type and jurisdiction - lakes, by state shoreland management classification - agticulturalland, by productivity class - lands enrolled in a conservation reserve program forest cover, by type, age and condition steep slopes (e.g., greater than 12 percent) - flood plains - important plant and animal habitats o a description ( written narrative) on the community's major and most unique natural features :I brief lists of key elements, e.g. dominant species or rare species found in community o a discussion (written narrative) of issues, problems, threats, etc. related to natural resources o recommendations, priorities, or next steps (see below) Using the results Depending on the purpose of the inventory and analysis, the [mal report or product may suggest additional uses for this information. Additional uses could include: o developing a set of goals and strategies for resource conservation and management for the overall area, as well as specific goals and strategies for key natural resource areas o identifying priorities for natural resource management and/or conservation, and/or protection (e.g., this could involve rating or ranking conservation of areas or features with consideration given to factors, such as, how imminent is the loss or destruction of the resource, relative rarity of the resource, community values, economic or commodity value of the resource, etc.) o evaluating current development patterns and practices (e.g., how well are natural systems and the services they provide being maintained or restored? Are renewable resources being managed in a sustainable way?) o guiding local policy development (e.g., how would the information be used in comprehensive planning, development review, recommendations for future growth patterns, etc.?) o providing information for parks, open space, trails, and greenway planning. . . Reference This checklist includes ideas from "Under Construction: Tools and Techniques for Local Planning' Minnesota Planning. 2002. e Natural Resource Guidance Checklist. Natural Resource Inventory & Anaiysis for City or County. December 2001 6 00 e ~ Metropolitan Council Natural Resources Inventory 1ft Region has strong our underground water To make sound decisions ~ resource base sources, provide habitat and about resource protection, the (.) The abundance of natural serve other important natural region needs to know where ~ resources in the T V\1n Cities functions remain undeveloped regionally significant natural metropolitan area is one of the and/or have not been acquired resources are located. for public use. Opportunities region's greatest assets. Three to conserve these natural lands The Council and the Minne- m rivers, a thousand lakes, become more expensive - and sora Department of Resources I- extensive wetlands, native less available - with each have developed a critical tool 0 prairies and woodlands, ptime passing year. in that effort. It is called the soils and aggregate are among Natural Resources Inventory ~ the resources that provide In Council surveys of metro and Assessment (NRl/ A). residents with valuable nature- area residenrs, the vast majority en based experiences and serve as agrees that "as areas develop, a key element in the regional governments should do more A resource inventory I- to protect natural features. " quality of life. The NRl/ A is a region-wide e (J geographic database and series ~ Strong growth poses Identifying areas of maps. The NRl/ A records for protection valuable information about potential threat land and water resources that: U) These resources are potentially The Metropoliran Council has . Perform significant I- threatened as the region developed an overall regional ecological functions. plan for accommodating (J continues to grow. The growrh called the 2030 Regional . Contain important habitat ~ Council forecasts that the Development Framework. for animals that are sensitive area's population will grow by nearly one million people The Framework and its to habirat fragmentation and between 2000 and 2030. supporting system plans for destruction. en Loss of open space has the transportation, water resources . Provide opportunities for I- and regional parks are directed people to experience nature potential to significandy (J impact our quality of life and at meeting the needs of current and the region's historical ~ wildlife habitat areas. and future residents, using landscapes. Buildings, roads, parking lots land sensibly and "preserving vital natural areas and The NRI/ A builds on existing and other changes to the resources for future information, such as Minnesota CD natural landscape promote the generations. " County Biological Survey dara, I- flow of polluted runoff into the to provide a comprehensive U region's lakes and streams. The Council works in concert look at natural resources. The ~ Important natural areas that with local communities to NRl/ A reveals that roughly e allow rainwater to replenish meet these goals. 100,000 acres of regionally Metropolitan Council . 390 N. Robert St. . St. Paul MN 55101 . Website: www.metrocounciLorg Phone: 651-602-1000 . TIY: 651-291-0904 . Data Center: 651-602-1140 . E-mail: data.centet@metc.state.mn.us significant natural lands remain unprotected in the metro area, compared to 280,000 acres of total natural lands and 1.9 million acres of land overall. Using the NRI/ A The Council is using the information from the NRl/ A to help promote and support the integration of natural resource protection in both local and regional planning. Natural resource planning is a required element of the local comprehensive plans developed by cities, though integration of the NRI, specifically, is not. However, the Council encourages local governments to use the NRl/ A as a tool in their comprehensive plans. Local governments can use the NRI/ A as a starting point to identify locally important resources and then take appropriate conservation measures. New development can be located and designed in such a way that preserves environmentally sensitive areas and thus benefit the natural environment. The Council is also using the NRI/ A as it plans to expand existing regional parks and acquire new ones. Other regional stakeholders, such as environmental groups, land trusts and others are encouraged to use the NRI/ A in making decisions about lands to protect. An electronic atlas The NRl/ A electronic adas is a collection of six GIS (geographic information systems) applications. These applications organize available natural resource data to provide users with a basic foundation for spatial information and analysis that can help guide discussion, planning and policy. The six applications include Natural Resource Protection (aquatic and terrestrial); Working Lands; Outdoor Recreation; Public Health and Safety; and Community Character. The adas is available on CD.ROM and comes with an instruction booklet. Over time the Council and DNR will update, in partnership with local communities, the NRl/ A Moving ahead The Council in 2004 estab. lished a Natural Resources Task Force. It charged the task force with developing a coordinated conservation program to protect regionally important natural resource areas and wildlife corridors of regional importance in the seven-county metropolitan area. e The taSk force had 14 representatives from the private and public sectors with expertise in natural resource protection. It met from March 2004 through early 2005, and issued a report in March 2005. The report made a variety of findings, conclusion and recommendations. Read the report at: httD:I /www.metrocouncil.ow/ resources/resources.h tIn e For more information . To learn more: Contact Ann Beckman at the Council, at 651-602-1669. . Related fact sheets: . Re~ional Parks . Watet Resources Planninu Pub. 14-05-052 June 2005 e Metropolitan Council. 390 N. Robert St. . St. Paul MN 55101 . Website: www.metrocouncil.org Phone: 651-602-1000 . TIY: 651-291-0904 . Data Center. 651-602-1140 . E-mail: data.centeJ@metc.state.mn.us 91/ e Case Study A natural-resource based town plan: Integrating community growth and open space goals in Blaine, Minnesota Excerpt from Community Redesign integrating land use, transportation, and natural resources e e Design Center for American Urban Landscape College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture lINI\'ERSI1Y or !\II'\NESOTA Design Center Project Team, Community Redesign Handbook: e Regina Bonsignore, Senior Research Fellow Jeffrey L. Miller, Research Fellow Matthew R. Finn, Research Specialist Franklin Fitzgerald, Daniel Marckel, Nancy Miller, Wira Noeradi, Carol Swenson Heather Wainwright, Dave Zaffrann Design Center Project Teams, Case Studies: Humboldt Avenue Catherine R. Brown, Roger Howley, Mike Kelly, Daniel Marckel, William Marquez, William R. Morrish Northwest Corridor Partnership and Brooklyn Blvd. & Hwy. 81 Tiago Carvalho, Matthew R. Finn, Frank Fitzgerald, Daniel J. Marcket Laurie McGinley, Jeffrey L. Miller, Nancy Miller, William R. Morrish, Wira Noeradi, Carlos Pinto, Gia Pionek, Ray Rindahl, Heather Wainwright, Dan lNhittaker Consultants: Fred Docl<, Rob Lucklow, Ramana Murthy Kotil Jaimison Sloboden Near Northside, Minneapolis Regina Bonsignore, Catherine R. Brown, Ron Haselius, Roger Howley, Gayla Lindt, Louise Liu, Dan Marckel, William R. Morrish, Sam Olbekson, Todd Rhoades, Sarah Ruplin, Katherine Solomonson, Don Vehige, Craig Wilkins Consultants: John ZeiseL GME Consultants Ine, Gary Meyer Nicollet Avenue Frank Fitzgerald, Wira Noeradi, Ryan Siemers, Brandon Stengel, Carol Swenson, Heather Wainwright Consultants: Craig Churchward, Fred Dock, James Jencks,:Mike Kotila, Ramana Murthy Keti Northeast Blaine Dax Bennett, Regina Bonsignore, Katherine Colla, Frank Fitzgerald, Santosh George, Diane Hellekson.,. Wira N oeradi, Carol Swenson, Jason Zimmerman Consultants: Martha Brand, Julie Marekel e Farmington Regina Bonsignore, Catherine R. Brown, M. Elizabeth Fitzsimons, Harrison Fraker, Thomas A. Hammerberg, William R. Morrish, R. G. 5chunn Consultants: Eugene A. Hickok, Daniel M. Parks, Diana Balmon Assoc., Herbert Bormann North Metro 1-35W Corridor Coalition Dax Bennett, Regina Bonsignore, Matt Finn, Frank Fitzgerald, Steven Lai, Sinok Lao, Daniel Marckel, Laurie McGinley, Nancy Miller, William R. Morrish,. Wira Noeradi, Kim Peterson, Gia Pionek, Carol Swenson,. Heather Wainwright, Jason Zimmerman Consultants: Martha Brand, John Carpenter, Joe Di Stefano, Fred Dock, Janna King. Joel Koepp, Ramana Murthy Koti, Barbara Raye, Nancy Reeves and Associates, Tim Rood, Jaimison Sloboden Coalition Consultants: Robert Benke, Phil Cohen, Nancy Reeves, Joseph Strauss, Shannon Strauss @ October, 2002 Design Center for American Urban Landscape College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota Photographs and images in this book were generated by the Design Center for American Urban Landscape unless otherwise noted. These images may be used without permission for non-profit educational purposes, with attribution. Permission is also granted for non-profit educational purposes for reproduction of all or part of written material, except that reprinted with permission from other sources. Acknowledgment is required and the Design Center for American Urban Landscape requests two copies of any material thus produced. Funding for this project was provided by the McKnight Foundation. Additional funding for this study and other Design Center publications is made possible through support from the University of Minnesota and the Dayton Hudson Foundation. The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its pro- grams, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion,. national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation. e . . . Case Study A natural-resource based town plan: Integrating community growth and open space goals in Blaine, Minnesota Assessing the Place Located on the edge of the urban service area, this 6000 acre area is fifteen miles north of Minneapolis. Recent trends in the local development market and smart growth policies at the regional level moti- vated the City of Blaine to reevaluate its previous assumptions about development timing and land use patterns. Recognizing the importance of an area of this size, the City was interested in exploring the poten- tial of the area for a broader mix of land uses and home types than more conven- tional suburban development pattern. The City and its citizens also recognized the importance of the large wetland complexes and high quality woodlands that had been identified in a recent Natural Resources Inventory. '1............ J .~.~.... ,. " .... . ' ' . ,...:.... .... .... .......... .... ',' ....- Pattern of existing streets and natural areas, both woodlands and uplands Engaging Communities While more than half the area is comprised of wetlands and extensive sod fields, approximately 190 homes were already located on five to forty acre parcels. Includ- ing these landowners in the process was a high priority. Some wanted to know how soon they could develop; others wanted to know how development would affect them; while others were adamantly opposed to any change in the status quo of low-density, un-sewered residential. All were interested in an open process. The aerial photo shows the subtle terrain of the Anoka Sand Plain: small wooded hills surrounded by wetlands. Many of the wetlands were ditched and drained, now sod fields. while others remain, with rare remnants of pre-European settlement plant species. Case Study Town Scale: A Natural-Resource Based Town Plan 1 mile N Small groups of citizens worked to create scenarios that clustered residential development. Taking Inventory of the Landscape Located on the Anoka Sand Plain, this ancient lake bed is characterized by deep sands overlain by wetland soils interspersed with knolls that gently rise above the flat terrain. Gathering data on wetland locations became the key to under- standing what could happen in the area, in terms of development potential. Though the area has a relatively high water table, the area can be built on, as long as homes are raised above the 100 year flood elevation. Wetlands are more of a constraint, according to local watershed manag- ers, because if filled, they would need to be replaced at a two for one acre replacement rate. Locating and evaluating the natural resources was critical to this planning process. The city sought and received matching funds for a con- sulting firm to conduct a natural resource inven- tory that was to guide future open space and greenway acquisitions in the community. The inventory reviewed historic data, existing maps and field reviewed many parcels that showed potential for harboring high quality natural areas or species. The areas were ranked, based on their resemblance to native plant communities. This information was overlaid on orthophotos, aerial photographs that are scaled for use with mapped data, that were provided at community work- shops. Presented in this manner, the development pattern could be shaped by the location of these pre-identified environmental resources. N~p""'in9"'" N- ''-/PubIllOlldt IB-"'" ISS1C11y~ardc.ns.:- "'JI'l_MdMllnll8" .MNCa.IItJ~s..v.y . BlUwNll\urlll~~ --- - _~A _Rank'" mRllnkB _RInB ;..RllnkC ~fRP:C '; .., u.-.u..f FUnk 0 ~- ;:-'lJr-.lualed _UpM:llnc:lullllnB DScxlF_ 2 . Eapublic,upland ~ private,wetland III public, Wiltland Bprivate,upland 1 mi. Wetland Inventory. This inventory combined data from various information sources to create the most accurate base map. for planning purposes, of land that was "developable" and land that was protected by wetland regulations. More detailed delineations would be required if a development application was submitted to the watershed district and city. (Source: City of Blaine Natural Resource Inventory 2000, Peterson Environmental) . ~N Natural Resource Inventory. This map is one of several information layers from an inventory that identified and rated the quality of remnant natural resources, including both upland and wetland plant communities. (Source: City of Blaine Natural Resource Inventory 2000, Peterson Environmental) . Community Redesign e e GIS Summary Map. Ovenaid on an aerial orthophoto. areas in light hatching are where at least three of the five groups placed development. Analyzing and Interpreting the Place This page shows how different interpretations and representations of data can contribute to a better understanding of different potential design scenarios. Small group work was summarized on a GIS map that served as an underlay for the diagram on the right. This diagram summarizes the small group work in a more graphic way, more in keeping with the imprecise nature of the information gathered. The information gathered became the basis for an open space and road network scenario that carries through the idea of a linear central open space corridor with develop- ment clustered on either side of it. e Case Study Town Scale: A Natura/~Resource Based Town Plan . , , . . r , , . Graphic Summary Map. The GIS data was analyzed and summarized to describe how the groups were generally describing four different districts. 3 Three scenarios. Each column represents a different approach to achieving open space, circulation, and land use goals. Parkway Loop Scenario , Neighborhood Network Scenario I e Exploring Design Scenarios Information gained from the Lochness Neighbor- hood workshops was applied to the Meadows Neighborhoods by the staff team. Residents and the city council reviewed the illustrations and the design principles that guided each alternative, as well as associated numbers, such as acreage and unit counts. Based upon their discussion of prefer- ences, a composite scenario for this area, as well as the other neighborhoods was proposed along with a set of overarching design principles and more detailed principles for each neighborhood. e Protect natural resources. Overarching Design Principles Protect and Restore Plan for urban services throughout. Natural Systems Development pays infrastructure costs. Diversify and Increase the Local Economy Designate areas for commercial! industrial uses. Enhance Homes and Neighborhoods Provide a diversity of residential types. Provide Travel Options Situate land uses in ways that support transit. 4 Foster Social Connections Create an interconnected roadway network. e Community Redesign e e tit Moving Forward The City of Blame submitted a comprehensive plan amendment that significantly increases the number of homes and businesses compared with their original fore- casts that assumed typical, larger lot single family residen- tial platting. By locating roadways and more intense development away from sensitive sites, the overall area can accommodate more people and preserve important natural areas and systems. Key ingredients to achieving the adoption of more sustainable development patterns were the following: Sample Guidelines: West Meadows Neighborhood Goal for Natural Features and Open Space: Design a connected system of preserved and created natural areas and parks throughout all land uses on the site that are accessible by trails linking to other existing open spaces. les: '., :::1 .: I:.. ....1..... . .......... ......:-....:.:.:.:....-1..: . ~ ~ ~ . Citizens had the opportunity to engage in hands-on planning and have an extended, substantive discussion about the future of their community. While some were not happy with the outcome, they were informed and involved in the process, rather than waiting until a public hearing to voice their concerns. A key result for property owners was an agreement by the current council that the costs for infrastructure improvements will be born by the development requesting the hook- up, rather than everyone in the area. Preserve woodlands where possible. . City staff and elected officials could see how develop- ment could look if guided by principles that begin with an open space framework to arrange a diversity of transit-supportive land uses. These principles have guided discussions and negotiations with a large scale development that came forward during the planning process. . The number of housing units increased and a greater diversity of land uses and housing types was accom- modated. The plan proposes to protect tracts of wood- lands that are adjacent to primary wetland corridors. Streets are connected, yet do not traverse high quality natural areas. .. . Create a system of linear lakes and larger ponds that are connected. . Design a primary park as a central community amenity. . Allow public access to the water along most edges. The city used the numbers generated from the design scenarios to formulate infrastructure plans. The scenarios were also used to illustrate a design guide book that was part of the comprehensive plan amendment. The guide- book spells out for each neighborhood more detailed design principles organized into three categories: natural features and open space, movement systems, and land use mix. In future negotiations with developers, the guide book will be a document that communicates the intentions and desires of the community for each of the four neigh- borhoods as they develop over time. . Locate new neighborhood parks along the parkway system; include dry areas for play. Case Study Town Scale: A Nafural.Resource Based Town Plan 5 rage I OI"- Home plans & Specs: Career.=: OpportUnltles Hrhcle,; who "/lie o".,re Locations J1t =100 ~ Anderlil<& "'1\11 AssocIatel" ...........- Natural Resources Surface Water Mgmt. Plans Greenways/Corridors Ponds Inventories Water Quality Restoration Wetlands e e 0E. Transportation Natural R.esour-ces Municipal Services GIS ConstnJction Services Recreational Facilities Wastewater Land Development land Survey Water ~ Landscape Architecture At'Chitecture Natural Resources Inventory Goodhue County, MN Situated between the continually growing areas of the Twin Cities and Rochester, Goodhue County set out to protect its natural resources in the face of impending development. The first step toward that goal was for us to conduct an inventory of the natural communities in the Lower Wells Creek Watershed. The project is the first phase of a much larger project that we began in July 1999, in which the natural communities for all of Goodhue County - more than 488,000 acres of land - will be inventoried. This is one of the largest inventories ever to be conducted by a private company in the Upper Midwest. The watershed includes 13,500 acres. Our services included: . Infrared aerial photo delineation . On-the-ground inventory . Report with site descriptions . Natural areas management/restoration recommendations . Opportunities for additional farm income that would be compatible with maintaining quality natural communities http://www.bonestroo.comlnaUnvent~oodhue.asp 10/29/2007 page L 01 L The inventory provides the Goodhue County Land Use Management Office with the technically sound information it needs to proactively identify and address potential concerns related to zoning, land use and protecting sensitive natural .. resources that include quality bluff prairies and a large tract - of forest. The inventory also provides the Wells Creek Watershed Partnership and the Mn/DNR with information to identify potential iand uses that will help diversify the local agricultural economy and strengthen the integrity of existing natural communities. A secondary goal is to restore a self- sustaining trout habitat. The project came with an extremely aggressive schedule - . we were done in just three months. We aiso helped write the Conservation Partners Grant that helped fund the inventory. Return to Top Main Office: Bonestroo I 2335 Highway 36 West, St Paul, MN 55113 I (800) 880-4700 I (55!) 636-4600 Terms & Conditions @2006 Bonestroo Contact: WebmJster e e http://www.bonestroo.comlnat_invent_goodhue.asp 10/2912007