Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes - 01/02/2024 (Joint Workshop)MINUTES JOINT MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Tuesday, January 2, 2024 — 5:00 p.m. Monticello Community Center Planning Commissioners Present: Chair Paul Konsor, Vice Chair Andrew Tapper, Rob Stark Planning Commissioners Absent: City Councilmembers Present: City Councilmembers Absent: Staff Present: 1. Call to Order Teri Lehner, Melissa Robeck Mayor Lloyd Hilgart, Charlotte Gabler, Tracy Hinz Lee Martie, Sam Murdoff Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman, Ron Hackenmueller, Hayden Stensgard Chair Paul Konsor called the joint workshop of the Monticello Planning Commission and City Council to order at 5:01 p.m. Added Item Recently appointed Planning Commissioner Rob Stark was administered the Oath of Office by Chair Konsor. 2. Concept Stage Planned Unit Development Submittal for the potential Phased Development of an Industrial Services principal use in the 1-2, Heavy Industrial District PID: 155-249-001010 Applicant: Tim Flander/Big Bear Holdings, LLC. Community Development Director Angela Schumann provided an overview of the purpose of the joint workshop meeting. The purpose was for a concept stage Planned Unit Development review aimed at providing helpful and constructive feedback to the development team that presented the concept. Notices were sent out for this meeting to the surrounding area where the development is proposed. Ms. Schumann added that the meeting did not involve a public hearing, but if time allows, residents present may address the group. City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the City Council, Planning Commission, and the public. Previously, the submitter applied for various zoning ordinance amendments that were later withdrawn, as the applicant stated it was not his intention to amend the zoning ordinance in its entirety. Rather, the submitter sought flexibility specifically for their lot in the Oakwood Industrial Park for development of the site to accommodate their Industrial Services business. With this concept stage PUD submittal, the submitter requested flexibility from design standards related to exterior building finish, surfacing of vehicle use and storage areas, and an increase in the maximum allowed square footage of outdoor storage. The group was asked to have an open discussion on the proposed flexibility areas, and how they would coincide with the City's overall land use goals. Mayor Lloyd Hilgart asked how many undeveloped lots were left in Oakwood Industrial Park. Ms. Schumann said that there are 3, including the subject site, that are not developed. Mayor Hilgart said that he did not have an issue with proposed surfacing materials, as that was allowed for the development of the Nuss Truck & Equipment site. However, that development was required to construct a principal building with enhanced materials beyond the minimum standards established by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Hilgart added that the most recent industrial development included brick/stone exterior on a percentage of the buildings, and would not expect there be flexibility to that standard with the subject concept. Joe Elam, Commercial Realty Solutions, noted that the wainscot requirement is somethine that thev plan to address and hp rnnfnrming with the Citv'c, rnr p requirements. Additionally, Mr. Elam added that the proposed metal siding would be coated with a finish that would reflect an EIFS or stucco finish from the public street. Tim Flander, submitter and of Mastercraft Outdoors, addressed the group and the public, and passed around examples of the proposed metal siding for the building. Mr. Flander also noted that the building would include an enhanced gable as well. Andrew Tapper asked what the proposed building's front facade is anticipated to look like. Mr. Elam said that the closest representation would be the industrial building located at 211 Dundas Road within the City. Ms. Schumann noted that variation in the front facade includes more options than the brick/stone requirement proposed by the applicant. Mr. Grittman clarified that the departure from the ordinance standard in this regard is on the metal exterior finish of the building walls, and the submitters have referenced that the proposed walls would include textured finish, rather than plain metal siding. Ms. Schumann asked if the proposed textured metal siding was proposed to be on the entire building, or a portion of it. Mr. Flander clarified that the front wall facing Fallon Avenue, as well as the wall facing north on the proposed layout, would be the textured siding. The remainder of the building that is not as visible to the public would be standard metal siding. Mr. Tapper noted that the most important facades of the building, given the proposed layout, are those that will be sided with coated metal. Mayor Hilgart asked if the site was proposed to have a fence. Mr. Flander clarified that a privacy & security fence is identified on the plan. Mr. Tapper asked if the designated truck & trailer parking is planned to be paved. Mr. Elam clarified that the intention would be to have crushed concrete for the truck & trailer parking, the drive aisle behind the building, as well as the outdoor storage area. Mayor Hilgart reiterated that he did not see an issue with the requested flexibility areas from the code, given the submitters proposed to enhance to sides of the building and surround the storage and private parking area with a fence. Mr. Konsor noted that it is anticipated that Fallon Avenue will see improvements in the future, and that if this site is developed, any opportunity to proactively plan for that would be beneficial. Mr. Tapper expressed concern regarding the request for flexibility from the limitations on outdoor storage in the 1-2 district, given the amount of effort the Planning Commission and Industrial & Economic Development Committee (IEDC) put towards establishing these updated standards in 2021-2022. Councilmember Charlotte Gable concurred, though noted that a little bit of flexibility would be considered but not at the level requesting double the maximum allowable area for outdoor storage. Mr. Tapper said he would feel more comfortable offering flexibility, if the area was proposed to be paved, rather than the request for crushed concrete. Councilmember Gabler asked Mr. Flander to explain what type of business he has. Mr. Flander explained that they run a year-round landscaping business, including snow control for sites in the winter. He further stated that the need for crushed concrete rather an asphalt surface is because the heavy equipment maneuvering around the site that could damage that type of surface material. Councilmember Gabler asked what type of things would be stored outside. Mr. Flander said that it would be commercial equipment such as trailers and equipment accessories like skid loader attachments. Councilmember Gabler asked whether the need for that amount of outdoor storage is necessary for accessibility, rather than storage area itself. Mr. Flander emphasized that the intention is to develop the site initially so they can move the business to Monticello, with the expectation of an expansion of the building area in the future. Councilmember Gabler reiterated that she would be fine with a little flexibility on the amount of outdoor storage area allowed for the site, but it will ultimately come down to a decision being made by the Planning Commission. Mr. Tapper expressed concern about the potential precedent this type of flexibility would set for other potential developments in Monticello. Mr. Elam asked for clarification on whether parking vehicles in the proposed storage area is CO IJIUereu uuruuur storage or parking. ivis. SScnuniann c1aniieU tnat it the vehicles are parked in the area for longer than 24 hours at a time, the zoning ordinance would define it as outdoor storage. The surface of the area where the vehicles would be parked would factor into that as well. Mr. Tapper reiterated that his concern does not focus on the flexibility given for outdoor storage, but rather, what the Planning Commission reasoning for allowing this flexibility would be if the next applicant asked for the same. Councilmember Tracy Hinz asked what the alternative plan would be if 200% of outdoor storage compared to total building square footage was not allowed. Mr. Elam noted that it would make development of the site in this regard difficult, as the concept plan proposed was to eliminate any unnecessary storage space on the site. Councilmember Gabler asked how many employees Mr. Flander has, and where they would park on site. Mr. Flander said at current there are four employees, and they would park in the front parking lot area that would be surfaced with asphalt. Mayor Hilgart said in regard to the outdoor storage flexibility request to enhance the building design as much as possible. Public Comment Mike Mossey, 12777 Aetna Ave NE, Monticello, MN 55362, addressed the City Council, Planning Commission, and the public. Mr. Mossey noted that he did not have any concern for the amount of outdoor storage requested, but rather the material the outdoor storage is located on. He noted that dust control is a concern for the City on industrial sites, and crushed concrete would likely cause an issue with dust in that regard. If dust and other external impacts are a concern to the City, they should review whether the need for impervious surface in these areas is necessary. 3. Adiournment By consensus, the meeting was adjourned at 5:52 p.m. Recorded By: Hayden Stensgard §3 Date Approved: February 6, 2024 ATTEST: Angela Schumao) C*�nunity Development Director