Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 05-04-1999 . . . MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 4, 1999 Members: Rod Dragsten, Dick Frie, Roy Popilek and Robbie Smith Staff: Steve Grittman, Jeff O'Neill and Fred Patch Absent: Richard Carlson and Council Liaison Clint Herbst I. Chair Frie called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and declared a quorum present. 2. Consideration of approval of the minutes of the April 6. 1999 regular meeting and the April 26, 1999 special meeting. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 6, 1999 REGULAR MEETING. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 26, 1999 SPECIAL MEETING. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. No items were added to the agenda. 4. Citizen Comment. There was no one present under citizen comment. 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a reLluest for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Develomuent within the B-3 Zoning district and a Preliminary Plat to allow outdoor vehicle sales and associated automotive service uses and variances to the Citv's Sign Ordinance. Applicant: Monticello Ford. Steve Grittmml presented the staff report on this item. The property is located at the southwest quadrant ofT.H. 25 and 1-94 and is affected by a project that would eliminate their property access from Oakwood Drive. The site currently contains a Ford dealership and it is proposed to add other services such as car rental, quick lube service and repair services. A conditional use permit is required for any Planned Unit Development and because the applicant is combining a number of pieces of land into one parcel a plat is required. The applicant is also requesting variances to the City's sign ordinance. Steve -1- . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 Grittman reviewed the variances requested noting that the variances were significantly over what the ordinance allows. . N umber of signs - The sign ordinance allows one free standing sign. The applicant is proposing four pylon signs in addition to building and entrance signs. . Sign area - The square footage of the signs proposed by the applicant is 600 square feet while the ordinance allows 300 square feet of area. . Setback - The applicant shows the setbacks at 5 and 7 feet whi Ie the ordinance requires 15 feet. . Prohibited sign - One of the signs the applicant is proposing is an electronic message board. The City ordinance does not allow electronic message boards in any zoning district. The staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit for the Planned Unit Development ffild of the preliminary plat. However, the staff did not recommend approval of the variances to the sign ordinance. Steve Grittman suggested that if the Planning Commission felt the sign plan should be approved it may be prudent to look at doing it as an amendment to the ordinance. In granting a variance the Planning Commission must find that requirements of the ordinance denied the property owner reasonable use of the property or created a physical hardship. . Robbie Smith asked about the landscaping requirements for the proposal. Steve Grittman explained how the number of trees and plantings were determined. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Dave Petcrson, 1312 Prairie Creek Lane, stated that the number of signs requestcd is not excessive considering the amount of land area of the parcel. If the property was not being combined into one parcel but remained individual parcels each parcel would be entitled to one free standing sign. He felt the number of uses proposed for the site justified the number of signs that were being requested. Mr. Peterson also stated that plans to change T.E. 25 impacted his business as the state would not grant a right-in offT.H. 25 and added that signage is critical to his business. In this case since the business cannot be seen from the freeway, the signage is very important, especially the electronic message board. Mr. Peterson noted that currently the business has two free standing signs. In response to the landscaping concerns, Mr. Peterson stated that a portion of the arca is a display lot and not a parking lot. He believes it is better not to have a lot of trees or plantings in the display area. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. . Robbie Smith noted that the request for additional signs was, in part, because of the change in access and asked ifthe applicant could meet the 15' setback requirements. The applicant stated he could comply with that requirement. The Planning Commission -2- . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 reviewed the proposal for compliance with parking requirements and pointed out that the parking lot area would need to be paved and curbed. The Planning Commission discussed thc variances from the sign ordinance. Previously the Planning commission had discussed whcther electronic message boards should be allowed and how they should be handled within the ordinance. The staff indicatcd that the sign ordinance needs somc cxtensive work and they wcrc not at a point to propose any amendment to the sign ordinance dealing with electronic signs. The applicant commcntcd that combining the parcels into one severely restricted the amount of signage he could have for the business. He felt the way the sign ordinance was written was discriminatory towards large land parcels. Chair Frie responded that the City is required to apply the ordinance equally against all the parcels in the samc zoning district. Robbie Smith commented that the electronic message board could flash multiple messages and thus reduce the number of signs needed. Dave Peterson concurred that this approach had merit and the Planning Commission discussed reasonable restrictions that could be placed on the use of an electronic message board. These included: 1) That it not be a flashing sign; 2) A time limit be placed on how often the message could change; and 3) That it not be a motion sign. Stcve Grittman added that any amendment to the sign ordinance would require a public hearing. . ROY POPILEK MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR A PUD AND FOR OUTDOOR SALES BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE SITE PLAN MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING DISTRICT AND ALL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ORDINANCE ARE COMPLIED WITH. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ROY POPILEK AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE APPROVAL OF THE PLANS BY THE CITY ENGINEER. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLA T BASED ON THE FINDING THAT 'rHE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE B-3 ZONING DISTRICT. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. DICK FRIE MOVED TO APPROVE A MODIFIED SIGN PLAN AND VARIANCES BASED ON THE FINDINGS MADE AT THE HEARING INCLUDING UNIQUENESS OF THE NEEDS OF THE BUSINESS AND THE IMPACT OF THE ROAD PROJECT ON THE BUSINESS OPERATION. . In further discussion Dick Frie explained that rather than use the amendment approach, -3- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 the variance route would provide a quicker result for the applicant. He noted that the Planning Commission could approve the request based on an anticipated amendment to the ordinance but there is the possibility that an ordinance amendment might fail to pass. The sign plan proposed for approval would include the two existing signs which are grandfathered in and the use of one electronic message board for a total of three signs. Dick Frie stated that the restrictions on the property access was the basis for the finding to grant a variance. Since there was no second to the motion, Dick Frie rescinded his motion. There was additional discussion on the signage for the building and the free standing signs. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE SIGN VARIANCES AND A MODIFIED SIGN PLAN WHICH INCLUDES BUILDING SIGNS AS PROPOSED, TWO PYLON SIGNS AND ONE ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD BASED ON THE FINDINGS MADE AT 'fHE HEARING INCLUDING THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY RELATIVE TO THE NUMBER OF SIGNS AND THE NUMBER OF DISTINCT AND INDEPENDENT BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND THE IMPACT OF THE ROAD PROJECT ON THE BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS FOR THE USE OF THE ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD: I) MESSAGE DISPLAYED FOR A LIMITED DURATION; 2) NO FLASHING SIGN AND 3) NO MOTION IN TlIE ELECTRONIC SIGN 4) TIIREE SECOND PAUSE BETWEEN MESSAGES REQUIRED. LED DISPLAY REQUIRED. DICK FRIE SECONDED THE MOTION. MO'l'ION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Rod Dragsten suggested that the City stail look a revising the sign ordinance. 6. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development in an R-2 District and a simple subdivision. Applicant: Little Mountain Limited Partnership. Steve Grittman presented the staff report noting that the property is zoned R-2 which allows townhouses as a conditional use. Since the residential units will not directly front a public street a Planned Unit Development is required. Steve Grittman indicated that this meeting constitutes the concept plan review for the proposal. It was pointed out that the proposed street would intersect with Marvin Elwood Road at a curve and this is an item that should be reviewed by the City Engineer as well as reviewing the possible reconfiguration of the proposed street to make it a through route. Steve Grittman also reviewed open space requirements, landscaping, sidewalks and future development of the balance of the parcel. Staff recommended approval of the concept stage PUD. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Steve Tomczyk, 226 Crocus Lane, questioned the -4- . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 landscaping provisions and whether any of the open space shown could be built on later. Steve Grittman replied that the open space was for the benefit of the project and could not be developed in the future. Brad Larson, 9533 Briarwood, stated that there is a total of 28 units with attached single car garages. It is proposed that some time in the future the southerly 10 acres may be developed as individually owned townhouses. A question was raised regarding the alignment of the proposed street and it was suggested that it should rlln on the west side of the parcel. Steve Grittman indicated that this is something that the City Engineer would need to review. Rose Prudhomme, 235 Crocus Lane, stated that she was concerned about the housing density and also about the road running behind her house. . There was discussion on the zoning for the parcel. It had originally been zoned as industrial, then rezoned to R-3 in the 80's. Recently it was considered for rezoning from R-3 to R-2. The Planning Commission felt that the R-2 designation would be an improvement to the site over what was there under the R-3 designation. While the residents may prefer to have an R-l designation, the rational for the R-2 designation was that it could serve as a buffer or transition area from thc industrial zoned property. Anthony Clark, 211 Crocus Lane also expressed his concern about the location of the street and questioned whether having the street along the back of his lot would atlect the value of his property. It was noted that the street could serve as a buffer betwccn the R-2 and R-l area. The appropriate landscaping for the area abutting the proposed street would be addressed at the developmcnt stage PUD hearing. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. Thc Planning Commission asked about the height of the berm and was told it would be approximately six feet. Roy Popilek was concerned about garage space. Steve Grittman stated that the proposal allowed for approximately three parking spaces per unit. The Planning Commission also addressed park dedication requirements. Although it is likely that for this proposal there would be a cash dcdication in lieu of land, it was noted that the Park commission had not officially reviewed the proposal. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPRO V AL OF THE SIMPLE SUBDIVISION FOR LITTLE MOUNTAIN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT REQUIRE A PLAT AT THIS 'riME. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. . ROY POPILEK MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONCEPT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUES MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT AND OTHERS IDENTIFIED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING INCLUDING CITY ENGINEER REVIEW OF RELOCATING -5- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 THE PROPOSED STREET AND SIDEWALK TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE PARCEL. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. 7. Public HearinQ - Consideration for approval of Conditional Use Permits for ioint parking and building height in excess of two (2) stories. Applicant: Comfort Inn Motel. Steve Grittman gave the staff report explaining that it is proposed to construct a 52 unit hotel on Lot 3, Block 1, Silver fox Addition which is the site of the existing Best Western hotel. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for joint parking for the two facilities and a conditional use permit to allow a building in excess of two stories. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. No one present spoke on the proposal. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. Roy Popilek asked what happens to the conditional use permit if one of the hotels is sold. Steve Grittman stated that the conditional use permit runs with the land and would not be affected by a property transfer. The Planning Commission discussed landscaping for the site, fire protection and the vacation of Oakwood Drive. The signage was also reviewed and it was noted that currently there is one pylon sign and that the franchise agreement prohibits sharing of signs. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO ALLOW FOR JOINT PARKING BETWEEN THE TWO FACILITIES AND TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE STORY BUILDING BASED ON TIlE FINDING TIIA l' THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND COMPLIES WITH THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTAINED IN THE MONTICELLO ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. The Planning Commission finds that criteria for each separate conditional use permit application is satisfactorily met. B. The applicant submits a landscaping plan indicating the type and height of trees to be used on the site subject to review and approval by the City. C. The proposed cul-de-sac for Oakwood Drive is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. D. Occupancy of the building is contingent upon compliance with all building and fire codes including a fire suppression program. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. Public Hearing - Consideration of a rezoning request and concept site plan approval from A-O to R-4 Mobile Home Park District. Applicant: Kicllbenz. Inc. -6- . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 Steve Grittman gave the staff report revicwing with the Planning Commission the original proposal and the proposal currently under consideration. In previous Planning Commission action the request for rezoning was denied based on the fact that the City's Land Use Plan called for mid-density housing in the area and the plan submitted did not meet the rcquirement. There wcre also traffic concerns that impacted the Planning Commission's decision. The rcvised plan submitted by thc applicant significantly increases the density. The staff felt that if the City was considering a mobile home park expansion the first proposal would bc superior. Although the second plan would be more consistent with the City's Land Use Plan, it was noted that one of the po I icy aims of the land use plan for that area was to encouragc upper scale housing. It was questionable whether this proposal would meet that. Steve Grittman pointed out that the MOAA Board action would also af1ect this property. Rod Dragsten asked about the state law governing mobile homes. Steve Grittman explained that the law requircs the City to allow mobile home parks as a conditional use in districts where the City allows multiple units. . Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Brian Southwell, legal counsel for the applicant, spoke to the Planning Commission on the reasons for bringing forward this plan. The applicant felt that the original plan was more sensitive to the desire of the City for upper scale housing but it was not consistent with the land use plan, thereforc a sccond plan was submitted. He noted that the road leading into the mobile home park would scrve the area until such time as School Boulevard would be extended. Mike Quinn, 3485 8gth Street felt that the lower density plan was more acceptable to the adjacent property owners. He expressed his concern that there was so little information on the plan relating to landscaping and berming. He also questioned the setbacks from the power line easemcnt as it appears that some of the lot could be affected by that. Chair Frie noted that this request is strictly for rezoning and that a more detailed plan would be required when the mobile home park expansion is proposed. A number of residents expressed their concern about how the proposed expansion would impact traffic in the area and aesthetic concerns about the existing mobilc home park. Chris Scribner, 3456 88th Street raised the issue of pedestrian traffic between the mobile home park and adjacent residential devclopments. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. . Chair Frie stated that the Planning Commission had requested a copy of the study done by MnDOT for the area in question but that it had not yet been submitted. He askcd if the applicant had given any consideration to the development of townhouses for this area instcad of a mobile home park. Mr. Southwell responded that economics was a factor in their decision to expand the mobile home park rather than pursue other types of development. Chair Frie suggested that a townhouse development could serve as a buffer between the existing residential developments and the mobile home park. Chair Frie also -7- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 encouraged the applicant to attcnd the upcoming MOAA Board meeting to specifically discuss this item. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AN R-2 ZONING DISTRICT AMENDMENT BASED UPON THE FINDING THAT TI-IIS DISTRICT IS MOST CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE OBJECTIVES OF ,\'HE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INCLUDING LAND USE AND HOUSING VALUE. DICK FRIE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. 12. Public Hearing - Consideration of an amendment to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan relating to the land use designation of the property west of Kiellberg West Mobile Home Park. Applicant: Citv of Monticello. Because this agenda item was related to the previous item it was moved up for Planning Commission consideration. It was the feeling that based on the earlier Planning Commission action this item could be tabled. Chair Frie opened and closed the public hearing. DICK FRIE MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY WEST OF KJELLBERG WEST MOBILE HOME PARK PENDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS A RESUL T OF THE PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE REZONING REQUEST. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. Public Hearing: - Consideration of a zoning text amendment to allow externally i\Iuminated proiecting wall signs. Applicant: City of Monticello. Frcd Patch gave the staff report noting that the proposed amendment was initiated by a sign permit application by Metcalf: Larson & Muth. Since it was in the CCD District, the Design Advisory Team (DA T) reviewed the request. DA T felt that the application met the intent of the Monticello Downtown Revitalization Plan. The guidelines of the Monticello Downtown Revitalization Plan, however, are not consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment would allow externally i\Iuminated projecting signs not exceeding 8 sq. ft. in area or 8 n. above grade only in the CCD District. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Rita Ullrich representing MCP (Monticello Community Partners) asked what the difference was betwcen a projecting sign and an overhanging sign which Fred Patch explained. Scott Hill, 1320 West River Street, felt -8- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 that thcrc could bc a problem with the projecting signs in that in order to get better visibility the signs would be placed at various heights thus creating an uneven look. If the projecting signs are all consistently placcd, the signs would be blockcd out. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. There was considerable discussion on how the placement of the signs should be regulated. It was suggested that the ordinance amendment could include upper and lower limits for the placement of the signs. Chair Frie asked if having this provision in the ordinance amendmcnt would place DA T in a capricious position when they conducted their review. Steve Grittman stated if DAT based their rccommendations on consistent application of findings it would not be considcrcd arbitrary or capricious. Chair Frie asked ifthcre was any consideration of allowing projecting signs outside the CCD District. Jeff O'Neill replied that this type of sign is more suitcd to the CCD District since the CCD District is pedestrian oriented. Frcd Patch felt that sign placement limits in the ordinance amendment, other than for purposes of safety, would be overkill and would limit the i1exibility of DA T in their review of proposals. DICK FRIE MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ALLOWING PROJECTING WALL SIGNS IN THE CCD DISTRICT BE APPROVED. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH ROD DRAGSTEN VOTING IN OPPOSITION. 10. Public Hearing - Consideration of a sign variance request for perpendicular professional sign. Applicant: Metcalf, Larson & Muth. Initially the applicant withdrew his request for the sign variance based on the Planning Commission approval of the proposed sign ordinance amendment for the CCD District. It was noted that thcre is the possibility that the Council may fail to approvc the proposed amendment. The applicant rescinded his decision to withdraw his request for a variance. Chair Frie opened and closed the public hearing. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REQUEST FOR A SIGN VARIANCE FOR METCALF, LARSON & MU'n-) UNTIL TIlE NEXT MEETING. DICK FRIE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. Public Hearing - Consideration of rezoning from PZM (Performance Zone Mixed) to I-I A (Light Industrial) Applicant: Citv of Monticello. Steve Grittman presented the staff report. The parcel in question lies between Elm Street and Minnesota Street. The PZM District allows single and two family homes as permitted uses, townhouses as a conditional use and some commercial activities as a -9- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 conditional use. It was questioned whether residential would be an appropriate use for this parcel. The staff felt it would be diilicult to develop this as a residential use because of its proximity to Ruff s Auto and the site did not provide good exposure or access as far as commercial development. Zoning it I-IA appeared to be the most logical designation and this zoning would also provide a good transition between Ruffs Auto and the commercial developments. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Tom Brennan, the property owner, spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning explaining there has been interest in the past for development of the land for residential use and currently there is a purchase option on the property with the intent of a residential development being proposed if the deal closes. Randy Ruff, 611 Elm Street asked about the alignment of]lh Street and its extension and also about the width of the watermain easement. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. DICK FRIE MOVED TO TABLE ACTION UNTIL THE JULY MEETING ON THE REZONING FROM PZM TO I-IA SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BEING SUBMITTED WHICH WILL BE THE PROPERTY OWNER COMMUNICATING WITH THE CITY STAFF AS TO WHETHER THE TRANSACTION ON HIS PROPERTY IS CONSUMMATED. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. Consideration of a Zoning Ordinance amendment adding tattoo parlors as a permitted use in a B-4 District. Applicant: Citv of Monticello. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ZONING AMENDMENT ADDING TAl"fOO PARLORS AS A PERMrrfED USE IN A B-4 DISTRICT. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 14. Public Hearing - Consideration of an amendment to the Zoning Ordi nance which allows Essential Services as permitted uses in the R-l Zoning District. Applicant: Citv of Monticello. It was discovered that essential services are not listed as permitted uses in the R-l Zoning District and an ordinance amendment was drafted to correct this omission. Chair Frie opened and closed the public hearing. ROY POPILEK MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPRO V AL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW ESSENTIAL SERVICES AS -10- - . , Planning Commission Minutes - 5/4/99 PERMrrTED USES IN THE R-l ZONING DISTRICT BASED ON THE FINDING THA TIT REFLECTS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. 15. Update on MOAA Land Use Plan Jeff O'Neill updated the Planning Commission on what progress had been made on reaching an agreement on a land use plan for the area covered under the MOAA agreement. It was suggested that the Planning Commission members may wish to attend the MOAA meeting. ROY POPILEK MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 10:45 P.M. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. DQu..~ ~ JJ).s~. Recording Secretary -11-