Loading...
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - 04/12/2023 (Special)MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, April 12, 2023 — 5:00 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), Ron Hackenmueller, Hayden Stensgard 1. General Business A. Call to Order Chairperson Paul Konsor called the special meeting of the Monticello Planning Commission to order at 5:08 p.m. 2. Public Hearing A. Consideration of a Request for an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development related to replacement of outdoor storage tanks. Applicant: Cargill Kitchen Solutions, Inc. City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. Cargill sought an amendment to their existing Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development to replace outdoor CO2 tanks. The proposed tanks to be installed reach a height of 60 feet, in comparison to the existing 42-foot-tall tanks on site. The proposal also includes installation of three tanks, two in the immediate future and another at an undefined later date. Mr. Grittman noted that though these are not considered buildings, the Central Community District regulations allow for structures to be a maximum of 60 feet tall. The applicants noted that due to the slight change in the site plan, a few parking spaces in the vicinity would need to be relocated. Cargill had also included plans for a third tank to be installed in the future. Mr. Grittman noted that there was a public comment submitted by email, noting concerns regarding the site and its impact to the surrounding residential neighborhood. The letter noted concerns of traffic and noise, specifically. Mr. Konsor asked for clarification on why the applicants are proposing to slightly move the location of the tanks. Mr. Grittman noted that it is necessary for operations that the new tanks are set up and functioning, before the existing can be removed from site. Councilmember Charlotte Gabler asked if the site has an existing landscape plan for the property, given it has a CUP for PUD. Mr. Grittman clarified that staff did not have any recollection of a landscape plan from its original approval. Mr. Konsor asked if there needs to be additional screening on site, due to the property abutting a different zoning district. Mr. Grittman clarified that that requirement is suited for new developments that abut a different zoning district than its own. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Martin Pylvainen, 313 W. 4t" Street, Monticello, MN 55362, addressed the Planning Commission and the public. Mr. Pylvainen noted he submitted the public comment online and expressed concerns regarding the impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood. He also encouraged added screening and landscaping to the site to not further disrupt the surrounding neighborhood. Andrew Tapper asked if Mr. Pylvainen had a preference for the height of the fence that was mentioned. Mr. Pylvainen stated that what has been done in other locations on the property would seem sufficient, and that the City's Arborist would have an understanding of what could be planted on site as well. Ryan Schmitz, on behalf of the applicant Cargill Kitchen Solutions, addressed the Planning Commission and the public. Mr. Schmitz noted that the installation of these new tanks will not add any production levels to the site. The third proposed tank included in the request is not planned to be installed right away. At that time, Cargill had no plans to install the third tank, though that third tank would increase production at the facility. Mr. Tapper asked if Cargill has plans to increase production on site. Mr. Schmitz clarified that Cargill has no intention at this time to increase production. Mr. Konsor asked why Cargill does not have plans to install the third tank right away. Mr. Schmitz clarified that the plant is set up so that one tank supports specific production line(s) within the facility. The facility does not have a third line set up to utilize the proposed third tank right away. Mr. Schmitz also addressed the screening barrier discussion along West 4t" Street, and that Cargill staff would oppose any screening requirements in that area, due to the visibility needs of the drivers using that access. Councilmember Gabler asked if there has been a traffic study done between this area of West 41" Street and Highway 25. Ms. Schumann noted the only information for that area and traffic was related to Highway 25 traffic and its justification for a signal at 4t" Street. There is no information directly related to Cargill's site. Councilmember Gabler asked the applicants if they knew how many trucks visit the site daily. Mr. Schmitz noted it varies for multiple reasons. Eric Hagen asked if there was a way to require screening on the north edge of the property, but so not to disrupt the view of the drivers accessing and leaving the property. Mr. Grittman noted it was a topic the Planning Commission could address through its recommendation if they chose to do so. Mr. Hagen asked the applicants if they knew the average height of the trucks entering the site. Mr. Schmitz said he could not provide an exact answer but did note that any fence height over 6 feet would be problematic. Mr. Hagen noted that it did not seem necessary at this time to require any additional landscaping or buffering but noted it could be necessary at the time of the third tank installation, given a third production line would be included with that. Mr. Pylvainen reiterated that his main concern related to the consideration is noise. He also noted concerns about proactively approving a third tank, due to that increasing the overall production on site, and further disturbing the surrounding area. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Tapper noted that if the Planning Commission recommended approval for the future third tank, it eliminates any ability to conduct necessary studies related to increasing production. Whereas it would not be as great of an issue if the third tank didn't come with increased production. Mr. Tapper said he would prefer that the applicants come back for another amendment at the time they are ready for the third tank. Mr. Konsor expressed challenges with the Planning Commission requirement such a specific buffer requirement, and noted he would prefer it if the surrounding neighbors took screening into their own hands on their own property. Mr. Konsor also agreed that the applicants should return with another amendment once they are ready to install the third tank. Mr. Hagen did not believe it was necessary for the applicants to come back for approval of the third tank. Mr. Tapper reiterated that requiring the applicants to come back for the third tank allows staff and the Planning Commission to review potential impacts to the site and surrounding area, given the third tank comes with an additional production line. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2023-16 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A CUP FOR A PUD, SUBJECT TO THE REVISED CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z, ALLOWING THE INSTALLATION OF 2 TANKS FOR THIS APPROVAL RATHER THAN THREE, AND BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 3-1, WITH COMMISSIONER HAGEN VOTING IN DISSENT. 3. Adiournment PAUL KONSOR MOVED TO ADJOURN THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION. ANDREW TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:08 P.M. Recorded By: Hayden Stensgard Date Approved: May 2, 2023 ATTEST: Ange a Schuma , C unity Development Director