Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 04-06-2010Planning Commission Minutes — 4/6/10 MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, April 6, 2010 6:00 PM Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Council Liaison: Staff: 1. Call to order. 2. Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, William Spartz Barry Voight Susie Wojchouski Angela Schumann, Ron Hackenmueller, Alan Brixius - NAC Chairman Dragsten called the meeting to order noting the absence of Commissioner Voight. Chairman Dragsten noted that the February meeting minutes were unavailable at this time. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 5', 2010. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 2", 2010. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Citizen comments. None 4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. None Planning Commission Minutes — 4/6/10 5. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request to approve a Preliminary Plat. Amendment to Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Conditional Use Permit for Joint Access for a Commercial Subdivision in a B -3 (Highway Business District). Applicant: Chrysler Financial. Alan Brixius from Northwest Associated Consultants (NAC) described the preliminary plat under consideration. The application is seeking to replat 19 existing lots into 4 lots. The property is located north of Chelsea Road, south of 94, along Marvin Road and west of Hwy 25. The proposal would clean up the overall plat to allow for buildings which have been taken back by Chrysler to be resold and redeveloped in a matter fitting the zoning. Zoning applications at this location within the past 10 years have included: preliminary plat, planned unit development over the entire development, two conditional uses for outdoor sales, car wash, variances for signage, minimum building sizes for auto sales, directional signage in the right- of -way, PUD amendments to allow offsite auto sales and storage lot, larger electronic signage, expansion of the sales lot and an interim use permit and amendment to accommodate temporary automobile display and storage. Staff recommended that these applications, other than those that are currently active, be eliminated. Anything new would require a new permit. Easements which run through property will be vacated. One easement, which is an existing utility, would be retained because it is necessary for ongoing operations within the plat. Lot 1, Block 1 would be accessed by two ingress points. One is a shared access between two businesses. One is an active car lot. This is the old Monticello Ford. There would be a need for an access easement for shared access and maintenance of a shared driveway. Lot 1 is compliant in use, lot area, building size, lot width, set backs and off street parking. Brixius cited that there is excess signage based on current approved sign plans and permits. There are some 229 square feet of additional signage on site primarily in temporary sign form such as a banner and changeable message signs. Staff recommended that the signage be brought into compliance. Lot 2 is the old Monticello Ford site. It is the larger property being combined. The new lot would be more than 4 acres in size. It is compliant as far as past use, lot size, lot width, building height and setbacks. Off - street parking is not shown. The building is currently vacant. The conditional use permit (CUP) is near lapsing. Any new applications would require a new CUP. Signage is compliant and some additional will be coming down as the Ford dealership is no longer in existence. Lot 1, Block 2 is an active business. It is compliant in lot area, lot width, and setbacks. Parking configuration was not approved but rather grandfathered in. With approval of this site there was requirement for additional landscaping along daycare. This has not been done. It is recommended that this action be taken. 2 Planning Commission Minutes — 4/6/10 Lot 2 combines a number of properties. There is shared access off of the frontage road and shared access off of Sandberg Road. It extends around the daycare. This is being combined into one larger parcel. A utility easement will have to be established. The property is not currently in use. The lot is compliant with the past B2 in that an outdoor storage CUP was issued. There is no principal building. The lot area and set backs are compliant. Brixius stated that 19 lots previously existed. Some were very small and barely usable. Bringing these together will provide an option for redevelopment or reuse. Brixius offered three alternatives for consideration: Option 1A: Approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD amendment to bring the signage into compliance as well as requiring previously required buffering adjacent to daycare. Option 1 B: Approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD amendment incorporating all existing signage and current site conditions into a revised PUD approval. Option 1 C: Approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD amendment requiring compliance with signage and conditions enumerated by the Planning Commission following public hearing. This would provide an opportunity to list conditions for cleaning up and making the plat appropriate. Option I is recommended. This option ensures that signage is in compliance, and that there is a provision of the landscape buffer between Sandberg Road, the extension of Metro West and the daycare building. Conditions are outlined in Exhibit C. This Exhibit describes the development agreement, and specifies the current approved conditions related to site plan signage as well as other details and any conditions imposed by engineering staff as far as plat approval. Previous approvals of the PUD, CUP and other zoning approvals would require new applications for any future changes in the lot and plat. This would provide the opportunity to again review these lots and make a determination under current ordinances. Existing easements for utilities and drainage would be vacated by a separate document no later than the time of final plat approval when new easements will be described. A landscape plan will be submitted for City approval related to the buffer installation noted in the staff report. Cross easements between Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 and between 1 & 2 at the shared access points. Commissioner Spartz questioned signage in the freeway bonus district. Schumann was unsure how detailed that analysis was. She stated that the provision applies only to the pylon signage and allows up to 200 square feet within the bonus district. She suggested that they look at those items specifically. She clarified that signs that are non - compliant in Lot 1, Block I may be that way not only because they exceed the 15% but because they are temporary signs attached to signs that are permanent. Planning Commission Minutes — 4/6/10 Brixius stated that they didn't really look at the permanent signage but think that it is compliant. One directional sign put in the right of way is questionable. Schumann suggested that they would consult page 2 signage subsection 1 to double check numbers and to ensure that all is taken into account. Commissioner Spartz wanted to make sure that any changes will come before the Commission if there is an interest in building in the vacant parcels. Schumann stated that if a site is unused for six months a previous conditional use permit will have lapsed and would have to be amended. Commissioner Gabler wanted to ensure that there would be a buffer in between the daycare. Brixius stated that they need to submit a landscape plan and that the Commission should add this as a condition of approval. Schumann stated that the City Engineer has not done stormwater analysis yet. Brixius stated that the two buildings on the old Ford site require a setback of 10 feet and that they are compliant. Brent Wold, of Cushman Wakefield, representing Chrysler Financial, stated that he didn't have any concerns about the Exhibits presented. He expected the GMC dealer would stay at that location and agreed to talk to him about the signage. They are actively marketing the site. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. MOTION TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATION lA BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Schumann stated she will keep the Commission posted on items that go straight to City Council. 6. Consideration to appoint Planning Commissioners to the Embracing Downtown Monticello Selection and Steering Committees. Schumann included the Embracing Downtown Monticello RFP in the agenda packet and asked the Commissioners to appoint two representatives to serve on these committees. She summarized the purpose of the project and the likely time commitment expected from committee members. 13 Planning Commission Minutes — 4/6/10 MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN TO APPOINT COMMISSIONERS GABLER AND SPARTZ TO THE EMBRACING DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SELECTION AND STEERING COMMITTEES. COMMISSIONER HILGART WILL ACT AS AN ALTERNATE APPOINTEE. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Consideration of an update on the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Revision. Schumann proposed a schedule of meetings to prepare to ensure varied and detailed input into the Zoning Ordinance Revision process. Schumann will be presenting to Chamber Government Affairs committee on April 16th to ensure that the business community feels like they've had ample input into the process. She suggested that the steering committee take a neighborhood tour on April 20th at 5 p.m. in place of their regular meeting to ensure that they have all of the information needed to a provide good level of input as the zoning ordinance is updated. Schumann stated that there were no formal development applications to be reviewed at this time but that there would be time to have a meeting if a new application were to be submitted. Schumann noted that the Building Department has planned a day of code review to work on furthering refine the ordinance. There is a public workshop scheduled for June I" to obtain citizen input for the final draft. The workshop may be taped for public record. There will be a joint planning/council workshop on June l4`h to go through the zoning code and a final workshop planned to talk about the PUD application process. At that point, the zoning code review will be presented at a series of public hearings. The Planning Commission agreed that the meeting schedule seems acceptable. Schumann will confirm the schedule by Outlook. 8. Community Development Director's Report. The first public review for the concept master plan for the Bertram Chain of Lakes (BCOL) Regional Park is scheduled for May 18`h. Advisory Council has been meeting for over a year. Family Fun Day is scheduled at the BCOL Regional Planning Commission Minutes — 4/6/10 Park on June 12a' from 10 -5 p.m. Last year, over 1400 people attended the event. The Commission was invited to attend the event and to also become a Friend of Bertram Lake on their Facebook page. Council will be considering grant through the DNR. City was awarded $249,000 in 2009. A Washington County landowner backed out of the grant process so $250,000 in additional funding became available and was awarded to BCOL. The Council will be asked to fund an additional match. The 2010 acquisition would total I million dollars. County voted 3 -2 in favor of matching the additional amount. 9. Adioarn. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO ADJOURN. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Recorder: Kerry T. Burri Approved: May 4, 2010 %�/;�.�I 0