Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 05-07-2013MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 7, 2012 - 6:00 PM Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: William Spartz, Brad Fyle, Charlotte Gabler, Sam Burvee, Grant Sala Council Liaison Present: Lloyd Hilgart Staff Present: Angela Schumann, Ron Hackenmueller, Steve Grittman-NAC 1. Call to order Bill Spartz called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes of April 2 2013 CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 2, 2013. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. 3. Citizen Comments Front yard fencing zoning amendment — Bill Spartz, of 1450 Oak Ridge Circle, asked Brad Fyle to step in as acting Planning Commission Chair so that he could provide citizen comment as a resident of Monticello. Spartz asked the Commission to call for a public hearing to consider a zoning amendment to allow four foot high front yard fencing utilizing material which provides 50% transparency to address traffic and line of sight issues in residential districts. He suggested that this change could potentially eliminate the graduated fence height requirements in place and result in easier ordinance enforcement. SAM BURVEE MOVED TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE JUNE 4TH, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO FRONT YARD FENCING REQUIREMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. CHARLOTTE GABLER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. (Bill Spartz did not vote.) 4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda None 5. Public Hearin - Consideration of a request for Variance to front setback for Lot 8 and Part of Lot 9 Original Plat of Monticello, PID: 155 - 010 - 009080. Applicants: Rogosheske, John and Dawn Planning Case Number: 2013 - 008 The applicants requested a variance to construct a covered porch and accessible ramp addition on the front (north) side of the building to accommodate wheelchair bound Planning Commission Minutes --- 5107113 residents of the adult foster care home located at 612 5th Street West. Section 2.4(C)(4)(a) of the Zoning Ordinance states that approval of a variance may only be made upon a determination that practical difficulties will result based on all of a certain set of criteria. Staff provided responses to each of the criteria as noted below: (i) The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if the provisions of the Ordinance are strictly applied. Staff Response The existing wheelchair ramp is only accessible from the garage. Construction of covered, exterior wheelchair ramp to protect foster home residents from adverse weather would be a reasonable use. Ramp construction on the east side of the property would negatively impact off - street parking. (ii) The circumstances rendering the property unusable are unique to the property. Staff_ Response The property is unique in that it is occupied by an adult foster care facility serving handicapped residents. This population has a routine need for common - carrier transportation such as scheduled vans or drop off/pick up traffic. Existing site conditions impose a significant burden and practical difficulty upon facility staff and residents in regard to transporting wheelchair bound residents. (iii) The circumstances rendering the property unusable were not created by the owner thereof. Staff Response The property is not considered "unusable" as the foster care use has been in existence for many years. The existing means by which handicapped residents are transported has however, been a significant burden. (iv) A variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff Response The proposed building expansion would not alter the character of the area. (v) Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a sufficient basis for a Variance if reasonable use far the property exists under the terms of the regulation. Staff Response It does not appear that the request relates to economic considerations. Planning Commission Minutes — 5107113 While the current 24 foot front yard setback at the property does not meet the 30 foot setback requirement for the R -3 Medium Density Residential District, it holds legal grandfather rights. The proposed porch addition would extend 8 feet into the existing front yard and result in a structure setback of 16 feet. Sam Burvee asked which street would be involved. Staff recommended minimizing the use of 5t' Street. Charlotte Gabler asked if off - street parking should be included as a condition. Steve Grittman recommended that site plan changes instead be encouraged. Bill Spartz opened the public hearing. John Rogosheske, the owner and operator of an adult foster care home at 612 5a' Street, summarized that the proposed property improvements would make bus access safer and easier for wheelchair bound clients. He noted that adding an handicapped ramp would provide visual appeal to the property as well. As there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Spartz also asked the applicant if he had a project timeline in mind. Rogosheske said that he'd like to begin the project in June to coincide with a scheduled roof replacement. He indicated that upgrading the property would likely take a couple of weeks. He also noted that it would the improvement would provide additional accessible fire exits. Decision 1: Adopting Resolution No. 2013 -033 approving a variance from the minimum 30 foot front yard setback requirement in the R -3, Medium Density Residential District as requested at 612 5a` Street West BRAD FYLE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2013 - 033 APPROVING THE VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT AS PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION OF MARCH 29, 2013, CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN EXHIBIT Z. GRANT SALA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval 612 5a' Street West Variance from 30 foot front Yard Setback Requirement 1. Wheelchair van pick -up and drop -off activities shall take place within the subject site's driveway and discouraged within 5a' Street West. 2. The porch addition shall match the color and finish materials of the principal building. 3 Planning Commission Minutes — 5107113 3. A building permit shall be received and all requirements imposed by it be satisfied. This item does not require City Council approval as the Planning Commission is the Board of Adjustment and Appeal for variances. 6. Public Hearin - Consideration of a request for Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for the Great River Addition a commercial subdivision in a B -3 (Highway Business District and R -3 (Medium-Density) Residential District. Applicant: City of Monticello and RiverWood Bank Staff asked that the Planning Commission table action on this item to allow for proper mailed and published notice for a public hearing. The public hearing will be conducted at a special meeting of the PIanning Commission scheduled for May 21, 2013. GRANT SALA MOVED TO TABLE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO TUESDAY, MAY 211T AT 6:00 PM. CHARLOTTE GABLER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. 7. Public Hearing - Consideration of an amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 11- Building Materials and Chapter 5, Section 1- Use Table and Section 2 -- Use Standards for Convenience Services and S ecial Eating Establishments The Planning Commission considered amending two sections of the zoning ordinance. The first proposed amendment, Chapter 4, Section 11 - Building Materials Standards, required revision due to a clerical error made in the final drafting of the text of code changes recommended for industrially zoned properties by the Industrial and Economic Development Committee (IEDC). The ordinance should have been amended to read as follows: 1. In the Industrial and Business Campus District (IBC), the Light rndustpiar n: „Wet 0 ) and the v. y h. u Sri r n:... het (7 -2), the following building materials and standards shall apply. (a) Any exposed metal or fiberglass finish on all buildings shall be limited to no more than fifty (50) percent of any one wall if it is coordinated into the architectural design. Any metal finish utilized in the building shall be aluminum of twenty -six (26) gauge steel, the roof slope shall be limited to a maximum of one (1) in twelve (12) slope. (b) All buildings constructed of curtain wall panels offanished steel, aluminum, or fiberglass shall be required to be faced with brick, wood, stone, architectural concrete cast in place or pre -cast panels on all wall surfaces. 2. In the Light Industrial (I-1) and Heavy Industrial (I-2) districts, the following 4 Planning Commission Minutes — 5107113 building materials and standards shall apply: RESER VED Staff had invited IEDC members Mary Barger and Wayne Elam to participate in a more extensive code review to eliminate the "Reserved" component and provide clear and definitive guidance to industrial users and prospects. They suggested standards which would not be overly restrictive for existing businesses. The language proposed for materials graduates from less restrictive to more restrictive as the districts progress from the I -2 to the Industrial & Business Campus (IBC) District. The IBC District mirrors the materials requirements for business district buildings which allows for no exterior metal finishes, with the exception of architectural or design detail metal. The I -1 and I -2 Districts allow for primarily metal buildings, but require some finish detail for facades along public rights of way. Any exterior wall adjacent to a public street must include a wall plane articulation or building materials differentiation across of 25% of the facade in the I -1 and 15% in the I -2. Bill Spartz opened the public hearing for Chapter 4, Section 11. As there were no comments, the public hearing was closed. There was some discussion as to the need to create additional regulations as well as some clarification about the limits involved in changing non - conforming buildings. Staff indicated that developing clear standards for the I -1 and I -2 Districts demonstrates compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Charlotte Gabler said that she trusted the IEDC to know what industrial building standards would be appropriate. Decision 1: Resolution 2013 -031 recommending approval of an amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 11— Building Materials CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2013 -031, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE #578, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 4.11(E) — BUILDING MATERIALS, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -1 WITH GRANT SALA VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Staff also proposed code amendments for Section 5.1 (Use Standards) and 5.2 (Use - Specific Standards) Convenience Services and Specialty Eating Establishments. In Section 5.1— Use Standards, "Convenience Service: Retail, Vehicle Fuel, Specialty Food and Drive - Through, " staff recommended that uses be listed separately within the Central Community District (CCD) Use Table 5-1A as they are in general principal use table (Table 5 -1) for consistency, as follows: Convenience Retail Vehicle Fuel Sales 5 Planning Commission Minutes — 5107/13 • Specialty Eating Establishments < 10,000 SF Other proposed use amendments include: + "Specialty Eating Establishments < 10,000 SF" would be considered a permitted use in the F -1, F -2 and L sub - districts of the CCD, with a CUP required in the F -3 and in all districts for any drive- through use. "Convenience Retail" would be considered a permitted use in the F -2 sub - district, and a conditional use in all other sub - districts. • "Vehicle Fuel Sales" would require a conditional use permit for the L -8 and F -1 and F -2 sub - districts and be prohibited in all other sub - districts Under Section 5.2 -- Use - Specific Standards, staff recommended several amendments to existing code for "Convenience Services: Retail, Vehicle Fuel, Specialty Food and Drive - Through Facilities. " • Uses would be separated and standards added to requirements for the pre - existing "Convenience Retail" and "Specialty Eating Establishments" uses. The "Vehicle Fuel Sales" use includes existing requirements related to the CCD. Section 5.2(F)(10) would be deleted entirely and the sub - section numbers re- ordered. • In the CCD, drive- through facilities shall be approved by conditional use permit and shall be located to minimize their exposure to the street. Bill Spartz opened the public hearing related to Chapter 5.1 & 5.2. As there was no comment, the public hearing was closed. Decision 2: Resolution 2013 -034 recommending approval of an amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, Section 1— Use Table and Section 2 — Use Standards for Convenience Services and Specialty Eating Establishments CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2013 -034, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE #579, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 5, SECTION 1 — USE TABLE AND SECTION 2 — USE STANDARDS FOR CONVENIENCE SERVICES AND SPECIALTY EATING ESTABLISHMENTS, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. GRANT SALA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Each of these resolutions will move forward for City Council consideration on May 28a' 31 Planning Commission Minutes 5/07/13 8. Consideration to call fora public hearing for amendments to the Monticello Com rehensive Plan Chapter 2 — Community Context Chapter 3 - Land Use and Chapter 4 — Economic Development The Planning Commission typically reviews the Land Use chapter of Monticello's Comprehensive Plan on an annual basis to ensure that it remains a relevant document. Staff recommended that the Community Context chapter (Chapter 2) and the Economic Development chapter (Chapter 4) also be updated to include more recent data. Representatives from the IEDC, EDA, and Planning Commissioners Brad Fyle and Charlotte Gabler updated the three chapters. The IEDC and EDA recommended approval of the draft amendments. Staff asked the Planning Commission call for a public hearing to consider the draft amendments as well. Staff agreed to provide the information in advance so that the Commission might more thoroughly review the document. BRAD FYLE MOVED TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE JUNE 4TH, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE MONTICELLO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHAPTER 2 - COMMUNITY CONTEXT, CHAPTER 3 - LAND USE, AND CHAPTER 4 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. CHARLOTTE GABLER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. 9. Consideration to approve Resolution 2012 -107, recommending action as related to a re guest for Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chanter 5 Section 3 — Accessory Uses to allow Machine /Truck Repair & Sales Auto Re air — Minor Auto Repair - Ma'or as Accessory Conditional Uses in the B -3 (Hi2hway Business District; a Conditional Use Permit for Vehicle Sales/Rental; a Conditional Use Permit for Machine /Truck Repair & Sales Auto Repair — Minor and Auto Repair - Minor; Variance to Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 8 - Off- Street Parking Requirements; Variance to Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Variance to Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 1- Landscaping & Screening Requirements, and a preliminary and final plat for the Maas Addition The Planning Commission had previously taken action on this item, recommending denial of all requests, with the exception of a recommendation to approve vehicle sales and vehicle repair by conditional use permit. The resolution, which had been included with the staff report, had not been formally adopted because it included language for approval of all requests. Staff asked that the Commission formally adopt the revised Resolution 2012 -007 in support of the motions made by the Planning Commission in December of 2012. There was some discussion as to why it was necessary to now adopt a resolution for a recommendation that had already been reflected in the minutes. Staff explained that the City Attorney had recommended that Planning Commission findings be accurately 7 Planning Commission Minutes — 5107113 summarized in a resolution and noted that the revised resolution would serve as a record of formal action in support of the minutes. BRAD FYLE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2012 -107. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. (Charlotte Gabler did not vote.) 10. Community Development Director's Report Building/Development Activity Dollar Tree — Staff confirmed that the Dollar Tree would be required to comply with the City's erosion control ordinance. The Planning Commission will consider the recently submitted application for variance on an accessory trash enclosure in June. Ryan Companies Site - Ryan Companies installed erosion control fencing on the lot south of PetSmart at the Union Crossings development because they don't want to plant alternative turf. Development plans are not yet in place. Economic Development Services - There will be likely be one Planning Commissioner present at the May Sffi workshop. Monte Club Follow -Up - Council had asked that the Parks Commission's May agenda include an item on the public and private use integration for the Monte Club property. Although IRET is currently looking at other Monticello site alternatives for the development of a multi- family project, representatives had agreed to share what they had learned about the development potential of the site at that meeting. 11. Adjourn BRAD FYLE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:14 P.M. CHARLOTTE GABLER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Recorder: Kerry Bum Approved: June 4, 2013 Attest: Angela Sc um , _C_(!! unity Development Director