Planning Commission Minutes 05-04-2010Planning Commission Minutes — 5/4/10
MINUTES
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
6:00 PM
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Commissioners Present:
Council Liaison:
Staff:
Citizen:
1. Call to order.
Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, William
Spartz, and Barry Voight
Susie Wojchouski
Angela Schumann, Ron Hackenmueller, Steve Grittman -
NAC
Barry Fluth
Chairman Dragsten called the meeting to order.
2. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes of February 3`a, 2010
and April 6th, 2010.
The minutes for the February meeting have not yet been submitted for
consideration.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
APRIL 6, 2010.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION
CARRIED 5 -0.
3. Citizen comments. None.
4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
Commissioner Spartz requested that an item related to signage be added to the
agenda.
5. Public Hearing - Consideration of request to approve an amendment to the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 14B — Central Community District as
related to ground floor residential dwellings. Applicant: Fhrth, Barry/Masters 5ti,
Avenue
Planning Commission Minutes — 5/4/10
Steve Grittman, NAC, presented the request to amend the CCD Zoning district.
He stated that current zoning allows for residential rnulti- family structures above
a commercial use in the CCD with a limited density allowance of 1 unit per 9,000
square feet. This zoning was established to limit the xnunber of units in order to
discourage apartment construction in the downtown and maintain as much
available land as possible for commercial uses. Developers have been looking at
mixed use options as well as full- residential projects.
Grittman suggested that there are a number of ways to amend the base CCD
zoning district to provide more flexibility for residential development in the
downtown area. The City could consider various options: allowing a special
district in the CCD; allowing a multi - family R -3 district; creating a hybrid district,
or creating a comprehensive list of restrictions and requiring conditional use
permits for increased ground floor or overall desnsity. Grittman cautioned that
any change made to the base district would allow this change to occur anywhere
throughout the CCD without restriction. If the City were to handle things in this
way, they would lose control over the CUP restriction process and be put in the
position of defending why an application for CUP should not proceed.
Staff proposed instead that a new zoning district called the CCD -R be created as
an overlay district in CCD, which would be applied on a parcel by parcel basis. A
new set of standards would apply. Applicants would be required to ask for
rezoning to add the overlay to their site and then apply for a CUP. The City would
have significant discretion to determine whether or not to approve the request
based on location, traffic generation, and similar uses.
Commissioner Gabler asked if an overlay district could be set up so that the front
and back parts of blocks would be handled differently. Grittman pointed out that
the overlay district language states that eligible property would not abut directly
onto TH 25, CSAH 75, or Walnut Street. The City could create a lot line division
and could add a PUD to it if so desired.
Commissioner Gabler also asked how adding an overlay district would affect the
type of tenancy allowed. Grittman replied that it would most likely be multi-
family but that it would depend on the developer's market. He also noted that the
Planning Commission would be able to regulate land use but not determine type
of ownership.
Commissioner Spartz suggested that the Commission might want to wait until the
City has the results of the Embracing Downtown Monticello study to snake this
kind of a zoning decision. Grittman pointed out that the City would need to
consider each request as the applications come in and that this might instead be
looked at as an opportunity to begin considering what type of zoning might be
useful in the CCD.
2
Planning Commission Minutes — 5/4/10
Grittman pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan does not address the CCD.
Schumann noted that the 2008 Comprehensive Plan adopted the 1997 Plan until
the Embracing Downtown Monticello plan is adopted. Allowing a CCD -R does
not contradict any plan currently in place.
Grittman stated that rezoning to this overlay may actually enhance commercial
uses in the downtown. It is proposed that commercial level materials would
continue to be used on the ground floor units so that the design would remain
within established parameters. He noted that adopting the overlay district would
give the Planning Commission guidance about controlling development so that
they would not be in the position of negotiating with developers. Grittman also
indicated that adding an overlay district might bump the density to a performance
district.
Commissioner Hilgart asked about the formula for determining density. Based on
a total of 32,000 square feet, the overlay district would allow one dwelling per
3,000 square feet of lot area on first floor residential.
Commissioner Spartz asked if the City could do a PUD instead of an overlay
district. Grittman stated that a PUD would be used to flex performance standards
and not to flex density unless the PUD ordinance is written specifically for that. It
would have to be rezoned to a PUD district and new rules would need to be
written. There would be no code guidance and everything would be open to
negotiation.
Grittman noted that this proposal adopts the overlay district concept but does not
involve a particular site. He summarized that approval of Option 3 would
establish a new overlay district but that it would also take an action to rezone any
parcel within the new district. Adding the overlay district also then gives the
Planning Commission power over CUP applications. An applicant would still
have to apply for a rezoning to CCD -R as well as a CUP for a change to take
place. Parcels would be rezoned as CCD -R only in cases in which intensive
residential uses would enhance commercial uses. If applicant can meet the CUP
performance standards, the Planning Commission has the discretion to allow the
rezoning request.
He pointed out that there are some parcels in the downtown area better suited for
residential and ill- suited for commercial due to location. Some lots just aren't
appropriate for main floor residential. The Planning Commission would have the
discretion to choose to use the overlay district when the circumstances are
appropriate per parcel.
Grittman pointed out that adopting this overlay concept would alleviate any spot
zoning concerns as one of the fundamental issues with spot zoning is land use
consistency.
3
Planning Commission Minutes — 514110
Grittman suggested that the Planning Commission could choose to adopt Option 3
with amendments if this were appropriate.
Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing.
Property owner and downtown developer Barry Fluth thanked the Commission
for considering the overlay district proposal. He stated that he felt that this type of
district would help bring the residential mix needed to make the downtown area
more successful. He noted that there are a number of parcels in which this
approach would work. He noted that he is considering developing market rent
apartments similar to those at Landmark Square to fit in with the ambiance of the
downtown. He stated that the units at that development are nearly full and feels
there is a market for more. He suggested that if the overlay district option passed,
he would return to the Planning Commission next month with a residential
development proposal.
Commissioner Spartz asked Fluth his thoughts about awaiting the outcome of the
downtown study to proceed with development plans. Fluth stated that he doesn't
think the new plan would vary much from having a combination of residential and
commercial development in the downtown and it might take a year or so before
any changes were approved.
Schumann stated that even after the downtown plan is completed, the City would
not yet have taken on any CCD district regulations for zoning. That will be a
separate process.
Wojehouski asked if there would be TIF involved. Schumann said, at this point, it
is just a land use consideration. TIF would be considered if the rezoning were to
be approved and a project put forward.
Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Gabler asked if the overlay district could it be rolled into any new
downtown plan if it were successful or eliminated if it were not. Grittinan stated
that the Commission always has the zoning authority to change policy consistent
with that plan when adopted.
Commissioner Gabler noted that she feels the proposal provides the flexibility to
support mixed use rather than doing spot zones to get folks downtown. She agreed
that the Commission could evaluate it as it is implemented.
Commissioner Hilgart asked if this proposal would eliminate commercial use on
main floor. Grittman stated that the overlay district doesn't change any existing
use in the CCD but would broaden the scope of options for the downtown.
0
Planning Commission Minutes — 5/4/10
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO RECOMMEND AN
AMENDMENT THAT CREATES AN OVERLAY DISTRICT IN THE CCD
FOR GROUND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL USES, ALONG WITH SPECIFIC
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR SUCH DEVELOPMENT..
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION
CARRIED 4 -1.
Commissioner Spartz expressed concerns that the findings from the Embracing
Downtown Monticello RFP project should be reviewed prior to approving any
rezoning options.
6. Consideration of an update related to density and neighborhood design standards
for Places to Live.
Schumann stated that one of the primary objectives of the new designation Places
to Live in the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan is to control for step up housing.
She noted that, although densities are not pre - assigned by the Plan, there are a
variety of tools available to the Planning Commission to control for density and
quality over quantity. She pointed out that the Planning Commission can also
identify particular zoning districts in the new code that meet the step up housing
Comp Plan objective.
Schumann noted that infrastructure services have already been extended to the
NW portion of the City, and for that reason, it would be developed more readily
than the City's broader south central region which is not yet served by
infrastructure.
She suggested that the Commission could, in updating the zoning code, increase
requirements as related to finishing standards. The revised code would also
strengthen application requirements for performance zoning and PUD. She
mentioned that the City is not obligated to automatically accept a property for
annexation because annexation only occurs at time of final plat. She pointed out
that the Commission has a great amount of leverage through the current orderly
annexation agreement and process.
Schumann told the Planning Commission that she feels that they have the control
necessary to address the Comprehensive Plan objectives.
Consideration of an update on the Monticello Housing Report.
Schumann said the full housing report would not be completed by May. She
indicated that some good baseline data has been gathered, including classification
information on the types of housing from Wright County. The analysis will be
Planning Commission Minutes — 5/4/10
done by plat and include number of lots, how many lots are occupied, zoning of
each lot, the density of the total development, and the number of rental licenses in
both multi - family and single family complexes. Staff has been reviewing
situational information such as how long single and multi - family homes are
staying on the market, the price points, and the vacancy rates. She suggested
delaying the public meeting until this information can be carefully evaluated as
additional planning projects are also underway. Schumann stated that she expects
the housing report to be completed by staff in house by July or August.
8. Community Development Director's Report.
Schumann provided an update on the Carcone Addition. City Council approved
the preliminary plat, the final plat and the development agreement. Recording of
those documents and final execution are underway.
Commissioner Gabler asked about the status of those development projects that
have not been closed out. Schumann provided a summary of the varying points in
the close out process. She stated that the City has a guidebook for development
which identifies steps in the process. She noted that it is available on the City's
website under the Community Development section.
Staff will meet with stakeholders to discuss and facilitate the highest and best use
of the Rand Mansion. Current property owners would like to sell as quickly as
possible. They ask that the property be maintained in its historic state and would
prefer that it to be put to public or semi - public use. Schumann will keep the
Planning Commission apprised of any proposed action on the property.
9. Consideration of adding items to the a eg nda.
Commissioner Spartz noted a large developer sign on Hwy. 94 near Sunset Ponds
and wondered if it met the zoning code requirements. Schumann agreed that it is
big and bright. She will determine if it was a preexisting structure with a change
in the face and therefore a lawful use. Previous standards had allowed for a 200
sq. foot size sign for property for sale or lease over a certain amount of acreage.
The new code will allow only 96 square feet for property over ten acres.
10. Adjourn.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO ADJOURN.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED
5 -0.
The meeting was adjourned at 7 p.m.
Recorder: Kerry T. Burri
Approved: July 6, 2010
Attest:
Planning Commission Minutes — 5/4/10
Development