Loading...
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - 03/07/2023MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, March 7, 2023 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: Paul Konsor, Andrew Tapper, Eric Hagen, Melissa Robeck Commissioners Absent: Teri Lehner Council Liaison Present: Charlotte Gabler Staff Present: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), Hayden Stensgard, and Ron Hackenmueller 1. General Business A. Call to Order Planning Commission Chair Paul Konsor called the regular meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. B. Consideration of approving minutes a. Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes —February 7, 2023 ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 712023 JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. b. Regular Meeting Minutes —February 7, 2023 ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 7, 2023 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. C. Citizen Comments None D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda None E. Consideration to approve agenda ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MARCH 7, 2023 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. 2. Public Hearings A. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Related to Retail Rental Uses Including, but not Limited to Definition, Zoning Districts and Standards Applicant: Michelle Rice City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. This item was brought forth after an inquiry from General Rental Center, an existing business in Monticello looking to expand operations into a new facility. It was found that retail uses specific to rental service was not included in the Zoning Code language. The requested text amendment would add language to include a rental aspect to the "retail commercial uses (other)" definition within the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Konsor asked if there are any additional, unforeseen items that would be allowed to be rented out with the proposed ordinance. Mr. Grittman clarified that the items currently allowed to be sold at a retail establishment by ordinance are the limitations to what can be rented. Councilmember Charlotte Gabler asked if Planned Unit Developments would be affected by this proposed ordinance. Mr. Grittman noted that it would depend on the language given to the specific Planned Unit Developments. If the PUD language included provision for "retail commercial uses (other)" or the base zoning district of the PUD allows "retail commercial uses (other)", it would then be permitted in the PUD. Councilmember Gabler asked if auto sales establishments within the city would be affected by the proposed ordinance. Mr. Grittman clarified that the auto sales establishments are classified as a separate use, and would not be affected by the proposed ordinance. Councilmember Gabler asked if staff and Planning Commissioners discussed amendments related to retail uses in 2022. Community Development Director Angela Schumann clarified that staff and Planning Commissioners did review potential amendments in 2022, and subsequently approved an ordinance amendment related to retail. The rental aspect of retail uses was not acknowledged at that time, nor at the time of adoption of the new code in 2011. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. PAUL KONSOR MOVED, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-07 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. X FOR AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO RETAIL RENTAL USES, SECTION 153.012, DEFINITIONS, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. ANDREW TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. Ms. Schumann noted the item was anticipated to be included in the City Council consent agenda at their regular meeting on March 271h, 2023. B. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello Lakes Planned Unit Development District affecting parking, accessory buildings, lot coverage, and related site impacts. Applicant: Monticello Lakes, LLC. Mr. Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. Originally approved by the City Council in December of 2021, the amendment request was specifically related to the removal of the approved resident parking garages on site. The amendment also addressed a change in the configuration of the clubhouse on site as well. An updated landscape plan was also included in the proposed changes, due to the added greenspace on site following garage removal. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-08 RECOMMENDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO LAKES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AMENDING THE APPROVED PLANS FOR SAID PUD, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION AND WITH CONDITIONS AS LISTED IN EXHIBIT Z OF THE STAFF REPORT OF MARCH 7, 2023. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. Ms. Schumann noted the item was anticipated to be included in the City Council consent agenda at their regular meeting on March 131", 2023. C. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan (Comprehensive Plan), Chapter 3, "Land Use, Growth and Orderly Annexation", Lq-guiding certain parcels from their existing Industrial designations to alternative Industrial, Employment, and Commercial categories, and amending_ the text of the Plan to add flexibility for implementation of the Plan's goals and land use obiectives. Applicant: City of Monticello Mr. Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. This item arose from a discussion related to item 2D of the current agenda, where the subject site does not meet the current land use guidance and zoning for the applicant's proposed use. It was then understood that the properties east of Edmonson Avenue, north of Chelsea Road and south of Interstate 94, as well as properties in the vicinity along the eastern side of Fallon Avenue NE, had Comprehensive Plan land use designations that did not match the companion zoning districts respective to each property. The request was directly related to correcting what staff believed to have been an error during the drafting of the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. The amendments requested are to re -guide the land use designation for the properties listed within the staff report from General Industrial, to Light Industrial Park or Regional Commercial, depending on the sites' current zoning district. Eric Hagen asked why the parcel at 108 Thomas Circle was not being considered to be re -guided as Regional Commercial. Mr. Grittman clarified that the reason this property was proposed to change designation from General Industrial to Light Industrial Park was due the current zoning district of the property is 1-1, Light Industrial District, which is reflective of the Light Industrial Park designation. Andrew Tapper did not agree with some of the parcels listed to be re -guided, as he felt certain parcels reflected the General Industrial designation more so than the proposed Light Industrial Park designation. Mr. Grittman noted that the intent of Light Industrial Park zoning designation is in part to act as a buffer between General Industrial and Regional Commercial designations. Though the existing uses on those properties may not reflect the designation, it is anticipated that as uses change, those properties would become more conforming with their respective designations and the transitional area in which they are located. Ms. Schumann added that the properties in question had been historically zoned 1-11 Light Industrial, and the land use designations are established as a guide for future uses on a given site. Councilmember Gabler asked what the guidance of the location for the new Wiha Tools facility is anticipated to be. Ms. Schumann clarified that the existing zoning district for the site is Industrial Business Campus (IBC), and the property's land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan is Employment Campus. Councilmember Gabler noted that it is reasonable to re -guide the properties but questioned whether the Employment Campus designation would be more fitting than the proposed Light Industrial Park designation. Ms. Schumann had clarified that the reason staff proposed re -guidance to Light Industrial Park was directly related to the current zoning districts of the properties. The 1-1, Light Industrial zoning district directly correlates to Light Industrial Park designation within the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Gabler asked where General Industrial is currently designated within the City. Ms. Schumann noted that the Oakwood Industrial Park is still a designated area for General Industrial, and there are pages within Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan that break down land use designations by acreage. One reason for the limitation of General Industrial guidance within the 2040 Plan is the city's focus on job and tax base creation, which occurs more often at a higher rate or density in Light Industrial Park and Employment Campus designations. Councilmember Gabler asked whether if it is necessary to continue including the General Industrial designation in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Schumann explained it is important to continue including General Industrial as a designation, due to the need for a designated location for business that fit the standards established by the designation in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tapper reiterated that he did not necessarily see the need to re -guide certain parcels away from General Industrial if the current uses on site reflect that designation. Mr. Grittman noted that the main differences between light and heavy industrial users has to do with external impacts of the use on a given site. Ms. Schumann also noted that land use guidance is the broad land use plan, but the existing zoning of a property is what controls the property in terms of uses and standards. The parcels in question to be re -guided to Light Industrial Park are already zoned the corresponding 1-1, Light Industrial. Mr. Konsor noted a page within Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan that uses Polaris as an example of a General Industrial use. Ms. Schumann noted that it is more likely that use is Light Industrial in nature, although it would also be allowed in General Industrial areas. Mr. Hagen noted that even though Polaris is an example of General Industrial, the guidance of the land could be different, due to the Comprehensive Plan acting as a future plan for property within the City. Mr. Tapper raised the question of why there is separate guidance for Light Industrial Park and General Industrial, and why those two are not bunched in to one designation. Mr. Hagen noted the broadness of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, with guidance like Places to Work,. Places to Shop, and Places to Live, then narrowing down of classification to what they are now provides a more established future plan for the City. The more detailed designation also provides potential businesses to easily understand where within the City their business would fit in with the long- term Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Konsor asked if all the parcels included in the discussion are currently zoned 1-1, Light Industrial. Ms. Schumann clarified that parcels proposed to be re - guided to Light Industrial Park are currently zoned 1-1, Light Industrial. The parcels proposed to be re -guided to Regional Commercial are currently zoned B- 4, Regional Business District. Ms. Schumann also noted that the detailed designations compared to designations in prior Comprehensive Plan is to address the fact that they also serve a purpose to promotes other sections and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Grittman reiterated that the amendments proposed include the changes to the Land Use Designation map in within Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan as well as a change the text within Chapter 3 to broaden the inclusivity of the Light Industrial Park designation to include both 1-1, Light Industrial, and IBC districts. Mr. Tapper asked if there is already a designation in the Comprehensive Plan that reflects the IBC zoning district already. Mr. Grittman clarified that the Employment Campus designation currently reflects the IBC zoning, but the intention of the text amendment proposed would be to include the IBC under the Light Industrial Park designation. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Konsor noted that he was indifferent on the decision at hand. Councilmember Gabler asked if there was ever a discussion of a business/industrial flex designation in the Comprehensive Plan, or if there is one already established. Ms. Schumann clarified that the flexibility within the current designations was discussed at the time of the Comprehensive Plan drafting, and that the intention was to include both commercial and industrial uses within the Employment Campus designation, but not to include those same commercial uses within any of the Industrial designations. Ms. Schumann added that if the Planning Commission was ever interested in looking at the Comprehensive Plan further, they have the authority to direct staff to prepare information on it and bring continue this discussion at a workshop meeting in the future. Mr. Tapper noted he understood the intention of he proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan following the discussion. Mr. Tapper was interested in the idea of bringing the discussion had to a subsequent workshop meeting to further discuss. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-09, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND CATEGORIES REGUIDING CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PARK, AND AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE PLAN TO ADD FLEXIBILITY FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN'S GOALS AND LAND USE OBJECTIVES, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-10 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND CATEGORIES REGUIDING CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN'S GOALS AND LAND USE OBJECTIVES, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. Ms. Schumann mentioned this item would go forth to the City Council for final decision on March 27, 2023, and the City Council will be informed of the discussion on the item at the Planning Commission meeting. D. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan (Comprehensive Plan), Chapter 3, "Land Use, Growth and Orderly Annexation" as related to Future Land Use Designations and Map; Consideration of Rezoning 108 Thomas Circle from 1-1, Light Industrial District to Industrial Business Campus (IBC) District. Applicant: Darrin Juve Mr. Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. The applicant sought rezoning of the parcel to accommodate the operation of a head start facility at 108 Thomas Circle. With the current zoning of the property being 1-1, Light Industrial, it limits the ability of a childcare use to a conditional use that must be accessory to a principal industrial use at the same location. The rezoning to IBC would allow them to operate in compliance, as a childcare facility use is permitted as a principal use in the IBC district. The concurrent request would be to amend the Comprehensive Plan so that the land use designation of the parcel would correspond with the proposed rezoning. Ms. Schumann noted that the prior item did not re -guide 108 Thomas Circle, so that it is necessary for the Planning Commission to act on the Comprehensive Plan amendment specific to this parcel. Staff also provided information related to the state of child care within Wright County to the Planning Commissioners for reference. This information has since been added to the agenda on the City of Monticello's website. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Dean Williamson, of Frauenshuh Inc., on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Planning Commission and the public, noting they were in attendance if any questions arose. Councilmember Gabler asked for clarification on how the group seeking to occupy the building would be considered a childcare facility under the Zoning Ordinance language, rather than a school. Mr. Grittman clarified that the Monticello Zoning Ordinance defines schools as K-12 programs, under the current language of the code, preschools and other head start programs are defined as childcare facilities. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Ms. Schumann noted that the decision for amending the Comprehensive Plan related to this agenda item does not include what designation to re -guide this parcel to. Staff recommended a re -guidance to Light Industrial Park. With the prior item being recommended for approval, it would then correspond with the rezoning request to IBC. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-11 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN), CHAPTER 3, "LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION" AS RELATED TO THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND MAP, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. PAUL KONSOR MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-12 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. X, REZONING 108 THOMAS CIRCLE FROM 1-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS CAMPUS (IBC), BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. ANDREW TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. Ms. Schumann mentioned this item would move forward to the City Council for final decision on March 27, 2023. Before the Planning Commission proceeded to the regular agenda to discuss whether the Comprehensive Plan item on the agenda should be further discussed at a workshop meeting in the future. The consensus was to plan for a workshop in the future. 3. Begular Agenda A. Consideration of Communitv Development Director's Report Ms. Schumann provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. Chief Building Official/Zoning Administrator Ron Hackenmueller addressed the Planning Commission regarding a personnel change within the Building Department. Building Inspector Bob Ferguson steeped into a new position as Building Official/Fire Inspector to assist with the restarting of the fire inspection program. The Building Department is also adding a third building inspector to the department following the personnel change noted. 4. Added Items None S. Adiournment MELISSA ROBECK MOVED TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION. ANDREW TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:50 P.M. Recorded By: Hayden Stensgard V, Date Approved: April 4, 2023 ATTEST: Angela Schu J# ommunity Development Director