Planning Commission Minutes 12-04-2007
MINUTES
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, December 4th, 2007
6:00 PM
Commissioners Present: Charlotte Gabler, William Spartz, and Barry Voight
Commissioners Absent: Rod Dragtsen, Lloyd Hilgart
Council Liaison Absent: Brian Stumpf
Staff: Angela Schumann, Gary Anderson, and Steve Grittman - NAC
1. Call to order.
Vice Chairman Spartz called the meeting to order, noted a quorum of the Commission, and the
absence of Commissioners Dragsten and Hilgart and Council Liaison Stumpf.
2. Approval of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 6"', 2007.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6`", 2007.
•
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
Consideration of adding items to the a eg nda.
Vice Chairman Spartz requested that dates for Planning Commission meetings in 2008 be added as
item 8.
4. Citizen comments.
NONE.
Continued Public Hearing -Consideration of a request Erosion Control
Schumann provided the staff report, stating that 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.
U
Schumann stated that the purpose of the ordinance is to consolidate existing practices in order to
better safeguard water quality and aid in the preservation and maintenance of land cover as
appropriate during development. Schumann indicated that 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. Schumann reported that the proposed ordinance had been
developed over the past year with input from both staff and the development community.
Schumann stated that currently, Monticello's regulation of grading and erosion has been
contained in various documents and policies which maybe somewhat inconsistent, due to lack of
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/04/07
uniform definitions of control measures and implementation. With the proposed amendment, the
City is seeking to condense current practice into one standard, making regulation more practical
for both the City and the development community.
Schumann reported that, for the most part, the ordinance proposed represents current City policy.
She said that the most notable change is related to the standard for requiring a permit. Currently,
the City requires no permit for grading under 400 cubic yards of material. Schumann stated that
400 cubic yards of soil is approximately equivalent to 40 dump trucks of material. City staff felt
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, Schumann
indicated that the proposed permit criteria include both volume and area triggers, as well as a
requirement for disturbances adjacent to waterways.
Other modifications to current practice include the requirement for individual site developers to
supply a security guaranteeing maintenance of on-site prevention measures and clean-up during
construction. Schumann stated that the City has and will continue to hold a security with an
overall site developer. However, an individual security makes communication with individual
site developers such as builders much easier.
Schumann discussed references within the ordinance to the Requirements and Design Guidelines.
She stated that 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. The inclusion of detailed specifications within that document, rather than the
ordinance ensures that the specs are current and consistent with new development practices and
• state and federal regulations. Schumann reported that the City will be completing updates to the
Plan Requirements and Design Guidelines in support of this ordinance.
Schumann expressed that the other practices and requirements outlined within the ordinance are
those currently being used by the City of Monticello at various stages of the development process.
Schumann summarized by stating that the proposed ordinance changes help to present a clear
guideline 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. She said that the City Engineer, Public Works Director and Chief Building Official had
reviewed the proposed ordinance and amendments and recommend approval. Supporting staff,
including building inspectors, the Street Superintendent, consulting engineers and Community
Development staff, had also reviewed this ordinance and recommend it for approval. Schumann
stated that the City Engineer had also spoken with a representative from the Pollution Control
agency, who also recommended approval as an independent reviewer.
Chairman Spartz opened the public hearing.
Gabler asked if builders have to provide a copy of the SWPPP for their individual lot. In other words,
does City get a copy of the SWPPP after the permit is signed over. City Engineer Bruce Westby
indicated that the City does get a copy of the SWPPP, but it is the overall development SWPPP.
Gabler inquired whether when the developer sells a lot, if the transfer of the SWPPP goes with the lot.
Westby confirmed, but stated that the City doesn't get a separate individual SWPPP because the
builder is required to follow the original SWPP. Gabler stated that she understood that component, but
was wondering of the City followed the chain of transfer. Westby stated that the City only monitors
compliance with the approved SWPPP.
Gabler stated that she had personally run into builders and homeowners not following the SWPPP
2
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/04/07
upon transfer. Westby stated that it is a common issue and the City is addressing it through
information measures such as upcoming meetings with homeowners and realtors regarding storm
water ponds.
Gabler asked if the new ordinance requires that the builder supply an LOC, as well as developer.
Schumann stated the builder would need to supply a bond.
Spartz confirmed that the City would require a permit only at 400 yards of materials and questioned
what the current standard is. Schumann referred to the proposed ordinance, citing triggers for both
volume and area. Schumann also noted that there are different volume triggers depending on whether
the property is developed or undeveloped. Spartz asked how many single family homes would utilize
these permits. Schumann stated that in the case of a new development, the entire development would
be subject to permit. In-fill single home projects would require a permit. Schumann also specified
that the permit would be required for major single-family landscaping projects such as large retaining
walls near a wetland complex, but would not be required for simple landscaping projects.
Voight cited the requirement for permit within 200 feet of a wetland and questioned if that applied to a
storm water retention pond. Westby stated that would not apply to storm water pond, but rather to
protected waterways.
Hearing no further comment, Vice Chairman Spartz closed the public hearing.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT 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.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
Consideration for review a current update on exnirin~ conditional use uermits and plans.
Schumann stated that an inventory of expiring plats and CUPs had been provided to the
Commission in November and has since been updated based on the direction from the
Commission. Schumann illustrated progress report and noted that two letters of request for
extension had been received and would be considered at January's meeting.
Spartz confirmed no action by the Commission is required.
Gabler asked if the Broadway Market is moving forward. Anderson reported that he had contact with
them and they verbally indicated that they wanted to extend their building permit, but he had received
no written communication to forward to the Council.
Voight inquired if those listed were sent letters that they could apply for extension. Schumann
confirmed and noted that applicants may have outstanding review costs. If so, they were also notified
of that responsibility. All notices also referenced that an extension request would not be automatically
approved.
• Spartz asked about those projects under construction. Schumann stated that projects under
construction were not sent notices, because they had commenced their projects. Voight asked that the
"completed" language referenced for CUPS within the current ordinance be addressed. Schumann
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/04/07
. explained that Commissioner Dragsten had also noted other potential ordinance changes, which should
be part of any amendment.
7. Consideration of a request to consider preparation of NRI.
Schumann provided the staff report for the NRI item, stating that the Planning Commission had
received a working draft of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan update for review and comment.
Schumann explained that one of the common themes in the development of the plan, 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.
Schumann stated that to support the vision for open space, the Planning Framework Chapter of
the Comp Plan details the completion of a Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) as a "Next Step".
Schumann indicated that NRIs are defined as a set of natural resource information for a given
geographic area, which most often includes a series of maps and information on land, water and
air resources. In building an NRI for a community, consultants use existing data resources, such
as DNR inventories, and combine them with field research and new analysis.
• Schumann stated that an NRI can be an important foundation tool in community planning. NRIs
assist a community in defining which areas are most critical for preservation or conservation and
which are best suited to traditional development patterns. Schumann discussed some of the
purpose points of an NRI in terms of guiding development patterns.
City staff is requesting that the Commission consider proceeding with a request for proposals for
the completion of an NRI for Monticello. Schumann said that regardless of how ideas about land
use 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.
Schumann reported that the City Administrator and Community Development Coordinator
support moving forward for RFP. 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. Schumann
concluded by stating that 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.
Voight stated that while he sees the value in completing the NRI, he inquired why it had not been
completed prior to, or with, the comp plan. Schumann referenced that if the City had intended for the
comp plan to be focused on conservation, it would have made more sense then. However, in thinking
about the revision of the zoning ordinance as a stronger tool and more form-based, the timing might be
ideal. Grittman agreed, stating that the way the plan appears to be set up, is to lay out the idea that if
the City believes it has some remaining high-value land, it should be protected. The result is to
complete the NRI.
4
Planning Commission Minutes -12/04/07
Gabler asked if there is an existing NRI. Schumann stated that there are existing components of an
NRI, but nothing specific for Monticello -especially in field research. Schumann stated that it is
hoped that a Monticello NRI incorporates social aspects. Grittman referred to this as a cultural
inventory. He cited Monte Club Hill, which obviously has natural resource aspects, but also cultural
identity important to Monticello. He said that the NRI may identify those as well.
Gabler asked if field research would be a component of the NRI. Schumann indicated that it will be
crucial. Spartz asked if Wright County had a lot of these resources, which the City could use.
Schumann stated that the NRI will pull all available information to prepare a complete picture. For
example, Wright County may have great soil information, but lack good information on water
resources. Grittman confirmed that there is a lot of secondary research, so part of the process is to
layer all the pieces. Field research will actually help identify what is special about these places and
prioritize. Schumann stated that the NRI will also help the City picture the zoning ordinance
differently. The Planning Commission will be able to review and discuss developments in a more
visual way.
Gabler asked if the City has to spend $20,000 on the NRI. Schumann stated this was the budgeted
amount, but may not be what the study actually costs. Gabler asked that no more be spent. Grittman
stated that his experience is that they cost much more. It may depend on the area inventoried. Gabler
asked whether Township had been approached for budget participation, Schumann stated they had not
been approached, but that the idea is that the NRI would serve Monticello's urban development
pattern.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GABLER TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY OF
• MONTICELLO PROCEED WITH A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR A NATURAL
RESOURCE INVENTORY.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT.
Spartz inquired what the next step in the process would be. Schumann replied that staff would draw a
scope and plan of work, request proposals, and then use a selection group, including a Planning
Commission representative, to choose a consultant.
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
Meetine Dates
Spartz stated that as the January 1 S` meeting falls on a holiday, it needed to be shifted. Schumann
referenced that with HRA and EDA under merger, there is no HRA meeting scheduled for Wednesday
the 2°d of January, as an option. The Commissioners agreed that the 2°d would be acceptable.
Spartz asked staff to prepare date options for February and November of 2008 if needed, as the caucus
and general elections are held those days, respectively.
9. Adjourn.
MOTION TO ADJOURN BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT.
MOTION SE QNDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
r+
' / ~'"
Reco,.~{e ;
~~ -;~
~__--
5