Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda 02-21-2012REGULARMEETING MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION Tuesday,February21st,2012 6:00PM MississippiRoom,MonticelloCommunityCenter Commissioners:RodDragsten,BradFyle,CharlotteGabler,WilliamSpartz,and BarryVoight Staff:AngelaSchumann,RonHackenmueller,SteveGrittman-NAC 1.Calltoorder. 2.ConsiderationtoapprovePlanningCommissionminutes. a.RegularMeetingofJanuary3rd,2012 3.CitizenComments. 4.Considerationofaddingitemstotheagenda. 5.ContinuedPublicHearing-Considerationtoadoptthe2012CityofMonticelloOfficial ZoningMap. Applicant:CityofMonticello 6.PublicHearing–ConsiderationofarequestforRezoningfromR-1(Single-Family Residential)toI-1(LightIndustrial)for1400EastBroadway. Applicant:CityofMonticello 7.PublicHearing–ConsiderationofarequestforAmendmenttotheMonticelloZoning Ordinance,Chapter4,Section5asrelatedtoTemporarySignage Applicant:CityofMonticello 8.PublicHearing–ConsiderationtoamendMonticelloZoningOrdinance,Chapter27, RegulatingtheManagementoftheMississippiWild,Scenic,andRecreationalRiver SystemandtheShorelandAreasoftheCityofMonticelloandMonticelloZoning OrdinanceChapter3,Section7fortheadoptionofOverlayOrdinancesregulatingthe MississippiWild,Scenic&RecreationalRiverDistrictandtheShorelandDistrict. Applicant:CityofMonticello 9.PublicHearing–ConsiderationofarequestforAmendmenttotheMonticelloZoning Ordinance,Chapter2,Section4(P)forSpecificReviewRequirementsandProceduresfor PlannedUnitDevelopment. Applicant:CityofMonticello 10.CommunityDevelopmentDirector’sReport 11.Adjourn. MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 3, 2012 - 6:00 PM Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center CommIlsslodnei-s: Rod Dragsten, Brad Fyle, Charlotte Gabler, Barry Voight, and William Spartz Council Liaison Absent: Lloyd Hilgart Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman-NAC Stafl'Absent: Ron Hackenmueller 1. Call to order Rod Dragsten called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes of December 6th, 2011 BRAD FYLE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 6, 2011. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BARRY VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 3. Citizen Comments None 4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda None 5. Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit for Co -location of a Wireless Telecommunication Service Antenna. Applicant: RKZ Consulting The applicant requested a Conditional Use Permit to co -locate wireless communication equipment on an existing wireless facilities tower located at 6111 Wildwood Boulevard in the R-1 Single Family district. The applicant would replace their own existing antenna array with newer technology. Antenna and equipment would be replaced at the same elevation and new cabling and ground equipment would be located within the existing enclosure with no visual or other impacts on the surrounding property. The site is fenced and screened. The application appeared to be in compliance with each of the required regulations of the code. Rod Dragsten asked which telecommunications carrier would be upgrading equipment. Steve Grittman reported that RKZ Consulting was representing AT&T. The public hearing was opened. Hearing no public comment, the public hearing was closed. BARRY SPARTZ MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2012-004 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS REQUESTED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CHARLOTTE GABLER. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes - 01/03/12 6. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, Section 1 as related to Conditional Uses in the R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) District and a request for a Conditional Use Permit for a duplex residential use in an R-3 District. Applicant: Bondhus, Mary K. The applicant requested a zoning amendment to convert an existing single family home to a duplex dwelling at 1349 Hart Boulevard. Two approvals would be necessary to accommodate this request. First, the R-3, Medium Density Residential District, must be amended to allow duplex dwellings as a conditional use. Secondly, a conditional use permit which is specific to the subject property must be processed and approved under that revised ordinance. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT The requested Zoning Ordinance amendment would make an allowance for conversions from existing single-family to duplex dwellings in the R-3 Zoning District by conditional use permit. The construction of new duplex dwellings in the district would not be allowed. This approach would provide an opportunity for the City and property owners to lessen the degree of nonconformity (by reason of density) in R-3 Districts. This would also allow the City's long-term vision for the district to remain intact. To make an allowance for duplex dwellings within R-3 Zoning Districts, the following Ordinance modifications are necessary: 1. Uses by District (Table 5.1) must be modified to list "duplex" as a conditional use in the B-3 Zoning District. 2. Regulations for Duplex Uses [Section 5.2 (C)(2)(b)] must be modified to stipulate that duplex dwellings would be allowed within R-3 Zoning Districts by conditional use permit when converted from single family residential dwellings. In this regard, it is suggested that the Section be modified to read as follows (refer to highlighted text): (b) Duplex (i) A minimum of two (2) off-street parking spaces per unit shall be provided within an enclosed garage of at least four hundred (400) square feet. (ii) All driveways and required off-street parking spaces shall be surfaced with concrete, bituminous or approved equivalent. iii Legal non -conforming single family dwellings located within R-3 Zoning Districts may be converted to duplex dwellings by conditional use permit where environmental conditions on the property support 0) Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 preservation of trees, drainage patterns, or other related features. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Approval of a conditional use permit application requires that the City find that conditions can be established to ensure that a certain set of criteria will be met. Staff provided written comment identifying how each set of criteria would be met. (i) The conditional use will not substantially diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity of the subject property; (ii) The conditional use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, or welfare of persons residing or working near the use; (iii) The conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding property for permitted uses predominant in the area; (iv) The conditional use will not pose an undue burden on public utilities or roads, and adequate sanitary facilities are provided; (v) The conditional use can provide adequate parking and loading spaces, and all storage on the site can be done in conformance with City code requirements; (vi) The conditional use will not result in any nuisance including but not limited to odor, noise, or sight pollution; (vii) The conditional use will not unnecessarily impact natural features such as woodlands, wetlands, and shorelines; and all erosion will be properly controlled; (viii) The conditional use will adhere to any applicable additional criteria outlined in Chapter S of the Ordinance for the proposed use. Barry Voight asked if a variance would be an option in this situation. Staff summarized that state statute does not allow for a variance to alter allowed use on a property. Charlotte Gabler asked if any overlays were involved in this parcel. Angela Schumann responded that a Wild and Scenic Overlay was in place as the property abuts the river. Steve Grittman confirmed that there are not many single-family homes in R-3 District that are on such a large piece of property and that this action would actually bring the property more into conformance with the intent of the district. It allows for incremental intensification of the density at this time. 3 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 The public hearing was opened. Applicant Mary K. Bondhus, of 7336 Aladdin Ave NW in Buffalo, outlined her plan for remodeling of the home and responded to questions. The dwelling would be divided into two separate units and follow all applicable building and fire codes. Hot water heating would be replaced with natural gas heat. New furnaces would be installed. The electrical would be redone. Plumbing would be separate. Hearing no further public comment, the public hearing was closed. DECISION 1: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT BARRY VOIGHT MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE #541 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW THE CONVERSION OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS LOCATED IN R-3 DISTRICTS TO DUPLEX DWELLINGS BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BRAD FYLE. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. DECISION 2: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 1349 HART BOULEVARD BARRY VOIGHT MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2012-001, APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BRAD FYLE. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval Mary K. Bondhus Conditional Use Permit 1. City Officials approve the Zoning Ordinance Amendment making an allowance for the conversion of single family residential dwellings to duplex dwellings in the R-3 Zoning District by conditional use permit. 2. The floor area of the duplex dwelling comply with the minimum area requirements of Chapter 5 of the Zoning Ordinance (based upon the number of bedrooms provided). 3. Not less than two off-street parking spaces be provided per dwelling unit within an enclosed garage. Such garage shall measure not less than 400 square feet in size. 4. During the use of the property as a two-family structure under the CUP, no subdivision shall be permitted that would alter the use of the property. This restriction is not intended to restrict conveyances of portions of the property for public use. 0 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 5. All driveways and required off-street parking spaces be surfaced with concrete, bituminous or approved equivalent. 6. Issues related to grading and drainage shall be subject to review and comment by the City Engineer. 7. Public Hearing - Consideration of request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development for a proposed parking lot expansion for an industrial use in the Central Community District (CCD). Applicant: Cargill Kitchen Solutions The Cargill site is currently occupied by a variety of buildings associated with the "Cargill Kitchen Solutions" business operations. The area in which the new parking lot is proposed, located at 206 4th Street West; had been occupied by a single family home. The requested amendment involves an expansion of the existing CUP (for PUD) site boundaries and the conversion of a single family residential lot to a parking lot. The proposed parking lot would be located south of 4th Street and west of Linn Street. The parking lot includes 29 stalls and is proposed to be accessed from the east via Linn Street. Linn Street is a partially improved right of way that enters the Cargill property and dead ends used for driveway for Cargill activities on the west side of property. Cargill shift overlap has limited parking options for employees. The application is intended to increase the off-street parking supply, particularly for the business activities toward the west end of the campus. Steve Grittman indicated that there was a problem with the proposal submitted due to the size of the lot width and existing code requirements related to parking. There was not enough space in the design to accommodate backing movements in dead end conditions. Cars wouldn't have enough turning radius. Staff offered an unconventional alternative because Linn Street functions as a driveway for Cargill rather than a public street. The alternative involves a one way drive aisle with angled parking entering on 4th Street, circulating through and exiting to Linn Street. In conversations with the applicant, the flow for this one-way circulation may be reversed, with traffic entering Linn Street and existing onto 4th Street. The advantage of this pattern would be the ability to add angled parking to the Linn Street right of way area that would be accessible to the in -bound traffic. The parking lot is bordered on the west by a single family residence. The neighboring property currently has a fence along the property line that would provide some screening from this parcel. Staff recommended intensifying landscape buffer with more evergreen and dense and larger plantings for effective screening. The Planning Commission may also consider the construction of a fully opaque fence on the applicant's property, or may require as a condition of approval that the applicant submit a security guaranteeing placement of such fence, should the adjacent fencing be removed. 5 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 The applicants recently provided a photometric plan which will be reviewed by staff. Bill Spartz indicated that he doesn't know if this will resolve all of the surrounding parking issues that exist today. He asked if the public would be able to use the parking lot as well. Steve Grittman pointed out that the point of the proposal is to move Cargill employees into that lot and free up street space for the public. Brad Fyle pointed out that Linn Street could become available for additional parking at a future date. The public hearing was opened. Scott Campbell, owner of the neighboring property to the west, shared his concerns. His wife, Pam Campbell, had submitted written comments to the Planning Commission. His daughter Jennifer resides at the property next door to the lot. He was concerned with traffic coming into the parking lot on 4th Street and semis coming in on Linn Street. He suggested that employees turn left onto Linn Street and instantly enter the parking lot and exit into Cargill's property on Linn Street as well so that there would be no entrance or exit on 4th Street. Steve Grittman agreed to consider that design option. The option would also eliminate light spilling onto 4th Street upon exiting. Scott Campbell mentioned that he liked the additional landscaping suggested and supported asking Cargill to provide a fence should the existing fence need be replaced. He indicated that he'd like to see the lighting and landscaping plans when completed. Russ Adamski of 304 Linn Street stated that it is difficult for cars to travel in both directions on 4th Street due to the number of cars parked along both sides of the street. He suggested that the City consider restricting parking on either the north or south side of 4th Street to improve circulation and visibility at the 4th and Linn Street intersection. Rod Dragsten agreed it might be useful to consider that suggestion. Kurt Zweifel, plant manager at the local Cargill facility, indicated that Cargill would do what it takes to be a good neighbor. Brad Fyle suggested that the applicant might consider adding some signage to the lot. Rod Dragsten asked about the possibility of going straight south and not turning into Linn Street but into the cul-de-sac. Steve Grittman noted that staff had spoken with the applicant about that but found that it may not work from an operational standpoint in that the area is used for parking trailers and tankers. Hearing no further public comments, the public hearing was closed. Bill Spartz asked for clarification as to which street traffic would flow from the parking lot. There was continued discussion about options. There was general agreement about the need for angled parking. m Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 Steve Grittman suggested that to maximize parking along Linn Street the opposite flow would be most appropriate. Outbound traffic in the parking lot would accommodate inbound traffic along Linn Street. Bruce Westby suggested it might be a safer option to enter from 4th Street than exit on to 4th Street. He suggested that there be no parking between the drive aisle and Linn Street. There was some consideration about tabling this item for further review to ensure that the Planning Commission is clear on what would be done. Barry Voight instead suggested moving forward with approval with specific amended conditions in Exhibit Z and asking that staff ensure that those conditions are met. Rod Dragsten asked about the option of vacating Linn Street. Angela Schumann reminded the Commission that the vacation of Linn Street would involve a separate notification process. Barry Voight suggested that a possible vacation of Linn Street would not directly affect this proposal at this time and that City Council could still move forward with that option at a later date. Daniel Push representing Cargill noted that the applicant would like to move forward with the proposal. There was some further discussion about amending the criteria in Exhibit Z to accurately reflect the intent of the Planning Commission's direction. Barry Voight suggested that the disabled parking requirement relate to Cargill's property systemwide rather than just on this specific parcel. The general consensus was that items 2, 4, 6, be amended to address specific concerns and that an item 8 be added. The wording in item 2 was to reflect the addition of angled parking. The wording in item 4 was to include a minimum evergreen height of 48" and the request that the applicant provide an opaque fencing along the boundary. The wording in item six was to be amended to address potential safety concerns related to site circulation and access in the parking lot. Item 8 should be added to address the need to include and review a photometric plan for the lot. BARRY VOIGHT MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2012-002 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMENDED CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BILL SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval Cargill Kitchen Solutions Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development 1. City Officials find the proposed north, south and east parking lot setbacks (all less than 6 feet) to be acceptable. 7 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 2. Consideration be given to modifying the parking lot design to eliminate the proposed dead-end drive aisle conditions. Parking spaces will be angled. Staff will make a recommendation as to the pattern of traffic flow. 3. The applicant address the State's disabled parking requirements. 4. Landscaping is intensified along the western boundary with evergreen shrubs at a 48" minimum initial planting height. The applicant is also asked to provide for opaque fence at this location should the existing fence be removed. 5. No semi -trailer parking or outdoor storage shall be permitted in the proposed parking area. 6. Issues related to grading and drainage as well as site circulation and access shall be subject to review and comment by the City Engineer, including those comments included with the staff report dated 1/3/12. 7. Issues related to utilities shall be subject to review and comment by the City Utilities Department including those comments included with the staff report dated 1/3/12. 8. The applicant will submit a photometric plan for review and approval. Angela Schumann noted that this item would be considered by City Council on January 9, 2012. 8. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit for Cross -Parking for a commercial use in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: Croaston, Ray/Landform McDonald's wishes to replace their existing 4,500 square foot restaurant at 100 Oakwood Drive East with a new restaurant measuring 5,158 square feet in size. The subject site overlays two parcels of land. The restaurant building and related automobile parking is proposed to be located upon Lot 1 to the west. Oversized vehicle parking is proposed to occur upon Lot 2 to the east. The requested conditional use permit is necessary to allow cross parking/access between the two lots which comprise the subject site. Staff conducted a site plan review and provided written analysis related to access, parking, drive-through lane, loading and trash handling, impervious surface coverage, landscaping, lighting, building materials, signage, grading and drainage and utilities. The request meets code requirements for the B-3 District. The vehicle circulation patterns within parking areas will be improved and the site will have ample parking. The Ordinance states that the following cross -parking conditions must be satisfied: The required island and landscaping requirements in Section 4.1 of the Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 Ordinance are met. 2. The vehicular use area meets the required setback at the perimeter of the parcels in question. 3. The curb cut access locations to the parking lot(s) are approved by the City. 4. A shared parking/access and maintenance agreement is provided by the parking owners and recorded against all subject properties. As a condition of CUP approval, light fixture heights should not exceed 25 feet as required by Ordinance. Staff indicated that the site plan submitted had proposed a 30 foot high sign but noted that the applicant has agreed to meet the code requirement. There was some discussion about building materials and color scheme. To provide visual interest, a few exterior feature/accents such as a trellis and different colored bricks are proposed. All building materials proposed meet Ordinance requirements. The applicant wishes to retain the existing pylon sign on the property although it significantly exceeds the maximum height and area requirements. The sign is, however, afforded grandfather rights and therefore may continue to exist in accordance with the City's nonconforming structure requirements. McDonald's can replace the face of the sign but not make any structural changes to the sign without approval. Charlotte Gabler asked if the two parcels owned by the applicant could be combined. Steve Grittman noted that staff had suggested replatting to avoid the CUP requirement but the applicant found it would be too complicated due to title and easement issues. Rod Dragsten asked about options for improved pedestrian access. The public hearing was opened. Eric Kellog from Landform Engineering was present for the hearing and represented McDonalds. The Commission inquired about the possibility of a sidewalk connection along the west side of the property. The applicant's representative indicated that the existing grade (there is a retaining wall along the northwestern side of the property) made the construction of a sidewalk prohibitive. He noted that the reconfigured parking lot would allow smoother circulation and put more parking adjacent to the front door. The dedicated drive-through lane would allow traffic adjacent to the building to flow freely. Hearing no other public comment, the public hearing was closed. BILL SPARTZ MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, BASED ON FINDINGS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN RESOLUTION 2012-003, CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN EXHIBIT Z. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CHARLOTTE GABLER. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Q Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval McDonald's Restaurant Conditional Use Permit 1. Access -related issues shall be subject to comment and recommendation by the City Engineer and MnDOT. 2. All easement related documents shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. 3. Exterior light fixture heights be reduced from 30 to 25 feet as required by Ordinance. Such fixtures shall be designed to direct light downward. 4. Issues related to grading and drainage shall be subject to review and comment by the City Engineer. 5. Issues related to site utilities shall be subject to review and approval by the City's Utility Department. The applicant would like to begin work on the project in the spring. Angela Schumann noted that this item will be considered by City Council on January 9, 2012. 9. Consideration to adopt the 2012 City of Monticello Official Zoning Man. Applicant: City of Monticello The Planning Commission had been asked to review the proposed 2012 City of Monticello Zoning Map and recommend the map for adoption by the City Council. Staff outlined three rezoning actions taken in 2011 which require a change in the zoning map and pointed to the need for corrective rezoning action on one parcel. After some questions from the Commission related to these changes, staff determined that further review was required prior to moving forward with the zoning map update. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO RECOMMEND TABLING ACTION ON THE ADOPTION OF THE 2012 CITY OF MONTICELLO OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR FURTHER STUDY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BILL SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 10. Consideration to complete an annual review of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Staff provided an overview of the Comprehensive Plan's vision and purpose and outlined three points of focus: Core Annual Review Areas, Growth Policies (or overall land use policies) reflected in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan, and the Transportation Plan which is reflected in Chapter 6. Core Annual Review Areas 10 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 1. Development trends and projects from the current years: With the newly available housing report and 2010 Census data in mind, staff recommended: an adjustment to the Chapter 3 -Land Use Growth Projection table; the establishment of a Commission task force to lead the Growth Projection update; and an update to Chapter 2 -Community Context. 2. Summary of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan: There were three comprehensive plan amendment applications, two of which were incorporations of additional planning documents. The three amendments adopted by the City Council were: the Park & Pathway Plan, the Embracing Downtown Plan, a land use change from industrial to commercial for a parcel at Fallon Avenue and Chelsea Road. 3. Discussion of current development issues and implications for the Comprehensive Plan: The City adopted a new Zoning Ordinance in 2011. There have been recent requests for reductions in square footage and other design standards in residential developments. These requests will continue to be considered as planning applications are received and the larger development trend will be addressed. Growth Policies Staff outlined the Comprehensive Plan's four main policies that provide an overarching guide for the general growth of the City. Each of these policies continue to be valid and do not require amendment. Chapter 6 — Transportation City Engineer Bruce Westby presented an overview of some of the recent planning efforts related to the Transportation Plan. These include planning currently taking place for the Fallon Avenue overpass, the second river crossing, and an overview of the ultimate build- out design for the intersection of CSAH 75/TH 25. Council had authorized additional studies to determine preliminary design and traffic control options. Staff outlined statistics related to traffic analysis and projected traffic volumes for 2030 with and without a second river crossing. A second river crossing location would impact vehicle volumes and distribution of traffic using the Fallon Avenue Overpass. Fallon Avenue Overpass Staff identified the Fallon Avenue Overpass as one of the highest priorities in the Transportation Plan for relieving congestion on Highway 25. WSB presented eight alternative concepts to the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC), the Industrial and Economic Development Committee (IEDC) and the City 11 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 Council. Each concept was evaluated on traffic operations, project costs and property impacts. Council approved bringing Concept 1, Concept 3A and Concept 5 forward for public input. • Concept 1 involves a "T" with a stop at 7th Street at an estimated total cost of $4.1 million. • Concept 3A involves Fallon Ave with roundabouts at 7th Street and Washington Street at a total cost of $5.5 million. • Concept 5 involves a Fallon Avenue connection to Washington Street using one roundabout at a total cost of $5.5 million. Next steps would include conducting meetings with affected property owners and presenting that input to council and the IEDC for concept selection. The approved concept would be submitted to MnDot and the FHWA for comment. A funding plan and final design would then be developed and right-of-way would be acquired. Second River Crossing Three potential locations were identified as second river crossing options: Orchard Road, Washington Street, and CSAH 18. There are about 14 miles between Highway 25 and the nearest crossing to either side. Council authorized traffic volume studies for the location of the crossing as well as the preparation of FAQs. If no action is taken to resolve congestion, the existing bridge over the Mississippi will be gridlocked at capacity of more than 40,000 vehicles per day by 2030. Next steps would involve completing the transportation analysis of the alternative alignments. Meetings with those impacted would follow. Concept layouts and preliminary environmental review would be prepared. Potential funding sources would be identified and a coalition would be created. Staff confirmed that Monticello would have to lead the charge for this project as it is the community most directly affected by the local traffic congestion. TH 25/CSAH 75 Intersection Improvements The TH 25/CSAH 75 Intersection Improvements are intended to increase capacity and reduce congestion in the downtown. The project involves adding dual left turn lanes for eastbound and westbound CSAH 75 and southbound TH 25. Dual right turn lanes are now in place from westbound CSAH 75 to northbound TH 25. Staff will obtain Council approval to apply for federal funding for full build -out of the intersection. Barry Voight expressed doubts that the revising growth projections would provide valid information. Staff pointed out that projections are critical for fiscal planning and noted that working through projections helps to prioritize which planning 12 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 strategies need be in place to accommodate local growth policy. Rod Dragsten and Brad Fyle agreed to participate in the Growth Projection task force. 11. Consideration to review and recommend appointment for expiring Planning Commission terms Commissioner Dragsten, Commissioner Voight and Commissioner Fyle's terms on the Planning Commission expired in December of 2011. Each indicated a willingness to serve another term. Planning Commission terms are three years. Appointment schedules would be realigned to be consistent with City Ordinance. BILL SPARTZ MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS BARRY VOIGHT AND ROD DRAGSTEN FOR A THREE- YEAR TERM ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND RECOMMEND THE APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER FYLE FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CHARLOTTE GABLER. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. The City Council would ratify the three appointments on January 9th, 2012. Appointments would be retroactive to January 1 st, 2012. 12. Consideration to review and recommend appointment for positions of Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair Commissioner Rod Dragsten indicated a willingness to serve another year as the Chair of the Commission. Commissioner Bill Spartz indicated a willingness to serve another year as Vice Chair. BARRY VOIGHT MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE APPOINTMENT OF ROD DRAGSTEN AS CHAIRMAN OF THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE APPOINTMENT OF BILL SPARTZ AS VICE CHAIR. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BRAD FYLE. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 13. Consideration to review for comment the 2011-2012 Planning Commission Workplan Staff provided a brief review of the 2011-2012 workplan illustrating the accomplishments of the Planning Commission in the past year. Many of the items on that plan remain priorities and were brought forward to the 2012 Goals & Objectives Workplan as part of continued efforts to accomplish the vision set out by the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. DNR Ordinances: DNR Overlay amendments for the Mississippi Wild & Scenic and Shoreland ordinances will be brought forward for public hearing at the February meeting. Floodplain: FEMA has asked that the City update its Floodplain Ordinance after they have finalized the process of Flood Insurance Rate Map updating. PUD Update: Steve Grittman is preparing ordinance amendments to be brought forward 13 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 in February as a result of the joint City Council and Planning Commission PUD Workshop. Temporary Sign Ordinance: The business owners who had participated in developing the interim ordinance will meet on January 19th to reassess the ordinance. Those who held temporary permits in 2011 will be surveyed to determine the value of the ordinance. The business community did a good overall job of self-regulation. The main issue continues to involve multi -tenant buildings. Ongoing Code Tracking: Staff recommended focusing on the Subdivision Ordinance as a top priority. Another 2012 priority is a discussion about how rezoning amendments may have affected the Special Use Overlay District. The City Plans & Specifications document is also due for an update. Downtown Monticello: The CCD rewrite will be a priority in 2012 as a result of the implementation of the Embracing Downtown Plan. Parks & Pathway Plan: The Planning Commission will continue to review the foundation document for compliancy as new development proposals come in. Park dedication calculations as related to the Fee Schedule are due for review in late 2012. Natural Resource Inventory: The Planning Commission will consider taking a more aggressive approach to implementing the inventory. Interchange Planning Area: Action on the interchange planning area will be put off until the end of 2012 as a result of pending transportation projects. Rod Dragsten asked about blight. Staff noted that the Building Department conducts an annual spring enforcement sweep and will report back to the Planning Commission when it is completed. Barry Voight asked for clarification as to which sections of the zoning code require completion. Angela Schumann pointed out that the Public Works and Engineering Departments would, at some point, be providing information to complete the Drinking Water Supply Management section of the code. Guidelines for the Industrial Building Materials and Design section have been reviewed by the IEDC and any revisions could be handled through code tracking. Staff also pointed to the wrap-up of the DNR Ordinance and Floodplain Ordinance as areas of code to be finalized. Rod Dragsten asked about replat requests. Steve Grittman noted that he is starting to see a lot of replat requests by developers as new owners of unfinished subdivisions. Staff indicated that the Featherstone development and Hunter's Crossing II could be subject to replatting. There are some parcels 800 preliminarily platted and 400 residential parcels unplatted in Monticello. BARRY VOIGHT MOVED TO APPROVE THE 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION 14 Planning Commission Minutes — 01/03/12 GOALS & OBJECTIVES WORKPLAN, WITH THE REVISION OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AS A PRIORITY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BILL SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 14. Community Development Director's Report a. DNR Ordinances: This item was discussed as part of the 2012 Workplan. b. Floodplain: This item was discussed as part of the 2012 Workplan. c. CCD Rewrite: Staff recommended utilizing the second meeting in February as a kick- off for the code rewrite discussion with representatives of the Downtown Partnership. Bill Spartz and Charlotte Gabler agreed to participate in the rewrite. d. PUD Update: This item was discussed as part of the 2012 Workplan. e. Sunset Ponds Update: The City Council tabled action on the PUD amendment requested by Sunset Ponds, LLC and asked that staff and the applicant work toward a more agreeable solution for all parties. Staff will coordinate a meeting between the applicant, resident representatives and City representatives during the first part of January. f. Development Survey: Staff will provide analysis of responses to the development survey emailed to all 2011 applicants (and their architects/engineers/realtors). g. Meeting Rescheduling: It was determined that the February 7, 2012 Planning Commission meeting need be rescheduled due to precinct caucuses. The meeting was rescheduled to Thursday, February 9, 2012. A special meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, February 21, 2012. 15. Adiourn BILL SPARTZ MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:19 PM. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BARRY VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Recorder: Kerry T. Burri Approved: February 21, 2012 Attest: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 15 Planning Commission Agenda- 02/21/12 1 5. Continued Public Hearing – Consideration to recommend for the adoption the 2012 City of Monticello Official Zoning Map. (AS) A. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed 2012 City of Monticello Zoning Map and recommend the map for adoption by the City Council. At its regular meeting in January, the Planning Commission tabled action on this item in order to allow staff the opportunity to research the final zoning action and zoning designation for the old bowling alley property (10 1 Chelsea Road). Staff has confirmed that the City Council acted to rezone Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of Oakwood Industrial Park, the bowling alley parcels, via Ordinance #521 on June 27th, 2011. A copy of the rezoning order is attached. This action was taken outside of the pending sale transaction, due to rezoning action’s consistency with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. In the future, staff will include all rezoning orders and/or ordinances with the Planning Commission’s report for annual official zoning map adoption, which occurs in January of each year. Rezoning orders for 2011 have thus been cross -checked to the version of the map presented in this packet. The map reflects the three rezoning actions taken in 2011. These include:  Rezoning from I-1 (Light Industrial) to B-2 (Neighborhood Business) for 101 Chelsea Road – Ordinance #531  Rezoning from I-1 (Light Industrial) to B-4 (Regional Business) for 102 Thomas Park Drive – Ordinance #534  Rezoning from I-1 (Light Industrial) to B-4 (Regional Business) for 9766 Fallon Avenue – Resolution 2011-092, completed with Comprehensive Plan Amendment As noted in last month’s staff report, the Bondhus Tool property, located at 1400 East Broadway, was incorrectly zoned R-2 with the 2011 Zoning Ordinance update and map revision. The property is guided industrial and was zoned I-1 on the pre-2011 zoning maps. The hearing for the rezoning of the Bondhus property is scheduled for the February Planning Commission meeting. Staff is recommending approval of the 2012 Official Zoning Map subject to final action on the rezoning action on this property by the City Council. The map illustrates the proper zoning as I-1. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to recommend adoption of the 2012 City of Monticello Official Zoning Map, subject to final zoning action as taken by the Monticello City Council related to the Bondhus Tool parcels (1400 E. Broadway). 2. Motion to recommend tabling of action on the 2012 City of Monticello Official Zoning Map for further study. 3. Motion of other. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the City of Monticello Official Zoning Map as proposed. This draft represents an accurate picture of Monticello’s zoning based on a review of all available records, subject to the upcoming review and hearing related to the Bondhus Tool property. D. SUPPORTING DATA Exhibit A: Resolution 2012-018 Exhibit B: Draft 2012 City of Monticello Zoning Map Exhibit C: Orders of Rezoning ReturnTo: AngelaSchumann CityofMonticello 505WalnutStreet,Suite1 Monticello,MN55362 STATEOFMINNESOTAMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL COUNTYOFWRIGHTREZONINGPROCEEDINGS APPLICANT:QuarryChurch FEETITLEPROPERYOWNER:CityofMonticello ORDER#11-013GRANTINGREZONING TheaboveentitledmattercametobeheardbeforetheMonticelloCityCouncilthis27thdayof June,2011onapetitionforrezoningpursuanttotheCityofMonticelloZoningOrdinancefor thefollowingdescribedproperty: AllofLot1,Block1,OakwoodIndustrialPark,accordingtotherecordedplatandsurvey onfileandofrecordintheOfficeoftheRegisterofDeeds,InandforsaidCounty,Less andexcept,theNorth300.79feetofsaidLot1,Block1andLessandexceptthe followingdescribedparcel,towit:CommencingattheSouthwestCorneroftheNorth 300.79feetofsaidLot1,Block1,OakwoodIndustrialPark,thenceinaNortherly directionupontheWesterlylineofsaiddescribedparcel75.00feet,thenceEasterlyata rightangle100.00feet,thenceSoutherlyatarightangle75.00feet,thenceWesterlyata rightangle100.00feettothepointofbeginningontheWestLine, AND TheSouthhalfofLot2,Block1,OakwoodIndustrialPark ITWASRECOMMENDEDTOTHECITYCOUNCIL thatrezoningfromI-1toB-2 beapprovedbasedonthefindingthattheactionisconsistentwiththelandusedirectivesofthe City’sComprehensivePlan. THEMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCILGAVEAPPROVALOFTHEREZONING FROMI-1(LIGHTINDUSTRIAL)TOB-2(LIMITEDBUSINESS)ONTHE27th DAY OFJUNE,2011. STATEOFMINNESOTA)CITYOFMONTICELLO )ss COUNTYOFWRIGHT) I,JeffO’Neill,CityAdministratorfortheCityofMonticello,doherebycertifythatI havecomparedtheforegoingcopyofOrder#11-013grantingRezoningwiththeoriginalrecord thereofpreservedinmyoffice,andhavefoundthesametobeacorrectandtruetranscriptofthe wholethereof.AcopyofthisOrderhasbeenforwardedtotheapplicant. INTESTIMONYWHEREOF,IhavehereuntosubscribedmyhandatMonticello, Minnesota,intheCountyofWrightonthe____________dayof_________________,2011 __________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator ReturnTo: AngelaSchumann CityofMonticello 505WalnutStreet,Suite1 Monticello,MN55362 STATEOFMINNESOTAMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL COUNTYOFWRIGHTREZONINGPROCEEDINGS APPLICANT:WHLEnterprises,LLC FEETITLEPROPERYOWNER:WHLEnterprises,LLC ORDER#11-018GRANTINGREZONING TheaboveentitledmattercametobeheardbeforetheMonticelloCityCouncilthis8thdayof August,2011onapetitionforrezoningpursuanttotheCityofMonticelloZoningOrdinancefor Thefollowingdescribedproperty: NorthhalfofLot1,Block1,OakwoodIndustrialPark,exceptthesouth75feetofthe west100feetofthenorthhalfofLot1,Block1 ITWASRECOMMENDEDTOTHECITYCOUNCIL thatrezoningfromI-1toB-4 beapprovedbasedonafindingthatsuchrezoningisconsistentwiththelandusedirectivesof theCity’sComprehensivePlan. THEMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCILGAVEAPPROVALOFTHEREZONING FROMI-1(LIGHTINDUSTRIAL)TOB-2(REGIONALBUSINESS)ONTHE8thDAY OFAUGUST,2011. STATEOFMINNESOTA)CITYOFMONTICELLO )ss COUNTYOFWRIGHT) I,JeffO’Neill,CityAdministratorfortheCityofMonticello,doherebycertifythatI havecomparedtheforegoingcopyofOrder#11-018grantingRezoningwiththeoriginalrecord thereofpreservedinmyoffice,andhavefoundthesametobeacorrectandtruetranscriptofthe wholethereof.AcopyofthisOrderhasbeenforwardedtotheapplicant. INTESTIMONYWHEREOF,IhavehereuntosubscribedmyhandatMonticello, Minnesota,intheCountyofWrightonthe____________dayof_________________,2011 __________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator ReturnTo: AngelaSchumann CityofMonticello 505WalnutStreet,Suite1 Monticello,MN55362 STATEOFMINNESOTAMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL COUNTYOFWRIGHTREZONINGPROCEEDINGS APPLICANT:RiverwoodBank FEETITLEPROPERYOWNER:RiverwoodBank ORDER#11-023GRANTINGREZONING TheaboveentitledmattercametobeheardbeforetheMonticelloCityCouncilthis26thdayof September,2011onapetitionforrezoningpursuanttotheCityofMonticelloZoningOrdinance forthefollowingdescribedproperty: Lot1,Block1,MonticelloCommerceCenter5th Addition ITWASRECOMMENDEDTOTHECITYCOUNCIL thatrezoningfromI-1toB-4 beapprovedbasedonanamendmenttotheCity’sComprehensivePlanandthefollowing findings: (a)Theamendmentandrezoningaddresstheneedresultingfromatrendtoward commerciallandusesintheareaarisingsincetheadoptionofthe ComprehensivePlan; (b)Theproposedamendmentandrezoningaccommodatecommercialuseswhichare compatiblewithexistingandproposedcommercialusessurroundingthe subjectproperty;theproposeddesignandlanduseisappropriatefortheland withadequateparking,greenspace,andexpansionareaforsimilarlanduses; andtheproposedamendmentwillmaintainorimprovecompatibilityamong nearbyexistingandplannedcommercialusesandensureefficient developmentwithintheCity; (c)Theproposedamendmentandrezoningtoacommerciallandusedesignationand zoningisconsistentwiththeguidingprinciplesoftheComprehensivePlan; (d)Theamendmentandrezoningtoacommerciallandusedesignationandzoning willresultinalogical,orderlyandpredictabledevelopmentpattern;and (e)Theproposedamendmentandrezoningtoacommerciallandusedesignationand zoningwiththepurposeoftheMonticelloZoningordinance. THEMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCILGAVEAPPROVALOFTHEREZONING FROMI-1(LIGHTINDUSTRIAL)TOB-4(REGIONALBUSINESS)ONTHE26thDAY OFSEPTEMBER,2011. STATEOFMINNESOTA)CITYOFMONTICELLO )ss COUNTYOFWRIGHT) I,JeffO’Neill,CityAdministratorfortheCityofMonticello,doherebycertifythatI havecomparedtheforegoingcopyofOrder#11-023grantingRezoningwiththeoriginalrecord thereofpreservedinmyoffice,andhavefoundthesametobeacorrectandtruetranscriptofthe wholethereof.AcopyofthisOrderhasbeenforwardedtotheapplicant. INTESTIMONYWHEREOF,IhavehereuntosubscribedmyhandatMonticello, Minnesota,intheCountyofWrightonthe____________dayof_________________,2011 __________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator Planning Commission Agenda- 02/21/12 1 6. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Rezoning from R-1 (Single-Family Residential) to I-1 (Light Industrial) for 1400 East Broadway. Applicant: City of Monticello (AS) A. BACKGROUND As noted the previous staff report, the Bondhus Tool property, located at 1400 East Broadway, was incorrectly zoned R-1 (Single-Family Residential) with the 2011 Zoning Ordinance update and map revision. At this time, the Planning Commission is asked to recommend rezoning action to correct that error. The applicable review criteria are outlined below. Chapter 2.4 B (5) Approval Criteria Recommendations and decisions on zoning amendments shall be based on consideration of the following criteria: a) Whether the proposed amendment corrects an error in the original text or map; or b) Whether the proposed amendment addresses needs arising from a changing condition, trend, or fact affecting the subject property and surrounding area. c) Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with achieving the goals and objectives outlined in the comprehensive plan. The rezoning of the subject property is intended to correct an error related to the adoption of a new zoning map occurring concurrent with the adoption of the 2011 comprehensive zoning ordinances. The property was zoned I-1 on the pre-2011 zoning maps and was not intended for rezoning action as part of the ordinance update. As such, the rezoning is supported under criteria “a” above. Additionally, the property is guided as “Places to Work” in the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan, and therefore meets review criteria “c” above. Bondhus Tool Company is currently in operation on the subject parcels. Bondhus Tool is a light manufacturing facility. The use is therefore consistent with the I-1 (Light Industrial) zoning designation. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to approve Resolution 2012-017, recommending approval of Ordinance #544 rezoning from R-1 (Single-Family Residential) to I-1 (Light Industrial) for the property located at 1400 East Broadway. 2. Motion of other. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends rezoning the subject property as proposed. The rezoning represents a return to appropriate zoning based on a review of all available records. Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the rezoning, no ordinance for rezoning is required for this item, as the rezoning will occur concurrent with the adoption of 2012 Zoning Map, subject to Council approval. D. SUPPORTING DATA Exhibit A: Resolution 2012-017 Exhibit B: Aerial Image Exhibit C: Current (6/11) Official Zoning Map Exhibit D: August 2010 Official Zoning Map Exhibit E: Land Use Plan – 2008 Comprehensive Plan CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTIONNO.2012–017 Date:February21st,2012ResolutionNo.2012-017 MotionBy:_____________________SecondedBy:________________________ ARESOLUTIONRECOMMENDINGAPPROVALOFAMENDMENTTOTHECITY OFMONTICELLOOFFICIALZONINGMAPFORTHEREZONINGFROMR-1 (SINGLE-FAMILYRESIDENTIAL)TOI-1(LIGHTINDUSTRIAL)FOR1400EAST BROADWAY WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellohasrequestedanAmendmenttotheMonticelloOfficial ZoningMapfortherezoningofthesubjectpropertyaslegallydescribedontheattachedExhibit A;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasreviewedtherequestforrezoningpursuanttothe regulationsoftheMonticelloZoningOrdinance;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionheldapublichearingonFebruary21st,2012onthe requestandmembersofthepublicwereprovidedtheopportunitytopresentinformationtothe PlanningCommission;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconsideredallofthecommentsandthestaffreport, whichareincorporatedbyreferenceintotheresolution;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticellomakesthefollowingFindings ofFactinrelationtotherecommendationofapproval: (a)TherezoningcorrectsanerrorintheOfficialZoningMap; (b)Theproposedrezoningtoanindustriallandusedesignationisconsistentwiththe guidingprinciplesoftheComprehensivePlan; (c)Theproposedrezoningtoanindustrialzoningdesignationisconsistentwiththe purposeoftheMonticelloZoningordinance. NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof Monticello,Minnesota: 1.PursuanttoMinn.Stat.§462.357,theapplicationforAmendmenttotheCityof MonticelloOfficialZoningMapfortheRezoningfromR-1(Single-FamilyResidential) toI-1(LightIndustrial)forthesubjectpropertyaslegallydescribedinExhibitAis herebyrecommendedtotheCityCouncilforapproval. ADOPTED this21stdayofSeptember,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof Monticello,Minnesota. MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION By:_______________________________ RodDragsten,Chair ATTEST: _____________________________________ AngelaSchumann,CommunityDevelopmentDirector EXHIBITA Attached. Cou nty Hwy 75 Chelsea Rd State Hwy 25 85th St NE 9 0 t h S t N E Linn St Pine St 7th St Sc h o o l B l v d Riverview Dr Cedar St W River St M a r v i n R d Jason Ave Dundas Rd W Broadway St Hart Blvd Country La Haug Ave NE Elm St W 4th St Fenning Ave NE Oakwook Dr Mall a rd La 95th St NE Fallon Ave NE Edmonson Ave NE Mississippi Dr 5th St C o u ntry C lu b R d Sandberg Rd P e l i c a n L a Fa lc o n D r Fenning Ave Walnut St Oak Ridge Dr Oriole La Club View Rd Broad way St Hillcrest Rd E River St Headman La M i l l Tr a i l L a Falcon Ave NE Wright St Benton St Elwood Rd Ramsey St 6th St River Mill Dr Wildwood Way Hilltop Dr Mi l l R u n R d Oak View La Farmstead Ave Ma r t i n D r 4th St E3rd St E Red Rock La Gillard Ave NE Maple St Fallon Dr Willow St View La E Grey Stone Ave Marvin Elwood Rd Fieldcrest Cir Fairway Dr Jason Ave NE Vine St Meadow La Jerry Liefert Dr Praire Rd Starling Dr Palm St Unknown or No Streetname Fallon Ave Golf Course Rd Falcon Ave Ke v i n L o n g l e y D r Craig La R e d O a k L a Front St 5th St W Thomas Park Dr Locust St M o c k i n g b i r d L a W 3rd St Eastwood Cir Briar Oaks Blvd F a r m s t e a d D r Henipin St E i d e r L a Dayton St Oak La River Forest Dr Meadow Oak Ave Kampa Cir O a k R i d g e C i r M i l l Ct River Ridge La Garrison AveOakview Ct Dundas Cir Kenneth La Otter Creek Rd Minnesota St Eagle Cir Crocus La M eado w O ak La Stone Ridge Dr Chestnut St 1 2 0 t h S t N E D arro w Ave N E Diamond Dr Pebble Brook Dr Widgeon La Washington St Bunker Cir H o m estead D r Thomas Cir E n d i c o t t T r Center Cir Oak View Cir Sandtrap Cir Country Cir Cheyen Ct O ld T e rrit o ral R d Tanager Cir Hillcrest Cir Osprey Ct A corn Cir Balboul Cir S w a ll o w C i r R i v e r s i d e C i r Meadow Oak Ct Matthew Cir E Oak Dr S t o n e R i d g e C i r Oakwood Dr Meadow Oak Ave NECounty H w y 75 Hart Blvd Marvin Rd Marvin Rd Wright St 90th St NE Cedar St Minnesota St $J U Z  P G  . P O U J D F M M P 0G G J D J B M  ; P O J O H  . B Q  .J T T J T T J Q Q J  8 J M E  4 D F O J D    3 F D  0 W F S M B Z  % J T U S J D U 07 & 3 - " :  % * 4 5 3 * $ 5 4 1F S G P S N B O D F  # B T F E  0 W F S M B Z  % J T U S J D U !!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! 4I P S F M B O E  % J T U S J D U 05 ) & 3 8B U F S -F H F O E " 0 3 " 3  5 / 3  3 1 6 % 3  . ) BA S E Z O N I N G D I S T R I C T S Re s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i c t s -- L o w R e s i d e n t i a l D e n s i t i e s -- M e d i u m R e s i d e n t i a l D e n s i t i e s -- H i g h R e s i d e n t i a l D e n s i t i e s #  #  #  #  $$ % *# $ *  *  Bu s i n e s s D i s t r i c t s In d u s t r i a l D i s t r i c t s 4Q F D J B M  6 T F  0 W F S M B Z  % J T U S J D U !!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !"b$ !"b$ !"b$ !"b$ Sg ?¾A@ ?¾A@ SÊ SÊ S} S} 9 0th St S E Fenning Ave NE Mississippi River M is sis s i p p i R i v e r O tte r C r e e k FirstLake MudLake R1 AO ¹ 0 1,200 2,400Feet Legend PERIMETER Lakes CityBoundary Parcels Zoning Districts Agriculture - Open Space Single Family Residential Single Family Residential - A Single Family and 2 Family Residential Single Family and 2 Family Residential - A Medium Density Residential Mobile Home Park Residential Planned Unit Development Performance Zone - Residential Performance Zone - Mixed Neighborhood Business Limited Business Highway Business Regional Business Central Community District Light Industrial - A Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Public - Semi-Public PUD AO R1 R1-A R2 R2-A R3 R4 PZ-R PZ-M B1 B2 B3 B4 CCD I1-A I1 I2 PS PUD     £¤10 £¤10 Æÿ25 !(14 !(11 !(43 !(50 !(68 !(5!(81 §¨¦ 94 Æÿ25 !(75 !(18 !(117 !(3 9 !(106 !(37!(1 3 1 0 0.5 10.25 Miles- November 1, 2011Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan Legend Places to Live Places to Shop Places to Work Places to Recreate Places for Community Downtown Mixed Use Interchange Planning Area Urban Reserve Infrastructure Rivers and Streams Public Waters Inventory Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories) Potential Greenway Potential Interchange Future Bridge Existing Arterial or Collector Road Proposed Arterial or Collector Road Powerline Monticello City Boundary Orderly Annexation Area Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011 CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (A) Findings, Purpose, and Effect City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 189 4.5 Signs (A) Findings, Purpose, and Effect (1) Findings The City finds: (a) Exterior signs have a substantial impact on the character and quality of the environment. (b) Signs provide an important medium through which individuals may convey a variety of messages. (c) Signs can create traffic hazards and aesthetic concerns, thereby threatening the public health, safety and welfare. (d) The City's zoning regulations include the regulation of signs in an effort to provide adequate means of expression and to promote the economic viability of the business community, while protecting the City and its citizens from a proliferation of signs of a type, size, location and character that would adversely impact upon the aesthetics of the community and threaten the health, safety and welfare of the community. The regulation of the physical characteristics of signs within the City has had a positive impact on traffic safety and the appearance of the community. (2) Purpose and Intent (a) It is not the purpose or intent of Section 4.5 to regulate the message displayed on any sign; nor is it the purpose or intent of this section to regulate any building design or any display not defined as a sign, or any sign which cannot be viewed from outside a building. (b) The purpose and intent of Section 4.5 is to: (i) Regulate the number, location, size, type, illumination and other physical characteristics of signs within the City in order to promote the public health, safety and welfare. (ii) Maintain, enhance and improve the aesthetic environment of the City by preventing visual clutter that is harmful to the appearance of the community. (iii) Improve the visual appearance of the City while providing for effective means of communication, consistent with constitutional guarantees and the City's goals of public safety and aesthetics. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (C) Permit Not Required Page 190 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (iv) Provide for fair and consistent enforcement of the sign regulations set forth herein under the zoning authority of the City. (3) Effect A sign may be erected, mounted, displayed or maintained in the City if it is in conformance with the provisions of this ordinance. The effect of Section 4.5, as more specifically set forth herein, is to: (a) Allow a wide variety of sign types in commercial zones, and a more limited variety of signs in other zones, subject to the standards set forth in Section 4.5. (b) Allow certain small, unobtrusive signs incidental to the principal use of a site in all zones when in compliance with the requirements of Section 4.5. (c) Prohibit signs whose location, size, type, illumination or other physical characteristics negatively affect the environment and where the communication can be accomplished by means having a lesser impact on the environment and the public health, safety and welfare. (d) Provide for the administration and enforcement of the provisions of Section 4.5. (B) Permit Required No sign shall be erected, altered, improved, reconstructed, maintained or moved in the City without first securing a sign permit from the City: (1) The content of the message or speech displayed on the sign shall not be reviewed or considered in determining whether to approve or deny a sign permit. (2) Application for a sign permit shall be in conformance with the requirements of Section 2.4(K), Sign Permits: (C) Permit Not Required The following signs shall not require a permit and are allowed in addition to those signs allowed by Sections 4.5(I) and 4.5(J) of this section. These exemptions, however, shall not be construed as relieving the owner of the sign from the responsibility of its erection and maintenance, and its compliance with the provisions of this section or any other law or ordinance regulating the same. Section 2.4(K) Sign Permits CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (C) Permit Not Required City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 191 (1) The changing of the display surface on a painted or printed sign only. This exemption, however, shall apply only to poster replacement and/or on site changes involving sign painting on a surface other than the surface of the building. (2) Permanent signs two (2) square feet or less in size. (3) One (1) sign per property in residential districts not to exceed four (4) square feet. (4) All noncommercial signs are permitted on private property in any zoning district with the express consent of the owner or occupant of such property. In a State general election year, noncommercial signs of any size may be posted in any number forty-six (46) days before the State primary in a State general election year until ten (10) days following the State general election. Election signs posted in connection with elections held at times other than those regulated by Minn. Stat. 211B.035 shall not be posted more than 13 weeks prior to the election and shall be removed by the party responsible for the erection of the sign or the property owner within ten (10) days after the election. (5) Official and Public signs. (6) One (1) sign shall be allowed per street frontage when a property is offered for sale or lease, provided that: (a) Within residential zoning districts (see table 3-1), no sign shall exceed twelve (12) square feet in area and six (6) feet in height for single-family, two- family, townhouse, and quadraminium units; or thirty two (32) square feet in area or eight (8) feet in height for multi-family or institutional uses. (b) For non-residential zoning districts (see table 3-1), as well as for any parcel larger than ten (10) acres in any zoning district, signs may be up to ninety six (96) square feet in area or twelve (12) feet in height as defined in this ordinance. One (1) additional such sign shall be allowed for any street frontage which exceeds one thousand (1,000) linear feet. For the purposes of this section, frontage on any right of way, including local streets, County or State Highways, or I-94 shall constitute a ―frontage‖, regardless of access. (7) Sandwich board signs are allowed within all business zoning districts (see table 3- 1) provided that: CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (D) Prohibited Signs Page 192 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (a) Not more than one (1) sign is allowed per principal building except that one sign is allowed per tenant within a principal building having two (2) or more tenants each with an exclusive exterior entrance. (b) The sign shall only be displayed when the business is open to the public. (c) Except in the CCD district, the sign shall be placed only on the business property and shall be located within required principal building setbacks, or encroaching into required setback areas a maximum of five (5) feet, and shall not be placed on any vehicle. (d) The signs shall be located so as to maintain a minimum five (5) foot pedestrian walkway and so as not to obstruct vehicular traffic. (e) The sign shall be set back a minimum of two (2) feet from the back of curb of a public street or private drive aisle. (f) The sign shall conform to the following height and area requirements: (i) Height: Five (5) feet. (ii) Area: Six (6) square feet. (g) For sandwich board signs within the CCD district, sandwich board signs may be located in accordance with the provisions of subpart (c) above. In addition, such signs may be placed upon the sidewalk or boulevard portion of a public right-of-way upon the issuance of an annual permit in accordance with the provisions and process of Section 2.4(K) of this ordinance. (D) Prohibited Signs The following signs are prohibited: (1) Any sign, signal, marking or device which purports to be or is an imitation of or resembles any official traffic control device or railroad sign or signal, or emergency vehicle signs, or which attempts to direct the movement of traffic or which hides from view or interferes with the effectiveness of any official traffic control device or any railroad sign or signal. (2) All off premises signs greater than six (6) square feet in area. (3) Flashing signs. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (E) Nonconforming Signs and Uses City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 193 (4) Roof signs. (5) Rotating signs. (6) Shimmering signs. (7) Signs which move or imitate movement, except for dynamic scrolling signs as defined in this ordinance. (8) Signs painted, attached or in any other manner affixed to trees or similar natural surfaces, or attached to utility poles, bridges, towers, or similar public structures. (9) Off Premises Signs: (a) Off premise signs existing as non-conforming structures at the time of adoption of this ordinance greater than six (6) square feet in area shall be considered a principal use of property. (b) Annual permits are required for all off premises signs. Off premises signs shall be removed as a condition of construction of another principal use upon the property or platting or subdivision approval for the land on which it is located. (10) Abandoned signs. (E) Nonconforming Signs and Uses (1) Signs: A non-conforming sign lawfully existing upon the effective date of this ordinance as denoted in Section 1.4 shall be regulated in accordance with Chapter 6 of this ordinance. (2) Uses: When the principal use of land is legally non-conforming under Chapter 6 of this ordinance, all existing or proposed signs in conjunction with that land use shall be considered conforming if they are in compliance with the sign provisions for the most restrictive zoning district in which the principal use is allowed. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (H) General Provisions Page 194 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (3) When a sign is considered to be non-conforming due to size, location, or other factor, but represents a conforming use of land, such sign may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion, unless it is considered to be abandoned as defined by this ordinance. When a non-conforming sign has been damaged to an extent of 50% or more of its market value, such sign shall be considered to be abandoned if no building or sign permit has been applied for within 180 days of the date of damage. (F) Enforcement and Penalties Section 4.5 shall be administered and enforced in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 7 of this ordinance. (G) Substitution The owner of any sign which is otherwise allowed by Section 4.5 of this ordinance may substitute non-commercial copy in lieu of any other commercial or non-commercial copy. This substitution of copy may be made without any additional approval or permitting. The purpose of this provision is to prevent any inadvertent favoring of commercial speech over non-commercial speech, or favoring of any particular non- commercial message over any other non-commercial message. This provision prevails over any more specific provision to the contrary. (H) General Provisions (1) Accessory Structures Except as provided for by Section 4.5(D)(9), all signs shall be considered accessory structures. (2) Setbacks All freestanding signs shall be set back fifteen (15) feet from any property line abutting a public right-of-way and five (5) feet from any side or rear property line. No sign may be located within a drainage and utility easement. (3) Standards Adopted The design and construction standards as set forth in Chapter 4 of the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code as may be amended, are hereby adopted. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (H) General Provisions City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 195 (4) Electrical Signs The installation of electrical signs shall be subject to the State's Electrical Code. Electrical service to such signs shall be underground. (5) Approval No sign shall be attached or be allowed to hang from any building until all necessary wall and roof attachments have been approved by the Community Development Department. (6) Sign Interference No signs, guys, stays or attachments shall be erected, placed or maintained on trees nor interfere with any electric light, power, telephone or telegraph wires or the supports thereof. (7) Illuminated Signs Illuminated signs shall be shielded to prevent lights from being directed at oncoming traffic in such brilliance that it impairs the vision of the driver and may not interfere with or obscure traffic signs or signals. Lighting may not illuminate any adjacent properties, buildings, or streets. (8) Permit Display Signs requiring permits shall display in a conspicuous manner the permit sticker or sticker number. (9) Placement No sign or sign structure shall be erected or maintained that prevents free ingress or egress from any door, window or fire escape. No sign or sign structure shall be attached to a standpipe or fire escape. (10) Structure A freestanding sign or sign structure constructed so that the faces are not back to back, shall not have an angle separating the faces exceeding thirty (30) degrees unless the total area of both sides added together does not exceed the maximum allowable sign area for that district. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (H) General Provisions Page 196 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (11) Square Footage Calculation (Total Area = A x B): (a) For wall signs, the area of a sign shall be that area within the marginal lines created by the sign surface which bears the advertisement or, in the case of messages, figures or symbols attached directly to the part of a building, which is included in the smallest rectangular figure which can be made to circumscribe the message, figure, or symbol displayed thereon: (b) For monument signs, area shall be calculated as for wall signs. Structural members of the sign, including supports or other decorative features shall not be considered as a part of the measured sign area: (c) For pylon signs, the entire area of the sign face or cabinet shall be considered as a part of the measured sign area. Structural supports, provided that they have no message or other graphics, shall be exempt from the area calculation. (12) Height The top of a wall sign, including its superstructure, if any, shall be no higher than the roof of the building to which such sign may be attached. (13) Landscaping A site plan shall be submitted as a part of any application for a freestanding sign which includes plans for the landscaping of the area near the sign, and which demonstrates that the sign will complement the existing or proposed general site landscaping of the property. (14) Vehicle Fuel Facilities Signs for vehicle fuel facilities shall be regulated by the sign provisions for the zoning district in which the facility is located, except that within a freestanding sign, an area not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet shall be allowed for continuous display (no flashing, scrolling or other animation) of electronic or non-electronic changeable copy identifying current fuel prices in accordance with Minnesota state statutes section 239.751. (15) Window Signs Window signs are not considered a part of the maximum sign area otherwise allowed under Section 4.5 of this ordinance and do not require a permit. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (H) General Provisions City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 197 (16) Changeable Copy Signs (a) Changeable copy signs are subject to the following additional regulations: (i) Signs must be permanently anchored to the structure. (ii) Signs must be incorporated within the overall sign structure for both monument and pylon signs and must be consistent in design with the sign structure. (b) Within commercial and industrial districts and for civic and institutional uses including, but not limited to, public school facilities, hospital and medical facilities, municipal facilities and places of public assembly, one (1) changeable copy sign shall be allowed per site provided that the area of the sign not exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the allowable sign area or fifty (50) square feet, whichever is less, for a freestanding or wall sign. The area of this sign shall be counted against the maximum sign area for the building, except where the property owner has agreed to forgo the use of temporary signs in accordance Section 4.5(I)(2) in which case the area of the changeable copy sign shall be allowed in excess of the maximum sign area. (17) Time and Temperature Signs Within commercial and industrial zoning districts, an area not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet within a freestanding or wall sign shall be allowed for display of an electronic time and temperature sign subject to the sign provisions for the zoning district in which the sign is located. (18) Projecting Signs Projecting signs may be allowed in commercial districts provided that: (a) There is a minimum of eight (8) feet of clearance under the base of the sign to the ground below. (b) The sign does not project more than five (5) feet beyond the wall to which it is mounted, may not project over any vehicular drive aisle or traveled portion of a public or private street and except in the CCD, Central Community District may not project over a public right-of-way. (c) The area of the projecting sign is not more than fifty (50) percent of the maximum area allowed for an individual wall sign in the respective zoning district in Section 4.5(J). CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (H) General Provisions Page 198 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (19) Dynamic Displays (a) Findings Based on studies related to the use of dynamic sign displays and driver distraction, the City finds that dynamic signs, as defined by the zoning ordinance, have a unique potential to create driver distraction, a major cause of traffic crashes. As a result, the City has adopted special regulations that relate to such signs. These regulations shall apply to all proposed dynamic signage in the City, whether new or existing, conforming or non-conforming at the time of adoption of this ordinance. (b) Regulations governing Dynamic Sign Displays (i) Dynamic sign displays shall have messages that change instantaneously, and do not fade, dissolve, blink, or appear to simulate motion in any way. Prohibited blinking signs shall include signs which are displayed as continuous solid messages for less than the time required by subpart (iii) of this subsection below. The exception to this regulation is the allowance of messages that appear to scroll horizontally across the sign, but are otherwise in compliance with the requirements of this ordinance, including the definition of ―scrolling signs‖. (ii) Dynamic sign displays shall not be permitted in any Residential zoning district. (iii) Dynamic sign displays shall be permanent signs. (iv) No dynamic sign display shall change more than one time per three (3) second period; time and temperature displays may change as frequently as once every three (3) seconds. (v) Dynamic sign displays shall be no brighter than other illuminated signs in the same district. (vi) Dynamic sign displays shall be designed to freeze the display in the event of malfunction, and the owner shall discontinue the display immediately upon malfunction, or upon notice from the City that the display violates the City’s regulations. (vii) Applicants for dynamic sign displays shall sign a license agreement supplemental to the building permit agreeing to operation of a sign in conformance with these regulations. Violation of these regulations shall result in forfeiture of the license, and the City shall be authorized to arrange disconnection of electrical service to the facility. (viii) No dynamic sign display shall be permitted to be located in a yard or on the side of a building which abuts a residentially zoned parcel. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (I) Temporary Signs City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 199 (20) Design and Materials Standards for Signs in Commercial Districts, Industrial Districts, the CCD District, PUDs, and Performance Based Mixed Use Development (a) In General The design and materials of any sign shall be consistent with the building materials requirements of the district in which the sign is located, and shall be the same as, or compatible with, the materials and design of the principal building(s) on the property. (b) Specific Materials for Pylon Signs All exposed pole or post structures must be wrapped or faced with stucco, architectural metal, brick or stone consistent with building architecture. (I) Temporary Signs (1) For property in a Business District or an Industrial District (see table 3-1), the use of commercial temporary sign devices shall not exceed forty (40) days per calendar year per building. Not more than one (1) temporary sign device per building shall be displayed upon a property at any one time. The area of temporary sign devices shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet. (2) In cases where properties forego, in writing, temporary signage allowed by Section 4.5(I)(1) above, an additional permanent message board sign up to fifty (50) square feet in area shall be allowed. Such sign may be incorporated into a property’s freestanding sign or the building as additional wall sign area. Freestanding signs shall be subject to the height limitations of the applicable zoning district. (3) Subject to other provisions of Section 4.5(I), one (1) additional temporary sign device shall be permitted for a business on a one-time basis for a period of up to forty (40) days to be utilized within six (6) months of the first day of the business opening to the public. Such signage shall not be limited by the provisions of Sections 4.5(I)(2). (4) Businesses or organizations with their activities located in the CCD, Central Business District, may display temporary, off-premise signs by express permit issued by the City Council or the Council’s designee where access to commercial areas requires directional signage from the City’s arterial roads. Signs allowed under this section shall be considered to be in addition to any other sign allowances, including permanent signage, other on-site temporary signs, or ―sandwich board‖ signs displayed pursuant to Section 4.5(C)(7). Signs allowed CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (J) District Regulations Page 200 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance under this section may, at the discretion of the Council, be permitted under the following conditions: (a) Off-premise, temporary signs shall be no more than four (4) square feet in area. (b) Off-premise temporary signs shall be no more than three (3) feet in height. (c) Off-premise temporary signs shall be limited to no more than one (1) sign every seventy-five (75) lineal feet of street frontage, but no more than three (3) signs per parcel. (d) Notwithstanding other regulations to the contrary, such signs may be placed upon the public sidewalk within a City street right of way. Any such sign placed on the public sidewalk shall be located so as to avoid impeding pedestrian traffic, and to avoid visual interference with vehicular traffic. (e) An application for an off-premise, temporary sign shall be accompanied by a written statement of permission from the owner of the private property on which the sign is to located. Such statement shall include an express grant of permission for City inspectors to enter the property for the purpose of inspecting and/or removing said signs. (f) An application for signs subject to the provisions of this section may be made for a single period of display, or in the alternative, the City may grant approval for annual license for the display of such signs in accordance with Section 2.4(K). Separate fees may be established for single-period or annual- period permits. (g) Eligible days for the display of signs subject to this section shall be Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday only. (J) District Regulations In addition to the signs allowed by Section 4.5(C) and Section 4.5(I), the following signs shall be allowed within the specific zoning districts: (1) Within residential zoning districts (see table 3-1), the following additional regulations apply: (a) Except for the uses specified in Sections 4.5(J)(1)(b) and 4.5(J)(1)(c) below, not more than one (1) sign shall be allowed provided that: (i) The area of the sign shall not exceed four (4) square feet. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (J) District Regulations City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 201 (ii) Freestanding signs shall be limited to a maximum height of four (4) feet. (b) In addition to the sign allowed by Section 4.5(J)(1)(a) above, one (1) residential area identification sign shall be allowed. Such sign shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet in area and eight (8) feet in height. (c) Government buildings and structures, public, quasi-public or private recreation buildings, public parks and recreation areas, public and private educational institutions limited to accredited elementary, middle or senior high schools, and religious institutions such as churches, chapels, temples and synagogues shall be allowed two (2) institutional identification signs not exceeding seventy-five (75) square feet in area and eight (8) feet in height. (2) Within business and industrial zoning districts (see table 3-1), the following additional regulations shall apply: (a) Total Area of Signs The total area of all signs (with the exclusion of freestanding signs as may be allowed by this code) displayed on a lot shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total building facade fronting not more than two (2) public streets. (b) Freestanding Signs (i) Unless otherwise specified in this section, one (1) sign is allowed per lot. The area of a freestanding sign may not exceed one hundred (100) square feet each side with a maximum height of twenty-two (22) feet. (ii) If a monument, rather than pylon sign is utilized, an additional one hundred (100) square feet of area beyond the total area calculated in Section 4.5(J)(2)(a) above, devoted to wall, canopy or marquee signs shall be granted. (iii) For shopping centers greater than one hundred and fifty thousand (150,000) square feet of aggregate building square footage and greater than twenty (20) acres in site area, two (2) freestanding signs may be permitted. Two (2) pylon signs may be constructed or, as an alternative, one (1) pylon and one (1) monument sign may be constructed. When the latter option is chosen, the monument sign shall be no greater than fourteen (14) feet in height nor more than one hundred (100) square feet in area. The pylon sign may be no greater than twenty-five (25) feet in height and three hundred (300) square feet in area. The Freeway Bonus Sign Overlay District allows for additional signage in specific commercial and industrial areas [Section 3.7(F)] CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.5 Signs Subsection (J) District Regulations Page 202 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (c) Wall, Canopy, or Marquee Signs (i) Wall, canopy, projecting, and marquee signs shall be consistent with the maximum area requirements of Section 4.5(J)(2)(a). (ii) Wall, canopy and marquee signs are permitted on any building facade except those which abut properties zoned for residential use. (d) Directional signage In addition to the sign allowed by Section 4.5(J)(2)(b)(i), directional signage may be allowed on site in an amount not to exceed three (3) signs with an individual square footage maximum of ten (10) square feet each and thirty (30) total square feet. (e) Multiple Occupancy Commercial And Industrial Buildings When a single principal building is devoted to two (2) or more commercial or industrial principal uses, signs shall be allowed subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department based upon the following requirements: (i) The maximum individual sign sizes for multiple occupancy buildings and individual businesses that may display a sign shall not exceed the maximum provisions in the same zoning district in Section 4.5(J). (ii) Commercial retail, office, or mixed use multiple occupancy buildings may display a freestanding sign consistent with the applicable zoning district provisions in Section 4.5(J). (iii) Except as provided by window, changeable copy, or temporary signs in this ordinance, individual tenants of a multiple occupancy building within a commercial or industrial zoning district shall not display separate wall, canopy, or marquee signs unless the tenant's business has an exclusive exterior entrance and subject to the following requirements: 1. Each sign shall be limited to the maximum wall sign size permitted in the applicable zoning district provisions in Section 4.5(J). 2. The sign shall be located only on the exterior wall of the tenant space to which the sign permit is issued, but are not required to face a public street. 3. A comprehensive sign plan is submitted that includes all of the following information: a. A site plan to scale showing the location of lot lines, buildings, structures, parking areas, existing and proposed signs, and any other physical features of the area included within the proposed comprehensive sign plan. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.7 Transitional Features Subsection (A) Purpose and Intent City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 203 b. Elevations to scale of buildings included within the comprehensive sign plan including the location of existing or proposed wall, canopy, or marquee signs. c. To scale plans for all existing and proposed signs of any type included within the comprehensive sign plan indicating area, dimensions, height, materials, colors, and means of illumination (if any). 4. No permit shall be issued for a new or replacement sign for an individual tenant except upon a determination by the Community Development Department that it is consistent with the approved comprehensive sign plan. (3) In a PUD, Planned Unit Development District, signing restrictions shall be based upon the individual uses and structures contained in the complex. Signs shall be in compliance with the restrictions applied in the most restrictive zoning district in which the use is allowed. 4.6 Underground Utilities All utilities within or serving new development [e.g. cable television, electrical (excluding transformers), gas, sewer, telephone, and water lines] shall be placed underground. 4.7 Transitional Features (A) Purpose and Intent Transitional features are architectural elements or site aspects that must be used to ease the transition between new development and existing structures and community character. It is the intent of these standards to: (1) Blend land use types throughout the City to minimize visual conflicts; (2) Limit the excessive consumption of land though the utilization of large vegetated buffers to separate potentially conflicting use types; and (3) Limit interruptions in vehicular and pedestrian connections created by efforts to segregate uses. 2011INTERMSIGNLISTS PERMIT#ADDRESS BUSINESSNAME OWNER'SNAME E-MAIL MISCNOTES 2011-00002 4300SchoolBlvd ElkAgencyInsurance KentKjellberg 2011-00030 141BroadwayE LibertyTax KenHoelker 2011-00041 800BroadwayE MiddleSchool CandiceBenoit 2011-00042 9361CedarSt GreatClips MikeKrutzig 2011-00045 261BroadwayE WomenofToday StephenConroy 2011-00052 9440StHwy#25 KwikTripInc SandeeHindermann ctyank@hotmail.com 2011-00055 520WalnutSt WrecklessDrivingAcademy BullseyeProperties 2011-00062 1220StHwy#25 PizzaRanch MarkWarnert OpeningSoon 2011-00068 316PineSt Bridgewater/TDS TomOllig thomas.ollig@tdstelecom.com 2011-00081 1200StHwy#25 PizzaRanch MarkWarnert GrandOpening 2011-00087 1001StHwy#25 WestMetro JeffSell 2011-00091 812GolfCourseRd RiverCitySigns PatSawatzke 2011-00093 101E3rdSt FindersKeepersGift&Consignment CherylWolff cwolfftravel@hotmail.com 2011-00094 100DundasRd MartiesFarmService BarbBrion info@martiesfarmservice.com 2011-00099 9395StHwy#25 CulversResturant DavidLoos(?)DJL93@comcast.net 2011-00104 254BroadwayW BeefOBradys BarryFluth/ToddTaylor monticellobeefs@yahoo.com 2011-00103 213StHwy25 SweetDreams MarnFlicker mmflick@hotmail.com 2011-00109 512PineSt TheStation StandardIron debcox83@yahoo.com 2011-00120 206W4thSt DohertyStaffing CargillKitchenSolutions dhughes@dohertystaffing.com 2011-00140 307ChelseaRd HoglundBody&Equipment WayneHoglund hr@hoglundbus.com 2011-00162 518CedarSt SunlifeTanning&Treasures BullseyeProperties sunlife05@gmail.com 2011-00163 512CedarSt RevitalizeMeSalon&Spa BullseyeProperties amhj4hansen@live.com Samebuildingasabove-doeseachtentantneedapermit? 2011-00187 9749HartBlvd AstSports JamiePaulson jamie.astsports@tds.net 2011-00232 206ChelseaRd WrightWayQuilt&Sew RochelleGarvey rochellegarvey@yahoo.com 2011-00234 1001HartBlvd MonticelloClinic LindaDircks linda.dircks@bufflaoclinic.com 2011-00287 1107HartBlvd NewRiverPhyscian'sClinic JoniPawelk joni.pawelk@newrivermedical.com 2011-00321 123W7thSt HolidayStationStores RonaldErickson,CEO mary.seifert@holidaycompanies.com CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots Page 390 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance SIDEWALK SALES & DISPLAY: Outdoor sale and display, conducted by the proprietor, of products normally sold inside a retail establishment. SIGN: Any letter, word or symbol, poster, picture, statuary, reading matter or representation in the nature of advertisement, announcement, message or visual communication, whether painted, posted, printed, affixed or constructed, including all associated brackets, braces, supports, wires and structures, which is displayed for informational or communicative purposes. SIGN FACE: The surface of the sign upon, against, or through which the message of the sign is exhibited. SIGN STRUCTURE: Any structure including the supports, uprights, bracing and framework which supports or is capable of supporting any sign. SIGN, ABANDONED: Any sign and/or its supporting sign structure which remains without a message or whose display surface remains blank for a period of one (1) year or more, or any sign which pertains to a time, event or purpose which no longer applies, shall be deemed to have been abandoned. Signs applicable to a business temporarily suspended because of a change in ownership or management of such business shall not be deemed abandoned unless the property remains vacant for a period of one (1) year or more. Any sign remaining after demolition of a principal structure shall be deemed to be abandoned. Where a sign has received a special permit or other City approval, such approval shall run with the principal use of the property, and such a sign shall be considered to be abandoned under this definition when it meets the conditions specified in this section, notwithstanding the prior special approval. SIGN, AREA IDENTIFICATION: A freestanding sign which identifies the name of a neighborhood, a residential subdivision, a multiple residential complex consisting of three (3) or more structures, a shopping center consisting of five (5) or more separate business concerns, an industrial area, an office complex consisting of three (3) or more structures, or any combination of the above located on contiguous property. SIGN, AWNING: A building sign or graphic printed on or in some fashion attached directly to the awning material. SIGN, AREA: A sign identifying a series of related parcels or uses, rather than a specific parcel or use. SIGN, BALLOON: A sign consisting of a bag made of lightweight material supported by helium, hot, or pressurized air which is greater than twenty-four (24) inches in diameter. CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 391 Changeable Copy Sign Canopy Sign SIGN, BILLBOARD: See definition of Off Premises Sign. SIGN, BUILDING: Any sign attached or supported by any building. SIGN, CANOPY: Any sign that is part of or attached to a canopy, made of fabric, plastic, or structural protective cover over a door or entrance. A canopy sign is not a marquee and is different from service area canopy signs. SIGN, CHANGEABLE COPY: A sign or portion thereof that has a reader board for the display of text information in which each alphanumeric character, graphic or symbol is defined by objects not consisting of an illumination device and may be changed or rearranged manually or mechanically with characters, illustrations, letters or numbers that can be changed or rearranged without altering the face or surface of the sign structure. SIGN, CHANGEABLE COPY (ELECTRONIC): A sign or portion thereof that displays electronic, non-pictorial text information in which each alphanumeric character, graphic, or symbol is defined by a small number of matrix elements using different combinations of light emitting diodes (LEDs), fiber optics, light bulbs or other illumination devices within the display area. Electronic changeable copy signs include computer programmable, microprocessor controlled electronic displays. Electronic changeable copy signs include projected images or messages with these characteristics onto buildings or objects. Electronic changeable copy signs do not include official signs. Electronic changeable copy signs may also be dynamic display signs if the definition of dynamic display sign is met. SIGN, DYNAMIC DISPLAY: Any characteristics of a sign that appear to have movement or that appear to change, caused by any method other than physically removing and replacing the sign or its components, whether the apparent movement or change is in the display, the sign structure or any other component of the sign. This includes displays that incorporate technology or methods allowing the sign face to change the image without having to physically or mechanically replace the sign face or its components as well as any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking or animated display and any display that incorporates rotating panels, LED lights manipulated through digital input, digital ink or any other method or technology that allows the sign face to present a series of images or displays. All dynamic displays are changeable copy signs, but not all changeable copy signs are dynamic displays. CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots Page 392 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Sign Height Monument Sign SIGN, ELECTRONIC GRAPHIC DISPLAY: A sign or portion thereof that displays electronic, static images, static graphics or static pictures, with or without text information, defined by a small number of matrix elements using different combinations of light emitting diodes (LEDs), fiber optics, light bulbs or other illumination devices within the display area where the message change sequence is accomplished immediately or by means of fade, repixalization or dissolve modes. Electronic graphic display signs include computer programmable, microprocessor controlled electronic or digital displays. Electronic graphic display signs include projected images or messages with these characteristics onto buildings or other objects. SIGN, FLASHING: A directly or indirectly illuminated sign or portion thereof that exhibits changing light or color effect by any means, so as to provide intermittent illumination that changes light intensity in sudden transitory bursts and creates the illusion of intermittent flashing light by streaming, graphic bursts showing movement, or any mode of lighting which resembles zooming, twinkling or sparkling. SIGN, FREESTANDING: Any sign which has supporting framework that is placed on, or anchored in, the ground and which is independent from any building or other structure. SIGN, HEIGHT OF: The height of the sign shall be computed as the vertical distance measured from the crown of the adjacent street surface at centerline to the top of the highest attached component of the sign. SIGN, IDENTIFICATION: Signs in all districts which identify the business or owner, or manager, or resident, and set forth the address of the premises where the sign is located and which contain no other material. SIGN, ILLUMINATED: Any sign which contains an element designed to emanate artificial light internally or externally. SIGN, MARQUEE: Any building sign painted, mounted, constructed or attached in any manner, on a marquee. SIGN, MONUMENT: Any freestanding sign with its sign face mounted on the ground or mounted on a base at least as wide as the sign and which has a total height not exceeding fourteen (14) feet. Marquee Sign CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 393 Pylon Signs Projecting Sign SIGN, MULTI-VISION: Any sign composed in whole or part of a series of vertical or horizontal slats or cylinders that are capable of being rotated at intervals so that partial rotation of the group of slats or cylinders produces a different image and when properly functioning allows on a single sign structure the display at any given time one (1) of two (2) or more images. SIGN, OFF PREMISES: A commercial speech sign which directs the attention of the public to a business, activity conducted, or product sold or offered at a location not on the same lot where such sign is located. For purposes of the Sign Ordinance, easements and other appurtenances shall be considered to be outside such lot and any sign located or proposed to be located in an easement or other appurtenance shall be considered an off premises sign. SIGN, OFFICIAL: Signs of a public noncommercial nature including public notification signs, safety signs, traffic signs, direction to public facilities when erected by or on behalf of a public official or employee in the performance of official duty – See also ―Public Sign‖. SIGN, POLE: See definition of Pylon Sign. SIGN, PORTABLE: Any sign which is manifestly designed to be transported, including by trailer or on its own wheels, even though the wheels of such sign may be removed and the remaining chassis or support is converted to another sign or attached temporarily or permanently to the ground since this characteristic is based on the design of such a sign. SIGN, PROJECTING: Any sign which is affixed to a building or wall in such a manner that its leading edge extends more than two (2) feet beyond the surface of such building or wall face. SIGN, PUBLIC: Any sign posted by a governmental agency of a public, non-commercial nature, to include signs indicating scenic or historical points of interest, memorial plaques, and the like, and signs for civic interest groups within the City of Monticello when signs are erected by or on order of a public officer or employee in the performance of official duty – See Also ―Official Sign‖. SIGN, PYLON: Any freestanding sign which has its supportive structure(s) anchored in the ground and which has a sign face elevated above ground level by pole(s) or beam(s) and with the area below the sign face open. CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots Page 394 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Sandwich Board Sign SIGN, ROOF: Any sign erected and constructed wholly on and above the roof of a building, supported by the roof structure, and extending vertically above the highest portion of the roof. SIGN, ROOF SIGN, INTEGRAL: Any building sign erected or constructed as an integral or essentially integral part of a normal roof structure of any design, so that no part of the sign extends vertically above the highest portion of the roof and so that no part of the sign is separated from the rest of the roof by a space of more than six (6) inches. SIGN, ROTATING SIGN: A sign or portion of a sign which turns about on an axis. SIGN, SANDWICH BOARD: A sign placed near the entrance of a business, usually on the public or private sidewalk, advertising particular aspects of the business goods or services. SIGN, SHIMMERING: A sign which reflects an oscillating sometimes distorted visual image. SIGN, SUSPENDED: Any building sign that is suspended from the underside of a horizontal plane surface and is connected to such surface. SIGN,TEMPORARY: Any sign which is erected or displayed for a specified period or time, including, but not limited to, banners, search lights, portable signs, streamers, pennants, inflatable devices. SIGN, TIME AND TEMPERATURE: A sign that displays only current time and temperature information. SIGN, VIDEO DISPLAY: A sign that changes its message or background in a manner or method of display characterized by motion or pictorial imagery, which may or may not include text and depicts action or a special effect to imitate movement, the presentation of pictorials or graphics displayed in a progression of frames that gives the illusion of motion, including, but not limited to, the illusion of moving objects, moving patterns or bands of light, or expanding or contracting shapes, not including electronic changeable copy signs. Video display signs include projected images or messages with these characteristics onto buildings or other objects. CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 395 Window Signage SIGN, WALL: Any building sign attached parallel to, but within two (2) feet of a wall, painted on the wall surface of, or erected and confined within the limits of an outside wall of any building or structure, which is supported by such wall or building, and which displays only one (1) sign surface. SIGN, WINDOW: Any building sign, picture, symbol, or combination thereof, designed to communicate information about an activity, business, commodity, event, sale, or service, that is placed inside a window or upon the windowpanes or glass and is visible from the exterior of the window. SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC SITE: Any archaeological site, standing structure, or other property that meets the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or is listed in the State Register of Historic Sites, or is determined to be an unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 307.08. A historic site meets these criteria if it is presently listed on either register or if it is determined to meet the qualifications for listing after review by the Minnesota state archaeologist or the director of the Minnesota Historical Society. All unplatted cemeteries are automatically considered to be significant historic sites. SPECIAL EVENT: An event which plans for or can reasonably expect to attract more than 100 persons at any one time such as cultural events, musical events, celebrations, festivals, fairs, carnivals, etc. SPEECH, COMMERCIAL: Speech advertising a business, profession, commodity, service or entertainment. SPEECH, NON-COMMERCIAL: Dissemination of messages not classified as commercial speech which include, but are not limited to, messages concerning political, religious, social, ideological, public service and informational topics. SITE LANDSCAPING: Required vegetative material consisting of trees and shrubs that are placed on a development site to soften built edges and provide transitions. [See Section 4.1(H)] SHOPPING CENTER: An integrated grouping of commercial stores under single ownership or control. See also “RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES” SLOPE: Means the degree of deviation of surface from the horizontal, usually expressed in percent or degrees. SOLAR ENERGY: Radiant energy (direct, diffuse, and reflected) received from the sun. Exhibit 5E City Allowed By Number per Location Calendar Days Permit Required Multi-Tenant Allowance Buffalo By Building 1 30 YES NO Becker By Business No Regulation 60 YES NO Big Lake By Parcel 1 60 YES NO Elk River By Parcel 1 90 YES NO St. Michael By Business 1 - 100 feet apart 90 YES NO Neighboring Community Survey - Temporary Sign Regulations CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 1 CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District (1) Purpose The purpose of this district is to protect and preserve the scenic, recreational, natural and historical values of the Mississippi River in the city by carefully controlling development of this river corridor consistent with the state Wild and Scenic River Act (Minn. Stats. § 103F.301 et seq.) and Minn. Rules 6105.0010 to 6105.0070; 6105.0150 to 6105.0250; and as applicable, the provision of 6120.2600 to 6120.3900. (2) Designation of District In order to preserve and protect the Mississippi River and its adjacent land which possess scenic, recreational, natural and historical values, the Mississippi River in the city has been given a recreational river classification, and lands adjacent to the river are hereby designated by land use districts, the boundaries of which are based upon the Mississippi River Management Plan, Minn. Rules 6105.0800-- 6105.0960. The provisions of Section 3.7(F) shall apply to all lands within the jurisdiction of Monticello that are denoted on the official zoning map as being within the Wild and Scenic Recreational River overlay district. In case of conflict between the map and the property descriptions and boundaries in Minn. Rules 6105.0910 and 6105.0950, the latter shall prevail. (3) District Application The regulations and requirements imposed by the WSRR overlay district shall be in addition to those established for the base zoning districts which jointly apply. Under the joint application of standards, the more restrictive requirements shall apply. Any person contemplating development in the WSRR overlay district should review the base district requirements with the Community Development Department to determine which regulations will apply. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 2 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (4) Substandard Lots Any lot of record filed in the office of the county recorder on or before July 1, 2000, which does not meet the dimensional requirements of this chapter may be allowed as a building site subject to the following: (a) Such use is permitted in the land use district. (b) The lot was in separate ownership on the date of enactment of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived. (c) All sewage disposal requirements are complied with and lot requirements are complied with to the greatest extent practical. (d) The lot is at least 10,000 square feet in area. (e) If in a group of two or more contiguous lots under a single ownership, any individual lot does not meet the lot width requirements of the local regulation, such individual lot cannot be considered as a separate parcel of land for purposes of sale or development, but must be combined with adjacent lots under the same ownership so that the combination of lots will equal one or more parcels of land, each meeting the lot width requirements of the local regulation, or to the greatest extent practical. (5) Substandard Uses Any uses in existence on a lot of record filed in the office of the county recorder on or before July 1, 2000, which are permitted uses in accordance with Chapter 5, but do not meet minimum setbacks or other dimensional requirements of the ordinance are to be considered as substandard uses. All substandard uses, except for substandard signs, shall be allowed to continue subject to the following conditions and exceptions: (a) Any structural alteration or addition to a substandard use which will increase the substandard dimension(s) shall not be allowed. (b) Substandard signs shall be gradually amortized over a period of time not to exceed five years once amortization has been initiated by the City. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 3 (6) Allowable Uses The allowable uses in the WSRR overlay district shall be as allowed in Chapter 5 for the underlying zoning classification provided the uses are in conformance with the criteria for Urban River Class Standards in Minn. Rules 6120.3100 and 6120.3200, and with the criteria for Recreational Rivers in 6105.0100 subpart 3. (7) Conditional Uses (a) Conditional uses allowable within the WSRR overlay district shall be reviewed under the provisions outlined in Section 2.4(D), and interim use permits for uses or structures within WSRR overlay district shall be reviewed under the provisions outlined in Section 2.4(E). (b) Any structure(s) associated with a conditional use which are proposed to be located upon slopes greater than 12 percent shall adhere to the following conditions: (i) The structure shall be screened from view of the river and adjacent shorelands in a manner judged acceptable by the city. (ii) An adequate conforming sanitary sewer and water system can be established on the site. (iii) Appropriate erosion control measures are undertaken as determined necessary by the city. (iv) If applicable, vegetative and/or clear-cutting permits are obtained for the proposed use in accordance with City ordinance. (8) Recreational river land use subdistricts – standards, lot dimensions, setbacks, and impervious surface requirements (a) Areas covered The following areas of the city are covered by this division: all areas of the wild and scenic recreational river district within the city. (b) Standards for lots Lots within the WSRR overlay district shall conform to the standards in Table 3-19. Where these standards conflict with the standards of the base zoning districts, the more restrictive standard shall prevail. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 4 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance TABLE 3-19: WILD & SCENIC LOT REQUIREMENTS RIVER TYPE Lot Size Lot Width [1] Wild 6 acres 300 feet Scenic 4 acres 250 feet Recreational 2 acres 200 feet [1]: Lot width shall be met at both the OHW and at the required setback from the OHW in accordance with Section8.2(B)(1)(i). (c) Standards for principal structures Principal structures within the WSRR overlay district shall conform to the standards in Table 3-20. Where these standards conflict with the standards of the base zoning districts, the more restrictive standard shall prevail. TABLE 3-20: WILD & SCENIC PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE SETBACKS Front yard setback and setback from rights-of-way or roadway easements (setbacks must be met from all roads when a lot is bounded by two or more roadways) - Arterial Road 70 feet - Collector Road 70 feet - Local Road 30 feet - Landlocked Parcel 30 feet Unsewered Sewered Side yard setbacks 30 feet 30 feet Rear yard setbacks 50 feet 30 feet Setback from the OHW of the Mississippi River 100 feet 150 feet Setback from a bluff line 75 feet 75 feet Sewer setback from the OWH 75 feet 75 feet (d) Accessory structure setbacks Accessory structures within the WSRR overlay district shall conform to the standards in Table 3-21. Where these standards conflict with the standards of the base zoning districts, the more restrictive standard shall prevail. TABLE 3-21: WILD & SCENIC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACKS Unsewered Sewered Setback from the OHW of the Mississippi River 75 feet 50 feet Setback from a bluff line 30 feet 30 feet CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 5 (e) Impervious surface requirements (i) Impervious surfaces on lots within the WSRR overlay district shall adhere to the following standards: 1. Impervious surface coverage of lots must not exceed 25 percent of the lot area. 2. When constructed facilities are used for storm water management, they must be designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation districts. 3. New constructed storm water outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge. (ii) The provisions of subdivision (i) above may be varied without a variance if all of the following criteria and standards are met: 1. All structures and impervious surfaces are located on slopes less than 12 percent. The physical alteration of slopes shall not be permitted for the purpose of overcoming this limitation. 2. The site development is designed, implemented, and maintained using the most applicable combination of comprehensive practices that prevent flooding, pollutant, erosion and sedimentation problems consistent with Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas: Best Management Practices for Minnesota, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, October 1989, or as amended, which is incorporated by reference, available at the state law library and not subject to frequent change. 3. A site development, maintenance, and inspection plan incorporating the comprehensive practices of this section is submitted and approved by the city prior to the issuance of an impervious surfacing permit and the plan is implemented. 4. The city may impose additional conditions determined necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. (9) Building Height The following minimum requirements shall be observed in the WSRR overlay district: (a) The maximum height of principal structures shall not exceed 25 feet. (b) The maximum height of accessory structures shall not exceed 25 feet. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 6 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (10) Additional structure and use standards (a) Placement of structures Structures shall not be located on slopes greater than 12 percent except by conditional use permit as provided for in subsection 3.7(F)(6). (b) Maximum density The maximum density in the WSRR overlay district shall not exceed one dwelling unit per lot with the exception of approved accessory dwelling units. (c) Multiple unit dwelling structures Multiple family dwelling units shall meet the following additional standards: (i) Each building must be set back at least 200 feet from the ordinary high water level; (ii) Each building must have common sewage treatment and water systems in one location and serve all dwelling units in the building; and (iii) Watercraft docking facilities for each lot must be centralized in one location and serve all dwelling units in the building (i.e. only one docking facility per lot). (d) Stormwater management Subject to other more restrictive limitations which may be imposed by this ordinance, the following general and specific standards shall apply: (i) General standards 1. When possible, existing natural drainageways, wetlands, and vegetated soil surfaces shall be used to convey, store, filter, and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters. 2. Development shall be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of disturbed areas, runoff velocities, erosion potential, and reduce and delay runoff volumes. Disturbed areas must be stabilized and protected as soon as possible and facilities or methods used to retain sediment on the site. 3. When development density, topographic features, and soil and vegetation conditions are not sufficient to adequately handle stormwater runoff using natural features and vegetation, various types of constructed facilities such as diversions, settling basins, skimming devices, dikes, waterways, and ponds may be used. Preference shall be given to designs using surface drainage, vegetation, and infiltration rather than buried pipes and manmade materials and facilities. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 7 (ii) Specific Standards 1. When constructed facilities are used for stormwater management, documentation shall be provided by a qualified individual that they are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation districts. 2. New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters shall provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge. (e) Special Provisions for Commercial, Industrial, Public/Semipublic, Agricultural, and Forestry (i) Standards for commercial, industrial, public, and semipublic uses 1. Surface water-oriented commercial uses and industrial, public, or semipublic uses with similar needs for access to and use of public waters may be located on parcels or lots with frontage on public waters. Subject to other more restrictive limitations which may be imposed by this chapter, those uses with water-oriented needs shall meet the following standards: a. In addition to meeting impervious coverage limits, setbacks, and other zoning standards in this chapter, the uses shall be designed to incorporate topographic and vegetative screening of parking areas and structures; b. Uses that require short-term watercraft mooring for patrons must centralize these facilities and design them to avoid obstructions of navigation and to be the minimum size necessary to meet the need; and c. Uses that depend on patrons arriving by watercraft may use signs and lighting to convey needed information to the public, subject to the following general standards: i. No advertising signs or supporting facilities for signs may be placed in or upon public waters. Signs conveying information or safety messages may be placed in or on public waters by a public authority or under a permit issued by the county sheriff. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 8 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance ii. Signs may be placed, when necessary, within the shore impact zone if they are designed and sized to be the minimum necessary to convey needed information. They shall only convey the location and name of the establishment and the general types of goods or services available. The signs shall not contain other detailed information such as product brands and prices, shall not be located higher than ten feet above the ground, and shall not exceed 32 square feet in size. If illuminated by artificial lights, the lights shall be shielded or directed to prevent illumination out across public waters; and iii. Other outside lighting may be located within the shore impact zone or over public waters if it is used primarily to illuminate potential safety hazards and is shielded or otherwise directed to prevent direct illumination out across public waters. This does not preclude use of navigational lights. 2. Uses without water-oriented needs must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. (ii) Agriculture use standards 1. General cultivation farming, grazing, nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting are permitted uses if steep slopes and shore and bluff impact zones are maintained in permanent vegetation or operated under an approved conservation plan (resource management systems) consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts or the natural resources conservation service, as provided by a qualified individual or agency. a. The shore impact zone for parcels with permitted agricultural land uses is equal to a line parallel to and 50 feet from the ordinary high water level. b. The bluff impact zone is equal to the bluff and land located within 20 feet from a bluff line. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 9 2. Animal feedlots shall meet the requirements of this chapter, as well as the following standards: a. New feedlots shall not be located in the WSRR overlay district; and b. Modifications or expansions to existing feedlots that are located within 300 feet of the ordinary high water level or within the bluff impact zone are allowed if they do not further encroach into the existing ordinary high water level setback or encroach on bluff impact zones. 3. Use of fertilizer, pesticides, or animal wastes within the WSRR overlay district shall be done in such a way as to minimize impact on the shore impact zone or public water by proper application or use of earth or vegetation. (iii) Forest management standard 1. The harvesting of timber and associated reforestation must be conducted consistent with the provisions of the Minnesota Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment--Forestry and the provisions of Water Quality in Forest Management--Best Management Practices in Minnesota. 2. Use of fertilizer, pesticides, or animal wastes within the WSRR overlay district shall be done in such a way as to minimize impact on the shore impact zone or public water by proper application or use of earth or vegetation. (iv) Extractive use standards 1. Site development and restoration plan. An extractive use site development and restoration plan shall be developed, approved, and followed over the course of operation of the site. The plan shall address dust, noise, possible pollutant discharges, hours and duration of operation, and anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations. It must also identify actions to be taken during operation to mitigate adverse environmental impacts, particularly erosion, and shall clearly explain how the site will be rehabilitated after extractive activities end. 2. Setbacks for processing machinery. Processing machinery shall be located consistent with setback standards for structures from the ordinary high water level and from blufflines. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 10 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (11) Vegetative Cutting Selective cutting of trees in excess of four inches in diameter at four feet height within the WSRR overlay district and within 100 feet of the ordinary high water level and 20 feet landward of the bluffline shall be subject to the following: (a) Clearcutting, except for any authorized public services such as roads and essential services, shall not be permitted. Clearcutting for essential services, such as telephone lines, substations, and related structures, shall require a special permit issued by the City Council in accordance with 2.4(N) of this ordinance. (b) Cutting is spaced in several cutting operations and a continuous tree cover is maintained, uninterrupted by large openings. In cases where the existing tree cover has been interrupted by large openings in the past, selective cutting may be performed so as to maintain a continuous tree cover in the remaining wooded areas. (c) The above cutting provisions shall not be deemed to prevent: (i) The removal of diseased or insect-infested trees, or of rotten or damaged trees that present safety hazards. (ii) Pruning understory vegetation, shrubs, plants, bushes, or grasses, or harvesting crops, or cutting suppressed trees or trees less than four inches in diameter at four-foot height. (d) Except in cases where vegetative cutting has been approved as part of a subdivision or other development, any person proposing vegetative cutting shall apply to the city for a vegetative cutting permit. Application forms for the permit shall be provided by the Community Development Department and require the following information: (i) Name and address of applicant. (ii) The name and address of the owner of the land. (iii) The address and legal description of the land involved. (iv) The purpose of the vegetative cutting. (v) A description of the type and amount of vegetation to be cut. (vi) The highway, street, or streets, or other public ways in the city upon and along which any material is to be hauled or carried. (vii) An estimate of the time required to complete the vegetative cutting. (viii) A site plan showing the proposed cutting area. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 11 (ix) A plan or statement demonstrating that the activity will in no way jeopardize the public health, safety and welfare. (x) A statement that the applicant will comply with all conditions prescribed by the city. (12) Clearcutting Restrictions Clearcutting within the WSRR overlay district shall be subject to the following standards and criteria: (a) Clearcutting shall not be used as a cutting method where soil, slope, or other watershed conditions are fragile and subject to injury. (b) Clearcutting shall be conducted only where clearcut blocks, patches, or strips are, in all cases, shaped and blended with the natural terrain. (c) The size of clearcut blocks, patches, or strips shall be kept at the minimum necessary. (d) Where feasible, all clearcuts shall be conducted between September 15 and May 15. If natural regeneration will not result in adequate vegetative cover, areas in which clearcutting is conducted shall be replanted to prevent erosion and to maintain the aesthetic quality of the area. Where feasible, replanting shall be performed in the same spring or the following spring. (e) Except in cases where clearcutting has been approved as part of a subdivision or other development, any person proposing clearcutting shall apply to the city for a clearcutting permit. Application forms for the permit shall be provided by the Community Development Department and require the following information: (i) Name and address of applicant. (ii) The name and address of the owner of the land. (iii) The address and legal description of the land involved. (iv) The purpose of the clearcutting. (v) A description of the type and amount of clearcutting to be conducted. (vi) The highway, street, or streets, or other public ways in the city upon and along which any material is to be hauled or carried. (vii) An estimate of the time required to complete the vegetative cutting. (viii) A site plan showing the proposed cutting area. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 12 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (ix) A plan or statement demonstrating that the activity will in no way jeopardize the public health, safety and welfare. (x) A statement that the applicant will comply with all conditions prescribed by the city. (13) Grading and Filling Any grading and filling conducted within the WSRR overlay district shall require a permit and shall comply with the following: (a) The provisions of 2.4(N) of this ordinance are satisfactorily met. (b) Grading and filling of the natural topography which is not accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall not be allowed. (c) Grading and filling of the natural topography which is accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall not be conducted without a grading and filling permit from the zoning authority. (d) Grading and filling of the natural topography which is accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall be performed in a manner which minimizes earth moving, erosion, tree clearing and the destruction of natural amenities. (e) Grading and filling of the natural topography shall also meet the following standards: (i) The smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for as short a time as feasible. (ii) Temporary ground cover such as mulch is used and permanent ground cover such as sod is planted. (iii) Methods to prevent erosion and to trap sediment are employed. (iv) Fill is established to accepted engineering standards. (f) Excavation of material from, or filling in the river, or construction of any permanent structures or navigational obstructions therein is prohibited, unless authorized by a permit from the commissioner pursuant to Minn. Stats. § 103G.245. (g) Draining or filling of wetlands as defined by this chapter shall be expressly prohibited. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 13 (14) Utility Transmission Lines All utility transmission crossings of land within the WSRR overlay district shall require a conditional use permit. The construction of such transmission services shall be subject to the standards and criteria of Minn. Rules 6105.0170 and 6105.0180. (15) Public Roads In addition to such permits as may be required by Minn. Stats. § 103G.245, a conditional use permit shall be required for any construction or reconstruction of new public roads within the WSRR overlay district. Such construction or reconstruction shall be subject to the standards and criteria of Minn. Rules 6105.0190 and 6105.0200. A conditional use permit shall not be required for marginal access streets which are intended to serve primarily as an access to abutting properties. (16) Land Suitability No land shall be subdivided which is determined by the city or the commissioner to be unsuitable by reason of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formation with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, unfavorable topography, inadequate water supply or sewage treatment capabilities or any other feature likely to be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision or the city. (17) Nonconforming Uses All uses in existence prior to July 1, 2000, which are lawfully permitted uses within the wild and scenic recreational river district, but do not meet the minimum lot area, setbacks or other dimensional requirements of this chapter shall be allowed to continue subject to the following conditions and exceptions: (a) Any structural alteration or addition to a nonconforming use which will increase the substandard dimensions shall not be allowed. (b) Substandard signs shall be gradually eliminated over a period of time not to exceed five years from the date of enactment or amendment of this division. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 14 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (18) Sewage Treatment (a) Public System Required Publicly-owned sewer systems must be used. (b) Nonconforming Sewage Treatment Systems A nonconforming sewage treatment system not meeting the requirements of applicable rules of the state Department of Health, the state pollution control agency, specifically Minn Rules ch. 7080, for individual sewage treatment systems, and any other applicable local government standards shall be brought into conformity or discontinued within five years of the date of enactment of the Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Ordinance from which this division is derived. (19) Water Supply Any public or private supply of water for domestic purposes must meet or exceed standards for water quality of the state Department of Health and the state pollution control agency and administrative procedures of this chapter. Private wells must be located, maintained, and sealed in accordance with or in a more thorough manner than the water well construction code of the state Department of Health. (20) Plats Copies of all plats within the Wild and Scenic Recreational River District shall be forwarded to the Commissioner within ten days of approval by the City. Approval of a plat which is inconsistent with this division is permissible only if the detrimental impact of the inconsistency is more than overcome by other protective characteristics. (21) Planned Unit Development A planned unit development may be allowed per the requirements of section 2.4(P) only when the proposed development provides a better means of preserving agricultural land, open space, woods, scenic views, wetlands, and other features of the natural environment than traditional subdivision development. Planned Unit Developments shall be reviewed under the provisions outlined in Section 2.4(P) of this ordinance, with the following additional criteria: (a) Preliminary plans are approved by the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources prior to their enactment by the City Council. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 15 (b) A publicly-owned sewer systems is used. (c) Open space is permanently preserved. This may be accomplished through the use of restrictive deed covenants, public dedications, granting of scenic easements, or other equally effective and permanent methods. (d) There is not more than one centralized boat launching facility for each cluster of homes. (e) The only uses that shall be allowed within the development are those allowed under section 2.4(P) and the underlying zoning district. (f) Under the joint application of standards, the more restrictive provisions of this chapter shall apply. (22) Variances (a) Variances shall be reviewed under the provisions outlined in Section 2.4(C) with the following additional variance criteria: (i) Granting of the variance is not contrary to the purpose and intent of this section and is consistent with Minn. Rules 6105.0010--6105.0250 and 6105.0800--6105.0960. (ii) Granting of the variance will not allow any use which is neither a permitted or conditional use in the land use district in which the subject property is located. (b) Exception: Where a setback pattern from the ordinary high water level has already been established on both sides of a proposed building site, the setback of the proposed structure may be allowed to conform to that pattern. This provision shall apply only to lots which do not meet the applicable minimum lot width requirement. (c) Appeals from variance decisions on shoreland issues may be made in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.4(H) and also Minnesota Statutes. Section 2.4(H): Appeal of Administrative Decisions CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District Page 16 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (23) Notice to the DNR of Proposed Actions within the Wild and Scenic Recreational River District (a) Notification of Proposals (i) For properties within the Wild and Scenic Recreational River District, the Community Development Department shall notify the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources of any application for a variance, ordinance amendment (including proposed changes to district lines), conditional use permits, PUDs, and plats. (ii) Notifications for ordinance changes and PUDs shall consist of a copy of the proposed ordinance amendment(s), a copy of the proposed PUD, and all other application materials as may be needed by the Commissioner to fully understand the proposal. (iii) Notifications for variances, plats or CUPs may consist simply of the notice of the applicable public hearing, or if a public hearing is not required, a copy of application materials as may be needed by the Commissioner to fully understand the proposal. (iv) Notification shall be sent so as to be received by the Commissioner at least 30 days prior to the planned hearing or meeting to consider the requested action. (b) Notification of final decision The Community Development Department shall notify the Commissioner of the City’s final decision on the proposed action within ten (10) days of the decision. (c) Effective date of decision (i) Decisions on variances, plats or CUPs become effective upon completion of the applicable review process at the City level. (ii) Decisions on PUDs and ordinance amendments within or affecting the Wild and Scenic Recreational River District become effective upon the happening of any of the following events, whichever first occurs: 1. The final decision taken by the city has previously received certification of approval from the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. 2. The city receives certification of approval from the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources after its final decision. CHAPTER 3: GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.7 Overlay Zoning Districts Subsection (E) Wild and Scenic Recreational River District City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 17 3. Thirty days have elapsed from the day the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources received notice of the final decision, and the city has received from the Commissioner neither certification of approval nor notice of non-approval. 4. The Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources certifies his approval within 30 days after conducting a public hearing. (d) Hearing after non-approval In case the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources gives notice of a PUD or proposed ordinance amendment, either the applicant or Community Development Department may, within 30 days of said notice, file with the Commissioner a demand for a hearing. If the demand for a hearing is not made within 30 days, the notice of non-approval becomes final. (i) The hearing shall be held within 60 days of the demand and after at least two weeks' published notice. (ii) The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with Minn. Stats. § 103G.311, subds. 2, 6 and 7. (iii) The Commissioner shall either certify his approval or disapproval of the proposed action within 30 days of the hearing. 27/1MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 27 REGULATING THE MANAGEMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI WILD, SCENIC, AND RECREATIONAL RIVER SYSTEM AND THE SH ORE LAND ARE AS OF T HE C ITY O F MO NTIC ELLO SECTION: 27-1:General Provisions 27-2:Designation of Types of Land Use 27-1:GENERAL PROVISION [A]STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION: This shoreland management ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authorization contained in the Laws of Minnesota 1973, Chapter 379, 272, and in furtherance of the policies declared in Minnesota Statutes 1976, Chapters 104, 105, 115, 116, and 462, and Minnesota Regulations NR 78-81, Rules and Regulations for Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers, NR 82-84, Rules and Regulations for the Management of Shoreland areas within municipalities, and NR 2400-2420, Rules and Regulations relating to the designation, classification, and management of the Mississippi River in Stearns, Sherburne, Wright, Anoka, and Hennepin Counties. [B]POLICY: The uncontrolled use of shorelands of the City of Monticello affects the public health, safety, and general welfare not only by contributing to pollution of public waters, but also by impairing the local tax base. Therefore, it is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to provide for the wise development of shorelands of public waters. The legislature of Minnesota has delegated responsibility to the municipalities of the shorelands of public waters and thus preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, preserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise utilization of waters and related resources. This responsibility is hereby recognized by the City of Monticello. It is in the interest of present and future generations to preserve and protect the outstanding scenic, recreational, natural, historical, and scientific values of the Mississippi River and its adjacent lands. Accordingly, the Commissioner of Natural Resources provides standards and criteria for the preservation, protection, and management of the Mississippi River as authorized by the Laws of Minnesota 1973, Chapter 271, and Minnesota Regulations NR 78-81 and NR 2400-2420. [C]STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: To achieve the policies described in paragraph B above and to: 1.Designate suitable land use zoning districts compatible with the 27/2MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE shoreland management classification and consistent with NR 2400- 2420. 2.Regulate the minimum dimensions for the size and length of water frontage of lots suitable for building sites. 3.Regulate the placement of structures in relation to shorelines and roads. 4.Regulate the amount of impervious surface allowed on each lot. 5.Regulate the type of placement of sanitary and waste disposal facilities. 6.Regulate alteration of the natural shorelands vegetation and to po gr ap hy. 7.Regulate placement of roads and parking areas. 8.Regulate the subdivision of land. 9.Regulate the location of utility transmission crossings of shorelands. 10.Regulate the construction or reconstruction of public roads in shoreland areas. 11.Provide for the enforcement and administration of municipal shoreland management ordinances and management of the recreational river ordinances within the City of Monticello. [D]JURISDICTION: The jurisdiction of this chapter shall include the shorelands of all public water in the city of Monticello as depicted on the official zoning map of the City of Monticello and the recreational river land use district as described in NR 2420. [E]COMPLIANCE: The use of any shoreland of public water; the size and shape of lots; the use, size, type, and location of structures on lots; the installation and maintenance of water supply and waste disposal facilities; the filling, grading, lagooning or dredging of any shoreland area; the cutting of shoreland vegetation; and the subdivision of lots shall be in full compliance with the terms of this chapter and other applicable regulations and ordin ances. Cons truct ion o f buil dings , priv ate wat er sup ply, and s ewage disposal systems and erection of signs shall require a permit unless otherwise expressly excluded by the requirements of this chapter. [F]ABROGATION AND GREATER RESTRICTION: 1.The provisions of Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, and zoning map of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, as revised and amended, of which this 27/3MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE chapter is a part, are hereby incorporated by reference and shall be made as much a part of this ordinance as if the matter described were fully set out herein. 2.It is not otherwise intended by this overlay chapter to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing deed restrictions or ordinances other than zoning to the extent specified in paragraph [F] above; however, where this chapter imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this chapter shall prevail. [G]INTERPRETATION: In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this chapter shall be held to be minimum requirements and shall be liberally constructed in favor of the City and shall not be deemed a limitation or re pe al of an y ot he r p ow er s g ra nt ed by Minnesota Statutes. [H]SEVERABILITY: The provisions of this chapter shall be severable, and the invalidity of any paragraph, sub-paragraph, or subdivision thereof shall not make void any other paragraph, sub-paragraph, subdivision or any other part. [I]DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this chapter, certain terms or words used herein shall be interpreted as follows: the word "shall" is mandatory, not permissive. All distance unless otherwise specified shall be measured ho ri zo nt al ly. 1.BOATHOUSE: A structure used solely for the storage of boats or boating equipment. 2.BUILDING LINE: That line measured across the width of the lot at the point where the main structure is placed in accordance with the setback provisions. 3.CLEAR-CUTTING: The removal of an entire stand of trees. 4.HARDSHIP: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the conditions allowed by the official controls; the plight of the landowners is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic consideration alone shall not constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under terms of the official controls. 5.LOT: A parcel of land designated by metes and bounds description, registered land survey, auditors plat, or other accepted means and separated from other parcels or portions by said description or the purposes of sale, lease, or separation thereof. For the purposes of these regulations, a lot shall be considered to be an individual building site which shall be occupied by not more than one principal structure equipped with sanitary facilities. 27/4MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 6.ORDINARY HIGH WATER: A mark delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape. The ordinary high water mark is commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. 7.PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: A type of development which may incorporate a variety of land uses planned and developed as a unit. The planned unit development is distinguished from the traditional subdivision process of development in that zoning standards such as density, setbacks, height limits, and minimum lot sizes may be altered by negotiation and agreement between the developer, the municipality, and the Commissioner of Natural Resources. 8.PLANNING AGENCY: The Planning Commission or planning de pa rt me nt as cr ea te d b y th e m un ic ip al it y. 9.PUBLIC WATERS: Any waters of the state which serve a beneficial public purpose as defined in Minnesota Statutes 1976, Section 105.37, Subdivision 6. However, no lake, pond, or flowage of less than ten (10) acres in size and no river or stream having a total drainage area less than two (2) square miles shall be regulated for the purposes of these regulations. A body of water created by a private user where there was no previous shoreland as defined herein for a designated private use authorized by the Commissioner of Natural Resources shall be exempt from the provisions of these regulations. The of ficia l dete rmina tion of the size and ph ysical li mits of drai nage areas of rivers and streams shall be made by the Commissioner of Natural Resources. The official size of lakes, ponds, or flowage shall be the areas listed in the Division of Water Bulletin 25, and Inventory of Minnesota lakes; or in the event that lakes, ponds, or flowages are not listed therein, official determination of size and physical limits shall be made by the Commissioner of Natural Resources in co op er at io n w it h t he mu ni ci pa li ty. 10.SETBACK: The minimum horizontal distance between a structure or sanitary facility and the ordinary high water mark, or between a structure or sanitary facility and a road, highway, or property lines. 11.SHORELAND: Land located within the following distances from public water: (a)1,000 feet from the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond, or flowages. (b)Three hundred (300) feet from a river or stream, or the landward extent of a flood plain designated by ordinance on 27/5MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE such river or stream, whichever is greater. The practical limits of shorelands may be less than the statutory limits where such limits are designated by natural drainage divides at lesser distances as shown on the official zoning map of the City of Monticello. (c)The area included in the recreational land use districts for the Mississippi River as defined in Minnesota Regulations NR 2400-2420. 12.SUBDIVISION: Improved or unimproved land or lands which are divided for the purposes of ready sale or lease, or divided successively within a five (5) year period for the purpose of sale or lease, into three (3) or more lots or parcels of less than five (5) acres each, contiguous in area, and which are under common ownership or control. 13.SUBSTANDARD USE: Any use of shorelands existing prior to the date of enactment of this ordinance which is permitted within the applicable zoning district but does not meet the minimum lot area and length or water frontage, structure setbacks, or other dimensional standards of the ordinance. 27-2:DESIGNATION OF TYPES OF LAND USE In order to guide the wise development and utilization of shorelands of public waters for the preservation of water quality, natural characteristics, economic values, and the general health, safety, and welfare in the city of Monticello, a shoreland management classification has been given by the Commissioner of Natural Resources, and uses of shoreland in these classes are hereby designated by land use districts, based on the compatibility of the designated type of land use with the shoreland management classification. [A]SHORELAND MANAGEMENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM: The public waters in the city of Monticello have been classified by the Commissioner of Natural Resources as "general development lakes and streams" which include the Mississippi River and Otter Creek. In addition, the Mississippi River has been designated as a "recreational" component of Minnesota's wild, scenic, and recreational rivers system. [B]SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT: The shorelands of the city of Monticello are hereby designated as a shoreland overlay district. The purpose of the shoreland overlay district is to provide for the wise utilization of shoreland areas in order to preserve the quality and natural character of the public waters of the city of Monticello. 1.PERMITTED USES: All permitted uses allowed and regulated by the applicable zoning district underlying this shoreland overlay district as indicated on the official zoning map of the City of Monticello. 27/6MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 2.CONDITIONAL USES: All conditional uses and applicable attached conditions allowed and regulated by the applicable zoning district underlying this shoreland overlay district as indicated on the official zoning map of the City of Monticello. 3.GENERAL PROVISIONS: The following standards shall apply to all shorelands of all public waters within the city of Monticello. Where the requirements of the underlying zoning district as shown on the official zoning map are more restrictive than those set forth herein, th en th e m or e r es tr ic ti ve st an da rd s s ha ll ap pl y. GENERAL UNSEWERED AREA DEVELOPMENT WATERS Lot area (feet)20,000 Water frontage and lot width at a building line (feet) 100 Build ing set back fr om ord inary high water mark (feet) 75 Building setback from roads and highways (feet) 50 Federal/State/County 20 Municipal/Private Elevation of lowest floor above highest known water level (feet) 3 Building height limitation (feet) 35 Total lot area covered by impervious surface (%) 30 Sewage system setback from ordinary high water mark (feet) 50 Sewage system elevation above highest groundwater level or bedrock (feet) 4 GENERAL SEWERED AREA DEVELOPMENT WATERS All provisions for unsewered areas shall apply to sewered areas except for the following, which shall supersede the provisions applied to unsewered areas: 27/7MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE Lot Area (feet): Waterfront lots 15,000 abutting public waters Other lots 12,000 not abutting public waters GENERAL SEWERED AREA DEVELOPMENT WATERS Lot Area (feet): Water frontage and lot width at building line (feet)80 Bu il di ng se tb ac k f ro m o rd in ar y high water mark (feet)50 [C]VEGETATIVE CUTTING PROVISIONS AND GRADING AND FILLING (Recreational River): 1.On lands within the building setback from the normal high water mark, the Mississippi River, and the portion of Otter Creek within the recreational land use district: (a)Clear-cutting except for any authorized public services such as roads and utilities shall not be permitted. (b)Selective cutting of trees in excess of four (4) inches in diameter at breast height is permitted provided that cutting is spaced in several cutting operations and a continuous tree cover is maintained, uninterrupted by large openings. In cases where t he ex isti ng tree c over h as been inter rupte d by large openings in the past, selective cutting should be performed so as to maintain a continuous tree cover in the remaining wooded areas. (c)The above cutting provisions shall not be deemed to prevent: i.The removal of diseased or insect infested trees or of rotten or damaged trees that present safety hazards; or ii.Pruning understory vegetation, shrubs, plants, bushes, grasses, or from harvesting crops or cutting suppressed trees or trees less than four (4) inches in diameter at breast height. 27/8MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 2.Clear-cutting anywhere in wild, scenic, or recreational river land use districts is subject to the following standards and criteria: (a)Clear-cutting shall not be used as a cutting method where soil, slope, or other watershed conditions are fragile and subject to in ju ry. (b)Clear-cutting shall be conducted only where clear-cut blocks, patches, or strips are in all cases shaped and blended with the natural terrain. (c)The size of clear-cut blocks, patches, or strips shall be kept at th e m in im um ne ce ss ar y. (d)Where feasible, all clear-cuts shall be conducted between September 15 and May 15. If natural regeneration will not result in adequate vegetative cover, areas in which clear- cutting is conducted shall be replanted to prevent erosion and to maintain the aesthetic quality of the area. Where feasible, replanting shall be performed in the same spring or the follo wing sp ring. 3.Grading and filling in of the natural topography which is not accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall not be permitted in the land use district. 4.Grading and filling in of the natural topography which is accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall be performed in a manner which minimizes earth moving, erosion, tree-clearing, and the destruction of natural amenities and shall be controlled by the local ordinance. 5.Grading and filling in of the topography shall also meet the following standards: (a)The smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for as short a time as feasible. (b)Temporary ground cover such as mulch is used and permanent ground cover such as sod is planted. (c)Methods to prevent erosions and trap sediment are employed. (d)Fill is stabilized to accepted engineering standards. 6.Excavation of material from or filling in a recreational river or construction of any permanent structures or navigational obstructions therein is prohibited unless authorized by a permit from the Commissioner pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 105.42. 27/9MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 7.No state or local authority shall authorize the drainage or filling in of wetlands within the recreational river land use district. [D]VEGETATIVE CUTTING, GRADING, AND FILLING (Other Public Waters): 1.The removal of natural vegetation shall be restricted to prevent erosion into the public waters, to consume nutrients in the soil, and to preserve shoreland aesthetics. Removal of natural vegetation in the shoreland overlay district shall be subject to the following provisions: (a)Selective removal of natural vegetation shall be allowed, provided that sufficient vegetative cover remains to screen cars, dwellings, and other structures when viewed from the water. (b)Clear-cutting of natural vegetation shall be prohibited. (c)Natural vegetation shall be restored insofar as feasible after any construction project is completed in order to retard surface run-off and soil erosion. (d)The provisions of this section shall not apply to permitted uses which normally require the removal of natural vegetation. 2.Grading and filling in shoreland areas or any alterations of the natural topography where the slope of the land is toward a public water or wa te rc ou rs e l ea di ng to a p ub li c w at er mu st be au th or iz ed by a conditional use permit. The permit may be granted subject to the conditions that: (a)The smallest amount of ground is exposed for as short a time as feasible. (b)Temporary ground cover such as mulch is used and permanent ground cover such as sod is planted. (c)Methods to prevent erosion and trap sediment are employed. (d)Fill is stabilized to accepted engineering standards. 3.Excavations on shorelands where the intended purpose is connection to a public water shall require a permit from the Zoning Administrator before construction is begun. Such permit may be obtained only after the Commissioner of Natural Resources has issued a permit for work in the beds of public waters. [E]UTILITY COMPANIES, STANDARDS, AND CRITERIA FOR UTILITY CROSSINGS: All transmission services constructed within the Mississippi 27/10MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE River recreational shoreland district shall require a conditional use permit. The construction of such transmission services shall be subject to the standards and criteria of Minnesota Regulations NR 70 (I) (2). No conditional use permit shall be required for high voltage transmission lines under control of the Environmental Quality Council pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 1160.61. [F]PUBLIC ROAD, RIVER CROSSINGS: All new construction or reconstruction of public roads within the Mississippi River recreational shoreland district shall require a conditional use permit. Such construction or reconstruction shall be subject to the standards and criteria of Minnesota Regulations NR 79 (J) (2). A conditional use permit is not required for minor public streets which are streets intended to serve primarily as an access to abutting properties. "Public Roads" include township, county, and municipal roads and highways which serve or are designed to serve flows of traffic between communities or other traffic generating areas. [G]SANITARY PROVISIONS: Any public or private supply of water for domestic consumption purposes shall conform with the Minnesota Department of Health standards for water supply. No person, firm, or corporation shall install, alter, repair, or extend any private well without first obtaining the necessary permits from the County Sanitation Office. 28/1MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 28 ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES SECTION: 28-1:Enforcement 28-2:Penalty 28-1:ENFORCEMENT: This ordinance shall be administered and enforced by the Building Inspector who is hereby designated as the Zoning Administrator. The Building Inspector may institute in the name of the City of Monticello any appropriate actions or proceedings against a violator as provided by statute, charter, or ordinance. 28-2:PENALTY: Any person who violates any of the provisions of this ordinance shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than three hundred dollars ($300.00) for each offense or imprisoned for not more than ninety (90) days or both. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. 29/1MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 29 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON ADULT ORIENTED LAND USES ON CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCA TED WIT HIN T HE C ITY O F MO NTIC ELLO SECTION: 29-1:Purpose 29-2:Definitions 29-3:Moratorium 29-4:Effective Date 29-1:PURPOSE: The City of Monticello is presently conducting a planning study identified as "A Study for the Location of Adult Oriented Land Uses" (the study) for the purpose of considering adoption and/or amendment of official controls as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.352, Subdivision 15, including Chapters 3-16 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. In recognition of the documented secondary impacts that "Adult Oriented Land Uses" pose to the property values, minors, and nearby sensitive land uses, the City Council of the City of Monticello does determine that prior to the completion and implementation of the study, interim regulations are necessary. The official controls and amendments will consider, among other things, appropriate land use regulations relating to "Adult Oriented Land Uses" as defined below. The Study will consider regulations of zoning districts for the property identifie d as "Zoning Dist ricts AO, R -1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-P UD, PZR, PZM, B-1 , B- 2, B-3, B-4, I-1, and I-2" as shown on the City of Monticello Zoning Map attached as Exhibit A to this ordinance. Therefore, in order to protect the planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the city of Monticello, it is necessary and desirable to impose the following moratorium pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, Subdivision 4. 29-2:DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein defined: [AA]ADULT BOOK STORE: Any building or structure which contains or is used for the display or sale of books, magazines, movie films, still pictures, and any and all other written materials, photographic material, novelties, devices, and related sundry items, which are distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on matters depicting, describing, or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas," or an establishment with a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material. [AB]SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES: Specified Sexual Activities shall mean: 1.Acts of human masturbation, sexual intercourse or sodomy, or any ac ts of be st ia li ty. 29/2MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 2.Fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttock, or breast of either male or female. 3.Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal. [AC]SPECIFIED ANATOMICAL AREAS: Specified Anatomical Areas shall mean: 1.Less than completely and opaquely covered: (a)human genitals, pubic region; (b)buttock; and (c)female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola; and 2.Human male genitals in a discernibly turgid state, even if completely and opaquely covered. [AD]ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENT: Any building or structure which contains or is used for commercial entertainment where the patron directly or indirectly is charged a fee to engage in personal contact with or to allow a personal contact by employees, devices or equipment, or by personnel provided by the establishment, or viewing of a series of dance routines, strip performances, or other gyrational choreography provided by the establishment which appeals to the prurient interest of the patron to include, but not to be limited to, bath houses, massage parlors, and related or similar activities. [AE]ADULT THEATER: Any building or structure which is used for the viewing of performances or activities by others, whether such performances or activities are by others, whether such performances are in the form of live shows, motion pictures, slide shows or other forms of photographic or visual display, which are distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on matters depicting, describing, or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas" as heretofore defined, or an establishment with a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material. 29-3:MORATORIUM: From the effective date of this ordinance to and including January 13, 1992, unless earlier terminated by resolution of the Monticello City Council, the City Council, Planning Commission, and the City of Monticello staff shall not accept any applications for or continue to process or act on any applications or requests for building permits, rezoning, conditional use permits, variances, plats, administrative subdivisions, or other land use approvals for land uses described in Section 29-2 above within the area identified in Section 29-1 above. 29-4:EFFECT IVE DATE: This ordin ance sh all be in ful l forc e and ef fect up on it s pass age and publication.(#202, 1/14/91) 30/1MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 30 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY PROHIBITING THE APPROVAL OF CERTAIN ACCESSORY BUILDING PERMITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS SECTION: 30-1:Intent 30-2:Exceptions 30-3:Temporary Prohibition 30-4:Effective Date 30-1:INTENT: This ordinance is intended to allow the City of Monticello time to study and adopt appropriate land use controls regulating the construction of a second accessory building on lots where one garage or accessory building already exists prior to app licat ion fo r the s econd such b uild ing. 30-2:EXCEPTIONS: This ordinance shall not apply to properties which have filed a valid application for a building permit prior to adoption of this ordinance by the City Council, nor shall it apply to properties in zoning districts other than R-1, R-2, or R-3 Districts. 30-3:TEMPORARY PROHIBITION: Pending the adoption of appropriate official controls, no building permit application for a second accessory building or second garage on a residentially zoned or residentially used property of less than 10,000 sq ft shall be accepted, processed, or approved. 30-4:EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. It shall remain in effect until the adoption of the official controls contemplated herein or 45 days, whichever first occurs. (#282, 6/10/96) 31/1MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 31 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS PENDING COMPLETION OF A REDEVELOPMENT STUDY AND ASSOCIATED ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS WITHIN A DESIGNATED REDEVELOPMENT AREA IN TH E C ITY O F MO NTIC ELLO SECTION: 31-1:Intent 31-2:Authority and Purpose 31-3:Temporary Prohibition 31-4:Misdemeanor 31-5:Injunctive Relief 31-6:Separability 31-7:Effective Date 31-1:INTENT: It is the intent of this interim ordinance to allow the City of Monticello to complete review of the presently-existing ordinance sections related to commercial and residential development in a designated redevelopment area (Exhibit A) and make appropriate changes to the same in order to establish proper public and private land uses and to protect the value of residential and commercial properties within the city of Monticello, to ensure proper land use controls, and to facilitate compatibility between public, commercial, and residential land uses. 31-2:AU TH OR ITY AN D P UR PO SE : T he Ci ty C ou nc il is em po we re d b y Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, Subdivision 4, to pass an interim ordinance, applicable to all or a portion of its jurisdiction, for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. 31-3:TEMPORARY PROHIBITION: For one year after the effective date of this ordinance, or until such earlier time as the Monticello City Council determines by resolution that the reasons for the moratorium no longer exist in general, or in particular circumstances, the City shall not receive, consider, and/or approve any application of any type of development within the redevelopment study area. 31-4:MISDEMEANOR: Any person, persons, firm, or corporation violating any provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.02, Subdivision 3, or as subsequently amended, plus costs of prosecution. 31-5:INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: In the event of a violation of this ordinance, the City may institute appropriate actions or proceedings, including requesting injunctive relief to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate such violations. 31-6:SEPARABILITY: It is hereby declared to be the intention that the several provisions of this ordinance are separable in accordance with the following: if any Court of 31/2MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE competent jurisdiction shall adjudge any provision of this ordinance to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect any other provisions of this ordinance not specifically included in said judgment. 31-7:EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication, and shall remain in effect until one year after the effective date, unless a shorter period of time is approved by proper resolution of the Monticello City Council. (#284, 11/25/96) 32/1MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 32 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY PROHIBITING THE APPROVAL OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR HOMES THAT DO NOT MEET PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS WITH EXCEPTIONS SECTION: 32-1:Intent 32-2:Exceptions 32-3:Temporary Prohibition 32-4:Effective Date 32-5:Extension 32-1:INTENT: This ordinance is intended to allow the City of Monticello time to study and adopt appropriate land use controls regulating the construction of single family homes. 32-2:EXCEPTIONS: This ordinance shall not apply to homes with a square foot living area equ al to o r greate r than 960 sq uare fe et and have a t hree car garage con taini ng a total square footage of 640 square feet, and have a front facade treated with brick. Brick area to equal 15% or more of facade area. 32-3:TEMPORARY PROHIBITION: Pending the adoption of appropriate official controls, no building permit application for single family residential structures not meeting exemptions above shall be accepted, processed, or approved that do not meet proposed single family residential standards. 32-4:EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. It shall remain in effect until the adoption of the official controls contemplated herein or 45 days, whichever first occurs. (#370, 1/28/02) 32-5 All platted lots of record as of April 8, 2002 will be allowed to construct homes meeting the requirements set forth in Section 32-2 provided a building permit for such lot is issued by August 1, 2002. (#372, 4/8/02) 1 REVISOR 6105.0110 6105.0110 ZONING DIMENSIONS. Subpart 1.Substandard lots.Lots of record in the office of the county register of deeds or registrar of titles on the effective date of enactment or amendment of the local land use ordinance,which do not meet the requirements of this part shall be allowed as building sites provided the proposed use is consistent with the local ordinance and the sanitary provisions,part 6105.0120,and the zoning dimension provisions,part 6105.0110, are complied with to the greatest extent practicable. If in a group of two or more contiguous lots under a single ownership any individual lot does not meet the lot width requirements of the local ordinance,such individual lot cannot be considered as a separate parcel of land for purposes of sale or development,but must be combined with adjacent lots under the same ownership so that the combination of lots will equal one or more parcels of land each meeting the lot width requirements of the local ordinance,or to the greatest extent practicable. Subp.2.Lot size.For lots platted or created by metes and bounds description,the minimum size shall be: A.for wild rivers,at least six acres in area,and at least 300 feet in width at the building line and at least 300 feet at the water line for lots abutting a wild river; B.for scenic rivers,at least four acres in area,and at least 250 feet in width at the building line and at least 250 feet at the water line for lots abutting a scenic river; C.for recreational rivers,at least two acres in area and at least 200 feet in width at the building line and at least 200 feet at the water line for lots abutting a recreational river. Smaller lot sizes may be permitted for planned cluster developments.See part 6105.0140. Subp.3.Structures.Structures: A.Density of dwelling units.The density of dwelling units shall not exceed one dwelling unit per lot. B.Setback.Structures,except signs specified in part 6105.0100,subpart 3, item N,essential services,private roads,and minor public streets,shall be placed so as to satisfy all setback requirements of subitems (1)to (3): (1)From the normal high water mark:wild river,200 feet;scenic river, 150 feet;recreational river,100 feet. (2)From a bluffline:wild river,40 feet;scenic river,30 feet;recreational river,20 feet. Copyright ©2009 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 2 REVISOR 6105.0110 (3)From tributaries designated in the management plan:wild river,100 feet;scenic river,100 feet;recreational river,100 feet. C.Placement of structures.Structures shall not be located on slopes greater than 13 percent unless such structures can be screened and sewage disposal system facilities can be installed so as to comply with the sanitary provisions in part 6105.0120. Where a floodplain ordinance exists,no structure shall be located in the floodway of a stream as defined in Minnesota Statutes,section 103F.111,subdivision 5,and furthermore shall be placed at an elevation consistent with any such applicable floodplain management ordinances.Where no floodplain ordinances exist,the elevation to which the lowest floor of a structure,including a basement,shall be placed,shall be determined after an evaluation of available flood information and shall be consistent with the statewide standards and criteria for management of floodplain areas of Minnesota. D.Structure height shall not exceed 35 feet. Statutory Authority:MS s 104.34;103F.321 Posted:June 11,2008 Copyright ©2009 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 1 REVISOR 6105.0100 6105.0100 USE WITHIN LAND USE DISTRICTS. Subpart 1.Nonconforming uses.All uses in existence prior to the effective date of enactment or amendment of the ordinance which do not conform to the use restrictions of the newly established land use district are nonconforming uses.Under the authority permitted by law,local authorities may adopt provisions to regulate and control,reduce the number or extent of,or gradually eliminate nonconforming uses.Local authorities shall provide for the gradual elimination of sanitary facilities inconsistent with part 6120.1300,subpart 3,items B,C,and E over a period of time not to exceed five years from the date of enactment of the local ordinance. Subp.2.Substandard uses.All uses in existence prior to the effective date of enactment or amendment of the ordinance which are permitted uses within the newly established land use district,but do not meet the minimum lot area,setbacks,or other dimensional requirements of the ordinance are substandard uses.All substandard uses, except for substandard signs,shall be allowed to continue subject to the following conditions and exceptions: A.Any structural alteration or addition to a substandard use which will increase the substandard dimensions shall not be allowed. B.Each local authority shall provide for the gradual amortization of substandard signs over a period of time not to exceed five years from the enactment or amendment of the ordinance. Subp.3.Permitted and conditional uses.In the following table of uses P means permitted use,C means conditional use,and N means nonpermitted use. Certain of the following uses are subject to the zoning dimension provisions and sanitary provisions in parts 6105.0110 and 6105.0120.All of the following uses are subject to the vegetative cutting provisions and the grading and filling provisions in parts 6105.0150 and 6105.0160. Land Use Districts Wild River Scenic River Rec. River A.Governmental campgrounds,subject to management plan specifications.N P P B.Private campgrounds,subject to management plan specifications.N C C Copyright ©2009 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 2 REVISOR 6105.0100 C.Public accesses,road access type with boat launching facilities subject to management plan specifications.N P P D.Public accesses,trail access type,subject to management plan specifications.P P P E.Temporary docks.C C P F.Other governmental open space recreational uses,subject to management plan specifications.P P P G.Other private open space recreational uses, subject to management plan specifications.C C C H.Agricultural uses.P P P I.Single family residential uses.P P P J.Forestry uses.P P P K.Essential services.P P P L.Sewage disposal systems.P P P M.Private roads and minor public streets.P P P N.Signs approved by federal,state,or local government which are necessary for public health and safety and signs indicating areas that are available,or not available,for public use.P P P O.Signs not visible from the river that are not specified in N.P P P P.Governmental resource management for improving fish and wildlife habitat;wildlife management areas;nature areas;accessory roads.P P P Q.Underground mining that does not involve surface excavation in the land use district.C C C R.Utility transmission power lines and pipelines,subject to the provisions of parts 6105.0170 and 6105.0180.C C C S.Public roads,subject to the provisions in parts 6105.0190 and 6105.0200.C C C Copyright ©2009 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 3 REVISOR 6105.0100 All uses not listed as permitted or conditional uses shall not be allowed within the applicable land use district. Statutory Authority:MS s 104.34 Posted:June 11,2008 Copyright ©2009 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. PlanningCommissionAgenda–2/21/12 1 9.PublicHearing-ConsiderationofarequestforAmendmenttotheMonticello ZoningOrdinance,Chapter2,Section4(P)forSpecificReviewRequirementsand ProceduresforPlannedUnitDevelopment.(NAC) PlanningCaseNumber:2012-004 A.REFERENCE&BACKGROUND Request(s):AmendmenttotheZoningOrdinancerelatingto variouspartsofthePUDordinance. TheattachedmaterialproposesaseriesofamendmentstothelanguageoftheCity’s PlannedUnitDevelopmentordinance.Mostoftheproposedchangesareclericalor intendedtoclarifyexistinglanguage,andthegeneralformoftheordinanceisleftintact. Inthisregard,theordinancecontinuestoallowPlannedUnitDevelopmentbyzoning districtonly,andretainstheCollaborativeprocess.AsPlanningCommissionwillrecall, ajointsessionofthePlanningCommissionandCityCouncilwasheldinOctoberof 2011forthepurposeofreviewingthenewPUDordinanceindetail.Theworkshopwas designedtogivethetwoentitiesacomfortlevelwiththenewcollaborativeprocessand identifyanadjustmentsthatmightbeneededinthecodelanguage. Theamendmentsproposedherearearesultoffeedbackprovidedattheworkshopandthe recommendationsofstaffuponfurtherreviewofthecode. Changesincludeclarificationstotheprocessingandsubmissionrequirements,and specifiesthatuponfinalapprovalofaPUDproject,theapplicantshallrecordaplatand theCityshalladoptarezoningordinancecreatinganewzoningdistrictapplyingtothe specificparcel(s)inquestion,andchangingthezoningmaptothisnewdistrict. Theattachedordinanceispresentedin strikeout/underline formindicatingproposed removalsandadditions.Thetextisalsointerspersedwithstaffcommentsthatindicate, inmostplaces,therationalefortheproposedadditions.Thesecommentsareinbrackets anditalics,andarenotintendedtobeincludedinthefinalordinancelanguage. Inadditiontothecommentaryform,wehaveprepareda“clean”versionoftheordinance ifitmeetstheexpectationsofthePlanningCommission–insuchcase,itcouldbeready forCommissionaction. ThePlanningCommissionshouldreviewtheattachedmaterialwiththepurposeof discussionattheupcomingCommissionmeeting. PlanningCommissionAgenda–2/21/12 2 B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS Decision1:ResolutionofRecommendationfor 1.MotiontoapproveResolution2012-019recommendingapprovalofOrdinance #546forthePlannedUnitDevelopmentzoningordinanceamendment. 2.MotiontodenyResolution2012-019recommendingOrdinance#546forthe PlannedUnitDevelopmentzoningordinanceamendment. 3.Motiontotableactionontherequest,pendingadditionalinformationasidentified bythePlanningCommissionandstaffreport. C.STAFFRECOMMNDATION SubjecttotheconditionslistedinExhibitZ,staffrecommendsapprovalofthe amendmentifitreflectstheintentoftheCommission.Ifthereareadditionalchangesor clarificationsneeded,thePlanningCommissioncouldtableactiontoasubsequentreview andfinallanguage. D.SUPPORTINGDATA A.Resolution2012-019 B.MonticelloZoningOrdinance,Chapter2.4(P) C.ProposedPUDOrdinancewithCommentary D.ProposedPUDOrdinance,CleanDraft PlanningCommissionAgenda–2/21/12 3 CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTIONNO.2012–019 Date:February21,2012ResolutionNo.2012-019 MotionBy:SecondedBy: ARESOLUTIONRECOMMENDINGAPPROVALOFANAMENDMENTTO THEMONTICELLOZONINGORDINANCERELATINGTOZONINGREGULATIONS FORPLANNEDUNITDEVELOPMENTZONINGDISTRICTSIN TITLE10,CHAPTER2,SECTION2.4(P) WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellohasadoptedazoningordinanceincludingregulationsfortheuse ofPlannedUnitDevelopmentasazoningprocess;and WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellohasfoundthatcertainamendmentstosaidregulationswill benefittheintentoftheregulationsandtheprocessforapplicationundersuchregulations;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconductedapublichearingonFebruary21,2012to receivepubliccommentontheproposedamendmentstotheZoningOrdinance;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconsideredallofthecommentsandthestaffreport, whichareincorporatedbyreferenceintotheresolution;and WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticellomakesthefollowingFindings ofFactinrelationtotherecommendationofapproval: 1.TheamendmentsareconsistentwiththeintentoftheComprehensivePlan. 2.TheamendmentswillfacilitatetheCity’sgoalsforlanddevelopment. 3.Theamendmentswilldirectapplicantsinpreparingapplicationsandproceedingthrough thePlannedUnitDevelopmentreviewprocess. NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof Monticello,Minnesota: ThePlanningCommissionrecommendsthattheCityCounciladopttheamendmentstothePlanned UnitDevelopmentregulationsoftheMonticelloZoningOrdinanceaspresented. ADOPTED this3rddayofJanuary2012,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof Monticello,Minnesota. MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION By:_______________________________ RodDragsten,Chair ATTEST: ___________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 65 (P) Planned Unit Developments (1) Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non-residential areas in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved by undertaking a collaborative process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning district. If a development proposal does not demonstrate significant public value benefits above and beyond those achievable under a conventional zoning district, the City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re-apply under the standard applicable zoning district. (2) Initiation of Proceedings Applications for a PUD shall be initiated by application of the property owner or other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications. (3) Reflection on the Official Zoning Map (a) PUD provisions provide an optional method of regulating land use which permits flexibility in allowed uses and other regulating provisions. In some circumstances, however, rules and regulations governing the underlying zoning district may apply within the PUD. As such, approval of a Planned Unit Development and execution of a PUD agreement shall require the property in question be rezoned to PUD, but the denotation on the official zoning map shall also illustrate the underlying zoning district. Once a PUD has been granted and is in effect for a parcel, no building permit shall be issued for that parcel which is not in conformance with the approved PUD Plan, the current Minnesota State Building Code and all associated documents, and with all other applicable City Code provisions. (b) All PUD rezonings approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall retain their zoning classifications of R-PUD, and shall continue to be governed by the ordinance and resolutions which created these areas. (4) Permitted Locations for PUD rezoning (a) A rezoning to PUD may be requested for any residential or commercially zoned area. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 66 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (b) PUDs are prohibited in the industrial districts. (5) Minimum PUD size Rezonings to PUD will not be considered for areas less than 8 acres of land in single ownership or control, except in the following circumstances: (a) Natural features of the land are such that development under standard zoning regulations would not be appropriate in order to conserve such features; (b) The land is intended to be developed in accordance with a prior PUD adjacent to or across the street from the subject property; or (c) The PUD process is desirable to ensure compatibility and careful consideration of the effect of a development on surrounding land uses. (d) The proposal is in the CCD in which case there shall be no minimum land area requirement. (6) Permitted Uses Within PUDs Uses within a PUD shall be governed by the ordinance establishing the PUD and by the conditions, if any, imposed by the City in the approval process and PUD documents. If a specific use is not established or addressed by a PUD ordinance, said use shall be governed by the underlying zoning district regulations. (7) Expectations of a Development Seeking a Rezoning to PUD The provisions of this section are intended to achieve the following public values within a PUD zoning district and associated subdivision: (a) Ensure high quality construction standards and the use of high quality construction materials; (b) Promote a variety of housing styles which include features such as side or rear loaded garages, front porches, varying roof pitches, and four sided architecture/articulation; (c) Eliminate repetition of similar housing types by encouraging a housing mixture which separates the same/similar model of homes by a minimum of two lots; (d) Promote aesthetically-pleasing design which fosters a sense of place within the neighborhood and appears attractive and inviting from surrounding parcels; CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 67 (e) Incorporate extensive landscaping in excess of what is required by code; (f) Provide high-quality park, open space, and trail opportunities that meet or exceed the expectations established in the Comprehensive Plan; (g) Provide a convenient and efficient multi-modal transportation system to service the daily needs of residents at peak and non-peak use levels, with high connectivity to the larger community. (h) Minimize the extent of the development footprint and impervious surfaces to the extent possible to reduce initial infrastructure costs and long-term maintenance and operational costs; (i) Maximize the use of ecologically-based approaches to stormwater management, restore or enhance on-site ecological systems, and protect off- site ecological systems including the application of Low Impact Development (LID) practices; (j) Foster in inclusive community by providing a complementary mix of lifecycle housing; (k) Preserve and protect important ecological areas identified on the City’s natural resource inventory (NRI); (8) Areas of Flexibility (a) The City shall consider an increase in the number of overall units and associated reductions in lot width and size if the PUD provides substantially more site amenities and public values, as outlined in Section 2.4(P)(7), than could be achieved in a conventional residential development for the applicable zoning district. (b) The City shall consider a decrease in the amount of road width required or right-of-way requirements if the PUD provides substantially more site amenities, as outlined in Section 2.4(P)(7), than are found in a conventional residential development for the applicable zoning district. Specifications and standards for streets, utilities, and other public facilities shall be at the discretion of City Council and must protect the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the city. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 68 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (c) The City shall consider flexibility with regard to lot size, width, and depth when reviewing a PUD rezoning request. Specifications and standards for lots shall be at the discretion of City Council, and shall encourage a desirable living environment which assists in achieving the goals set out for PUDs. (d) The City shall consider flexibility in the phasing of a PUD development. Changes to the proposed staging or timing of a PUD may be approved by the City Council when necessary or on the showing of good cause by the developer. (9) PUD Procedure All requests for rezoning to Planned Unit Development shall follow the steps outlined below. (a) Collaborative process and project goal setting The collaborative process and project goal setting step is intended to allow the applicant to meet with members of the Community Development Department and appointed and elected officials to gain an understanding of the public values related to development of the subject site. The feedback received during this step will provide guidance to the applicant on things to incorporate into a future concept plan. (i) Initiation of Proceedings A request for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be initiated by application of the property owner or other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications. (ii) Application 1. All applications for a PUD Collaborative process and project goal setting session shall be in accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements. 2. In addition to common review requirements, a site analysis shall be submitted in anticipation of the pre-application activities which includes the following information: a. Location of wooded areas or significant features (environmental, historical, cultural) of the parcel; b. Indicate the base flood elevation level (if applicable) and show the general location of floodways and/or flood fringe areas; c. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies; d. Delineation of the shoreland district boundary (if applicable); CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 69 e. General locations of wetlands (if applicable); f. Calculation of gross acres on the site proposed for development; g. Indication of neighboring land uses surrounding the proposed development site. (iii) Collaborative Process and Project Goal Setting Process 1. The applicant shall meet with the city staff for a pre-application conference prior to submittal of a concept plan to the city. The primary purpose of the conference is to allow the applicant and staff an opportunity to review the comprehensive plan and to make a preliminary determination if the proposal is conducive to a PUD rezoning. 2. City staff and the applicant shall work together to schedule a concurrent worksession with policymakers of the city (applicable commissions and City Council) to discuss the public values on the site using the established public values in Section 2.4(P)(7) as a guideline. The result of this meeting will be a public values statement. 3. At an appropriate point during the process, the applicant shall hold a neighborhood meeting. The city and all owners of property within 1,000 feet of the proposed PUD (or a larger area as determined by the Community Development Department) shall be given notice of the meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to inform the neighborhood of the proposed PUD, discuss the concepts and basis for the plan being developed and to obtain information and suggestions from the neighborhood. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs incurred by the city for attorney, engineering, or other consultant fees during these pre- concept plan activities. (b) PUD Concept Plan Prior to submitting formal preliminary plat and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the applicant shall prepare an informal concept plan and present it to the appropriate commissions and City Council at a concurrent worksession, as scheduled by the Community Development Department. The purpose of this meeting is to determine if all parties are on a common track and if the development reflects the stated public values; CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 70 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (i) Initiation of Proceedings A request for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be initiated by application of the property owner or other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications. (ii) Application 1. All applications for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be in accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements. 2. In addition to common review requirements, applications for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall also include at least the information in Section 2.4(P)(9)(b)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as exempted by the Community Development Department). (iii) Specific PUD Concept Plan Submittal Requirements An applicant shall provide the following information unless waived by staff: 1. A listing of contact information including name(s), address(es) and phone number(s) of: the owner of record, authorized agents or representatives, engineer, surveyor, and any other relevant associates; 2. A listing of the following site data: Address, current zoning, parcel size in acres and square feet and current legal description(s); 3. An updated site analysis incorporating any additional features or requested changes identified during the collaborative process and project goal setting session; 4. A narrative explaining how the identified public values for the site are addressed by the concept plan; 5. A listing of general information including the number of proposed lots and a calculation of gross land area; 6. Calculation of the proposed density of the project and the potential density under standard zoning regulations. 7. Outline a development schedule indicating the approximate date when construction of the project, or stages of the same, can be expected to begin and be completed (including the proposed phasing of construction of public improvements and recreational and common space areas). 8. A Concept PUD Plan illustrating the nature and type of proposed development. At a minimum, the plan should show: a. Area calculations for gross land area CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 71 b. Existing zoning district(s) c. Layout of proposed lots and proposed uses. Denote outlots planned for public dedication and/or open space (schools, parks, etc.) d. Area calculations for each parcel e. General location of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision parcel f. Location of existing and proposed streets within and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel g. Proposed sidewalks and trails h. Proposed parking areas i. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements (indicate public vs. private if applicable) j. General location of wooded areas or significant features (environmental, historical, cultural) of the parcel k. Location of utility systems that will serve the property l. Other: An applicant may submit any additional information that may explain the proposed PUD. (iv) PUD Concept Plan Review 1. Upon receiving a complete PUD concept plan application, the Community Development Department shall review the proposal and generate a staff report analyzing the proposal against the expectations for PUDs. The report shall be forwarded to the appropriate commissions—as determined by the Community Development Department—and the City Council for review. 2. Commissions receiving the report shall review the PUD rezoning request, and make a recommendation to the City Council with regard to the plat layout, design, density, uses, deviations, and achieved public values of the concept plan; 3. The Council shall consider the recommendations of the commissions that have conducted a review, and provide feedback to the applicant on the proposed public values, proposed deviations, and any other aspect of the application. The Council shall either make a motion that the applicant—if they choose to proceed—move forward with the PUD preliminary plat and rezoning requests, or direct the applicant to submit a development application using conventional zoning district standards CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 72 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance 4. After the City policymakers have reviewed and commented on the Concept PUD plan, city staff shall meet with other agencies, as applicable, to explore opportunities of partnership to enhance the stated public values. (c) PUD Preliminary Plat and Rezoning (i) Initiation of Proceedings 1. Concurrent applications for rezoning to PUD and a Preliminary Plat shall be submitted to the City within one year of the City Council’s recommendation on the PUD Concept Plan. Failure to submit applications for rezoning to PUD and a Preliminary Plat within the one year timeframe will require the applicant to begin the process anew from that point forward. 2. The requests for rezoning to PUD and Preliminary Plat shall be initiated by application of the property owner or other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications. (ii) Application 1. All applications for rezoning to PUD and Preliminary Plat shall be in accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements. 2. The application for rezoning to PUD shall be in accordance with Section 2.4(B), Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map Amendments. 3. The application for Preliminary Plat shall be in accordance with City Code Title 11, Chapter 4, Data Required for Preliminary and Final Plats; and shall include the additional information requirements listed in Section 2.4(P)(9)(c)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as exempted by the Community Development Department). 4. If the PUD is proposed to develop over a timeframe exceeding two years, a PUD Master Plan for the entire project (to be completed in phases) may be submitted. Subsequent PUD Final Plan applications would only grant approval for an individual phase. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 73 (iii) Specific PUD Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements An applicant shall provide a separate PUD Development Plan clearly delineating the proposed development and all features not consistent with underlying zoning regulations (e.g. setback deviations). At a minimum, the plan should show: 1. Administrative information (including identification of the drawing as a ―Preliminary PUD Development Plan,‖ the proposed name of the subdivision, contact information for the developer and individual preparing the plan, signature of the surveyor certifying the document, date of plan preparation or revision, and a graphic scale and true north arrow); 2. Area calculations for gross land area, wetland areas, wetland buffers, right-of-way dedications, conservation areas, and proposed public and private parks; 3. Existing zoning district(s); 4. Layout of proposed lots with future lot and block numbers. The perimeter boundary line of the subdivision should be distinguishable from the other property lines. Denote outlots planned for public dedication and/or open space (schools, parks, etc.); 5. Area calculations for each parcel; 6. Proposed setbacks on each lot (forming the building pad) and calculated buildable area; 7. Proposed gross hardcover allowance per lot (if applicable); 8. Existing contours at intervals of two feet. Contours must extend a minimum of 200 feet beyond the boundary of the parcel(s) in question; 9. Delineation of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision parcel; 10. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies; 11. Location, width, and names of existing and proposed streets within and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel; 12. Easements and rights-of-way within or adjacent to the subdivision parcel(s); 13. The location and orientation of proposed buildings; 14. Proposed sidewalks and trails; 15. Proposed parking areas; 16. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements (indicate public vs. private if applicable); CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 74 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance 17. Any other information as directed by the Community Development Department. (iv) PUD Preliminary Plat and Rezoning to PUD Review 1. The application for rezoning to PUD shall be reviewed in accordance with Section 2.4(B), Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map Amendments. 2. The application for Preliminary Plat shall be reviewed in accordance with City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 2, Preliminary Plat Procedure. 3. As part of the review process for both applications, the Community Development Department shall generate an analysis of the proposal against the expectations for PUDs and the previously established public values statement to formulate a recommendation regarding the rezoning to the planning commission and City Council. 4. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing and consider the application’s consistency with the intent and purpose of the PUD and comprehensive plan goals. The planning commission shall make recommendations to the City Council on the merit, needed changes, and suggested conditions of the proposed rezoning, preliminary plat and PUD development plan. 5. In approving or denying the ordinance to rezone the subject property to PUD, the City Council shall make findings on the following: a. The PUD plan is consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan; b. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and greater public benefits than would be achieved under conventional provisions of the ordinance; c. The PUD plan addresses the purpose and intent of the PUD rezoning laid out in Section 2.4(P)(1), and the public values statement established at the beginning of the process d. The PUD plan addresses the expectations of a PUD laid out in Section 2.4(P)(7); e. The PUD plan maintains or improves the efficiency of public streets, utilities, and other public services; f. The PUD plan results in development compatible with existing adjacent and future guided land uses; g. How the PUD plan addresses the purpose and intent of the PUD rezoning laid out in Section 2.4(P)(1), and the public values statement established at the beginning of the process. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 75 (d) PUD Final Plat (i) Initiation of Proceedings 1. A final plat that conforms with the preliminary plat and associated PUD rezoning ordinance shall be submitted within 180 days of approval of the ordinance and preliminary plat approval, unless otherwise extended by the City Council. If the applicant fails to submit a final plat application or extension request within this time period, the zoning shall revert back to the underlying zoning district through a rezoning ordinance adopted by the City Council. 2. The request for PUD Final Plat shall be initiated by application of the property owner or other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications. (ii) Application 1. All applications for PUD Final Plat shall be in accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements. 2. The application for PUD Final Plat shall be in accordance with City Code Title 11, Chapter 4, Data Required for Preliminary and Final Plats. 3. In addition to general city code requirements, applications for a PUD Final Plat shall also include at least the information in Section 2.4(P)(9)(d)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as exempted by the Community Development Department). (iii) Specific PUD Final Plat Submittal Requirements 1. If a PUD Master Plan for the entire project was submitted and approved as part of the preliminary plat review, an updated Master Plan shall be submitted incorporating all changes required by the preliminary plat approval. 2. The PUD Development Plan shall be updated to incorporate all changes required by the preliminary plat and rezoning approvals. This document must clearly show all deviations from standard zoning being approved as part of the PUD. 3. The City and applicant shall prepare a developer’s agreement which references all PUD plans, specifies permitted uses, allowable densities, development phasing, required improvements, completion dates for improvements, the required letter of credit, all required development fees, escrows, and warranties, and any other information deemed necessary by the City. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 76 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance 4. Up-to-date title evidence for the subject property in a form acceptable to the City shall be provided as part of the application for the PUD Final Plat. 5. Developer shall provide warranty deeds for Property being dedicated to the City for all parks, outlots, etc., free from all liens and encumbrances except as otherwise waived by the City. 6. Developer shall provide all easement dedication documents for easements not shown on the final plat including those for trails, ingress/egress, etc., together with all necessary consents to the easement by existing encumbrancers of the property. (iv) PUD Final Plat Review The application for PUD Final Plat shall be reviewed in accordance with City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3, Final Plat Procedure. (10) PUD Amendments Approved PUD’s may be amended from time to time as a result of unforeseen circumstances, overlooked opportunities, or requests from a developer. At such a time, the applicant shall make an application to the city for a PUD amendment. All such amendments will be processed as one of the following: (a) Administrative Amendment – The Community Development Department may approve minor changes in the location, placement, and height of buildings if such changes are required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the PUD Final Plan was approved, provided the changes are indeed minor and conform to the review criteria applied by the Planning Commission and City Council. Under no circumstances shall an administrative amendment allow additional stories to buildings, additional lots, or changes to designated uses established as part of the PUD. (b) PUD Adjustment – an adjustment to a PUD may be made through review and approval by a simple majority vote of the City Council with or without referral to the Planning Commission. To qualify for this review, the minor adjustment shall not: (i) Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of sensitive site features. (ii) Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning, design, landscaping or building materials. (iii) Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads. (iv) Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more than five percent. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 77 (v) Increase the gross floor area of non-residential buildings by more than three percent or increase the gross floor area of any individual building by more than five percent (residential lots not guided for specific structure sizes are excluded from this requirement). (vi) Increase the number of stories of any building. (vii) Decrease the amount of open space or alter it in such a way as to change its original design or intended function or use. (viii) Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the Final PUD Plan. (c) PUD Amendment – any change not qualifying for an administrative amendment or a PUD adjustment shall require a PUD amendment. An application to amend a PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that required for an initial PUD beginning at PUD Preliminary Plat. (11) PUD Cancellation A PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an ordinance rescinding the ordinance approving the PUD. In any event, it shall not be necessary for the council to find the creation of a PUD district was in error. (12) Administration In general, the following rules shall apply to all PUDs: (a) Rules and regulations: No requirement outlined in the PUD process shall restrict the City Council from taking action on an application if necessary to meet state mandated time deadlines; (b) Plan Certification: The City may require that PUD plans be certified at the time of submittal and/or upon completion of construction. (c) Preconstruction: No building permit shall be granted for any building on land for which a PUD plan is in the process of review, unless the proposed building is allowed under the existing zoning and will not impact, influence, or interfere with the proposed PUD plan. CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments Page 78 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (d) Effect on Conveyed Property. In the event any real property in the approved PUD Agreement is conveyed in total, or in part, the buyers thereof shall be bound by the provisions of the approved Final PUD Plan constituting a part thereof; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed to create non-conforming lots, building sites, buildings or uses by virtue of any such conveyance of a lot, building site, building or part of the development created pursuant to and in conformance with the approved PUD. referenceotherdistrictdetailsratherthanreprinteverythingnew,butitisstillabase district,withoutanymappingreferencetoan“underlying”zoningdistrict.Instead,the mapreferenceshouldpointtotheadoptedPUDOrdinance,suchasalablelike“PUD- A”,“PUD-B”,etc.,orreferencingthedateofadoption,suchasPUD-3-1-12.] (b)AllPUDrezoningsapprovedpriortotheeffectivedateofthisordinance shallretaintheirzoningclassificationsofR-PUD,andshallcontinuetobe governedbytheordinanceandresolutionswhichcreatedtheseareas. (4)PermittedLocationsforPUDrezoning ArezoningtoPUDmayberequestedforanyresidential,commercial,orindustrialzoned area. (5)Minimum PUD sizeQualifications RezoningstoPUDwill not beconsidered only forareas lessthan8acres oflandinsingle ownershiporcontrol,exceptinthefollowingcircumstances:[Staffcomment:Arbitrary acreagethresholdscanraiseproblems,particularlyinredevelopmentareas.Aprojecteither meetstheCity’sgoalsforusingaPUDprocessoritdoesn’t.Theseacreagethresholdscame intofashionwhenCitiesbegantoworrythatsmallerprojectswerejustusingPUDtoget aroundordinancerequirements–whichwasnodoubthappening–buttheproblemwasthe City’swillingnesstocompromiseitsprinciples,notwiththesizeoftheproject.Manysmaller PUDsaregood,andmanylargerPUDsarebad–irrespectiveofacreage.] (a)Naturalfeaturesofthelandaresuchthatdevelopmentunderstandardzoningregulations wouldnotbeappropriateinordertoconservesuchfeatures; (b)ThelandisintendedtobedevelopedinaccordancewithapriorPUDadjacenttoor acrossthestreetfromthesubjectproperty;or (c)ThePUDprocessisdesirabletoensurecompatibilityandcarefulconsiderationofthe effectofadevelopmentonsurroundinglanduses. (d)TheproposalisintheCCDinwhichcasethereshallbenominimumlandarea requirement. (d)Multiplepartyownershipisadequatelysecuredthroughacorporation,partnership,or otherlegalentitythatwillensuretheabilitytofulfillalloftheobligationsofthePUD process,includingapprovals,development,andsecurities. (6)PermittedUsesWithinPUDs UseswithinaPUDshallbegovernedbytheordinanceestablishingthePUDandbythe conditions,ifany,imposedbytheCityintheapprovalprocessandPUDdocuments .Ifa specificuseisnotestablishedoraddressedbyaPUDordinance,saiduseshallbegoverned zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Indent:Left:0.75",Nobulletsor numbering Formatted:ListParagraph Formatted:Font:11pt Formatted:Font:Bold Formatted:Tabstops:Notat1" Formatted:Font:NotBold bythe underlyingzoningdistrict regulations.[Staffcomment:Sameissuewithbasev. overlayconcept.] (7)ExpectationsofaDevelopmentSeekingaRezoningtoPUD Theprovisionsofthissectionareintendedtoachievethefollowingpublicvalueswithina PUDzoningdistrictandassociatedsubdivision: (a)Ensurehighqualityconstructionstandardsandtheuseofhighqualityconstruction materials; (b)Promoteavarietyofhousingstyleswhichincludefeaturessuchassideorrearloaded garages,frontporches,varyingroofpitches,andfoursidedarchitecture/articulation; (c)Eliminaterepetitionofsimilarhousingtypesbyencouragingahousingmixture which separatesthesame/similarmodelofhomesbyaminimumoftwolots thatdiversifiesthe architecturalqualitiesofaneighborhood;[Staffcomment:Applyingthisasastandard hasalwaysbeenproblematic–whataboutcorners,oracrossthestreet.And,whatis “sameorsimilar”?Differentcolor?Differentsiding?Anadditionaldormer?This requirementsisdifficulttointerpretandenforcebytheCity,andismoreofadeveloper’s marketingtoolthanagoodmeasureofplanningreview.] (d)Promoteaesthetically-pleasingdesign whichfostersasenseofplace withinthe neighborhoodandappearsattractiveandinvitingfromsurroundingparcels;[Staff comment:Thesephraseswouldneverstanduptoacourtchallenge.Itisextremely doubtfulthattheCitycouldapproveordenyaPUDrequestbasedonwhetheritcreates a“senseofplace”.] (e)Incorporateextensivelandscapinginexcessofwhatisrequiredbycode;[Staffcomment: Thisisn’tabadgoalaslongasitisquantifiedsomehowintheordinance.] (f)Providehigh-qualitypark,openspace,andtrailopportunitiesthat meetor exceedthe expectationsestablishedintheComprehensivePlan;[Staffcomment:Suchspaces should“exceed”,notjust“meet”.Ifit’saPUD,thebaselineisalwaystodobetterthan theminimumexpectation.] (g)Provideaconvenientandefficientmulti-modaltransportationsystemtoservicethedaily needsofresidentsatpeakandnon-peakuselevels,withhighconnectivitytothelarger community. (h)Minimizetheextentof the Promote development footprintandimpervioussurfacestothe extentpossible thatisdesigned toreduceinitialinfrastructurecostsandlong-term maintenanceandoperationalcosts;[Staffcomment:Therequirementdoesnot necessarilyleadtotheobjectiveinthisitem.AndIcouldimaginemanyPUDsdoingthe opposite–maximizingtheextentofthedevelopmentfootprintwhenyouarelookingata Formatted:Font:NotBold moreurbanproject,whichwouldbeoffsetbyalargercontributiontotheCity’spublic openspaceefforts. Thisalsoleadstoanotherissuegenerally–thisPUDordinanceissetuptopresumethat PUDsareself-containedunits,ratherthanpartsofthewhole.EveryPUDshouldnotbe requiredtohaveitscomponentproportionofallpublicservices(especiallyopenspace). Geographically,youmaynotwantonePUDtoprovideopenspace,inexchangeforthe abilitytoacquireitonaneighboringpiece. Thiscommentalsoimplicatesthenextitem,whichpresumesthatPUDswillbedesigned tobelessurbaninnature.ThisisaviewofPUDthathasbeenpromotedbyrural ecologists,andcanhavesomeexcellentapplicationforlargeresidentialplats,butmay becompletelyinappropriateforacommercial/industrialPUD,orforanextensivemulti- familydevelopment. Perhapsthiscouldallbemitigatedbyadditionaltextintheintrotothissection, explainingthattheseelementsmayormaynotbeappropriateinallcircumstances,and thattheCitywillidentifythemostapplicablegoalsfortheproposedPUDasaroleofthe collaborativeteam(?). (i)Whereapplicable,Mmaximizetheuseofecologically-basedapproachestostormwater management,restoreorenhanceon-siteecologicalsystems,andprotectoff-site ecologicalsystemsincludingtheapplicationofLowImpactDevelopment(LID) practices;[Staffcomment:seecommentabove.] (j)Fosterininclusivecommunitybyprovidingacomplementarymixoflifecyclehousing; (k)PreserveandprotectimportantecologicalareasidentifiedontheCity’snaturalresource inventory(NRI); (8)AreasofFlexibility (a)TheCityshallconsideranincreaseinthe numberof overallunitsdensityorintensityof theproject,alongwith andassociated related reductionsinlotwidthandsizeifthePUD providessubstantiallymoresiteamenitiesandpublicvalues,asoutlinedinSection 2.4(P)(7),thancouldbeachievedinaconventional residential developmentforthe applicable zoningdistrictlandusezone.[Staffcomment:Manyprojectswillbemixeduse orexclusivelycommercialand/orindustrial.“Unit”countand“lotsize”isnot necessarilyrelevanttomanyPUDdesigns–theissueismorelikelytobe“density”or “intensity”.] (b)TheCity shall may consideradecreaseintheamountofroadwidthrequiredorright-of- wayrequirementsifthePUDprovidessubstantiallymoresiteamenities,asoutlinedin Section2.4(P)(7)–andparticularlythoseamenitiesthatwouldmitigatetrafficconcerns-, thanarefoundinaconventional residential developmentfortheapplicablezoning Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,Italic,Fontcolor: CustomColor(RGB(79,98,40)) Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight district.Specificationsandstandardsforstreets,utilities,andotherpublicfacilitiesshall beatthediscretionofCityCouncilandmustprotectthehealth,safety,comfort, aesthetics,economicviability,andgeneralwelfareofthecity.[Staffcomment:Asa generalrule,theCityshouldsetreasonable,sustainableroadwidthrulesandstickby them.Thisisapublicsafetyissue,notsomethingtobebarteredoffbecauseadeveloper proposesmorestoneonhishousefacades.Thus,therecommendationheresuggeststhat anyPUDnegotiationonthisissuerelatestotrafficsafetyimprovements.] (c)TheCityshallconsiderflexibilitywithregardtolotsize,width,anddepthwhen reviewingaPUDrezoningrequest.Specificationsandstandardsforlotsshallbeatthe discretionofCityCouncil,andshallencourageadesirablelivingenvironmentwhich assistsinachievingthegoalssetoutforPUDs. (d)TheCityshallconsiderflexibilityinthephasingofaPUDdevelopment.Changestothe proposedstagingortimingofaPUDmaybeapprovedbytheCityCouncilwhen necessaryorontheshowingofgoodcausebythedeveloper. (9)PUDProcedure AllrequestsforrezoningtoPlannedUnitDevelopmentshallfollowthestepsoutlinedbelow. (a)Collaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsetting Thecollaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsettingstepisintendedtoallowtheapplicant tomeetwithmembersoftheCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentandappointedand electedofficialstogainanunderstandingofthepublicvaluesrelatedtodevelopmentof thesubjectsite.Thefeedbackreceivedduringthisstepwillprovideguidancetothe applicanton things elementsandobjectives toincorporateintoafutureconceptplan. [Staffcomment:Editorial] (i)InitiationofProceedings ArequestforaPUDConceptPlanReviewshallbeinitiatedbyapplicationofthe propertyownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofileanapplicationpursuantto Section2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforaPUDCollaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsettingsession shallbeinaccordancewithSection2.3,CommonReviewRequirements. 2.Inadditiontocommonreviewrequirements,asiteanalysisshallbesubmittedin anticipationofthepre-applicationactivitieswhichincludesthefollowing information: a.Locationofwoodedareasorsignificantfeatures(environmental,historical, cultural)oftheparcel; b.Indicatethebasefloodelevationlevel(ifapplicable)andshowthegeneral locationoffloodwaysand/orfloodfringeareas; Formatted:Font:NotBold,Italic,Fontcolor: CustomColor(RGB(79,98,40)) Formatted:Font:NotBold,Italic,Fontcolor: CustomColor(RGB(79,98,40)) Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight c.Delineationoftheordinaryhighwaterlevelsofallwaterbodies; d.Delineationoftheshorelanddistrictboundary(ifapplicable); e.Generallocationsofwetlands(ifapplicable); f.Calculationofgrossacresonthesiteproposedfordevelopment; f.g.Calculationofnetacresonthesiteproposedfordevelopment,includinga calculationof,anddeductionfromthegrossacreageof,allwetlands, floodplains,slopesofmorethan18%,significantwoodlands,areasidentified intheCity’sNaturalResourcesInventory,andanyotherunbuildableareasof theprojectsite. g.h.Indicationofneighboringlandusessurroundingtheproposeddevelopment site.[Staffcomment:Thepreliminaryanalysisshouldidentifybothgross andnetusable/buildableacreage,alongwithanestimateofsitedevelopment capacityunderexistingzoning.ToknowwhethertheCityisaccomplishing anything,andwhetherwhatyouaretradingisreasonable,youshouldhavea baselinedevelopmentplanthatshowssitecapacity–almostanydeveloper willhavetakenthissteptogivethemanideaofwhattheirROIwouldbeata certainlandprice–theyhavetoinordertoknowwhethertheycaneven makeanofferontheland.Anditcanserveasaninvaluablebaselineforthe City’sreviewofthePUDdesign. (iii)CollaborativeProcessandProjectGoalSettingProcess 1.Theapplicantshallmeetwiththecitystaffforapre-applicationconferenceprior tosubmittalofaconceptplan application tothecity.Theprimarypurposeofthe conferenceistoallowtheapplicantandstaffanopportunitytoreviewthe comprehensiveplanandtomakeapreliminarydeterminationiftheproposalis conducivetoaPUDrezoning. 2.Citystaffandtheapplicantshallworktogethertoscheduleaconcurrent worksessionwithpolicymakersofthecity(applicablecommissionsandCity Council)todiscussthepublicvaluesonthesiteusingtheestablishedpublic valuesinSection2.4(P)(7)asaguideline.Theresultofthismeetingwillbea publicvaluesstatement.[Staffcomment:Itwouldbevaluabletoexpectthe developertoprovideacommentaryontheeconomicfeasibilityoftheCity’s objectivestohelpformtheValuesStatement.Ofcourse,mostdevelopersare goingtoraiseconcernsaboutdevelopmentcosts,butinmostcollaborative processes,oneofthepointsoftheeffortistogetthedeveloper’sinputon economicfeasibility–otherwiseit’snotmuchdifferentthanthetypicalPUD processwheretheCityasksforadditionalstuff,andthedevelopersquirmsuntil heobtainsanapproval.Thecollaborativeprocessisintendedsetoutrealistic goalsearly,whichinturnaresupposedtoavoidtheneedforongoing negotiationslater. Formatted:Tabstops:Notat4" 3.Atanappropriatepointduringtheprocess,theapplicantshallholda neighborhoodmeeting.Thecityandallownersofpropertywithin1,000feetof theproposedPUD(oralargerareaasdeterminedbytheCommunity Development DepartmentDirector)shallbegivennoticeofthemeeting.The purposeofthemeetingistoinformtheneighborhoodoftheproposedPUD, discusstheconceptsandbasisfortheplanbeingdevelopedandtoobtain informationandsuggestionsfromtheneighborhood. 4.Theapplicantshallberesponsibleforthecostsincurredbythecityforattorney, engineering,planning,orother consultant City-incurred fees costs duringthese pre-conceptplanactivities.[Staffcomment:Thereareprobablyotherfeesthat justconsultantfees–Citystaffcharges,permitapplicationfees,etc.)] (b)PUDConceptPlan Priortosubmittingformalpreliminaryplatandrezoningapplicationsfortheproposed development,theapplicantshallprepareaninformalconceptplanandpresentittothe appropriatecommissionsandCityCouncilataconcurrentworksession,asscheduledby theCommunityDevelopmentDepartment.Thepurposeofthismeetingistodetermineif allpartiesareonacommontrackandifthedevelopmentreflectsthestatedpublic values;.TheapplicantmayrequestthattheConceptandDevelopmentStagePUD applicationsbeconsideredconcurrently.Allowanceforconcurrentreviewshallbeatthe solediscretionoftheCity,andtheapplicantassumesanyrisk,financialorotherwise,of proceedingwithplandevelopmentbeyondthestageatwhichtheCityhasidentifiedPUD reviewisofficiallyunderconsideration.Withoutspecificwrittenauthorizationfromthe CommunityDevelopment,noapplicationforDevelopmentStagePUDshallbe consideredcompletepriortoCityCouncilactionontheConceptStagePUD.[Staff comment:IftheCityisgoingtoallowconcurrentConceptandPreliminaryapplications, itneedstobestatedexplicitly.Thislanguageisintendedtospecifytherequirementsfor concurrentapplications.] (i)InitiationofProceedings ArequestforaPUDConceptPlanReviewshallbeinitiatedbyapplicationofthe propertyownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofileanapplicationpursuantto Section2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforaPUDConceptPlanReviewshallbeinaccordancewith Section2.3,CommonReviewRequirements. 2.Inadditiontocommonreviewrequirements,applicationsforaPUDConcept PlanReviewshallalsoincludeatleasttheinformationinSection2.4(P)(9)(b)(iii) belowtobeconsideredcomplete(exceptasexemptedbytheCommunity Development DepartmentDirector).Seenoteabove. Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight (iii)SpecificPUDConceptPlanSubmittalRequirements [Staffcomment:Inthelist below,theOrdinanceshouldbedefiningbothgrossandnetdensity,howdensityis calculated,unitcounts,quantitiesbylandusecategory,buildings(notjustlots), delineationbetweenpublicandprivateservices(e.g.utilities,openspace,etc.).This sectionshouldalsogranttheCDDtheauthoritytorequireadditionalinformation beforeaConceptPlanappisconsideredcompleteforreview.] Anapplicantshallprovidethefollowinginformationunlesswaivedbystaff: 1.Alistingofcontactinformationincludingname(s),address(es)andphone number(s)of:theownerofrecord,authorizedagentsorrepresentatives,engineer, surveyor,andanyotherrelevantassociates; 2.Alistingofthefollowingsitedata:Address,currentzoning,parcelsizeinacres andsquarefeetandcurrentlegaldescription(s); 3.Anupdatedsiteanalysisincorporatinganyadditionalfeaturesorrequested changesidentifiedduringthecollaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsetting session; 4.Anarrativeexplaininghowtheidentifiedpublicvaluesforthesiteareaddressed bytheconceptplan; 5.Alistingofgeneralinformationincludingthenumberofproposed lots residential units,commercialandindustriallandusesbycategoryofuse,publicuseareas includingadescriptionofproposeduse,andanyotherlanduseproposedaspart ofthePUDandacalculationofgrosslandarea; 6.Calculationoftheproposeddensityoftheprojectandthepotentialdensityunder standardzoningregulations,includingbothgrossdensityandnetdensity, accountingfordevelopableandundevelopableland.Undevelopablelandshall includeallwetlands,floodplains,sensitiveecologicalareasidentifiedinthe NaturalResourceInventory,slopesgreaterthan18%,poorsoils,andareasof concentratedwoodlands. 7.Outlineadevelopmentscheduleindicatingtheapproximatedatewhen constructionoftheproject,orstagesofthesame,canbeexpectedtobeginandbe completed(includingtheproposedphasingofconstructionofpublic improvementsandrecreationalandcommonspaceareas). 8.AConceptPUDPlanillustratingthenatureandtypeofproposeddevelopment. Ataminimum,theplanshouldshow: a.Areacalculationsforgrosslandarea b.Existingzoningdistrict(s) c.Layoutofproposedlotsandproposeduses.Denoteoutlotsplannedfor publicdedicationand/oropenspace(schools,parks,etc.) d.Areacalculationsforeachparcel e.Generallocationofwetlandsand/orwatercoursesoverthepropertyand within200feetoftheperimeterofthesubdivisionparcel f.Locationofexistingandproposedstreetswithinandimmediatelyadjacentto thesubdivisionparcel g.Proposedsidewalksandtrails h.Proposedparkingareas i.Proposedparks,commonareas,andpreservationeasements(indicatepublic vs.privateifapplicable) j.Generallocationofwoodedareasorsignificantfeatures(environmental, historical,cultural)oftheparcel k.Locationofutilitysystemsthatwillservetheproperty l.Other:Anapplicantmaysubmitanyadditionalinformationthatmayexplain theproposedPUD. (iv)PUDConceptPlanReview 1.UponreceivingacompletePUDconceptplanapplication,theCommunity DevelopmentDepartment,alongwithotherdesignatedstaff,shallreviewthe proposalandgenerateastaffreportanalyzingtheproposalagainstthe expectationsforPUDs.Thereportshallbeforwardedtotheappropriate commissions—asdeterminedbytheCommunityDevelopment Department Director—andtheCityCouncilforreview.[Staffcomment:Theoriginal languageimpliesconcurrentcommissionandCouncilreview–obviouslynotthe intent.] 2.CommissionsreceivingthereportshallreviewthePUDrezoningrequest,and makearecommendationtotheCityCouncilwithregardtotheplatlayout, design,density,uses,deviations,andachievedpublicvaluesoftheconceptplan; ThePlanningCommissionshallberesponsiblefortheformalcommentstothe CityCouncil.Otherstaffandcommissionreportsshallbeprovidedtothe PlanningCommissionandmadeapartofthePlanningCommission’sreport. 3.TheCouncilshallconsidertherecommendationsofthecommissionsthathave conductedareview,andprovidefeedbacktotheapplicantontheproposedpublic values,proposeddeviations,andanyotheraspectoftheapplication.The Councilshalleithermakeamotionthattheapplicant—iftheychooseto proceed—moveforwardwiththePUDpreliminaryplatandrezoningrequests,or directtheapplicanttosubmitadevelopmentapplicationusingconventional zoningdistrictstandards.TheCouncilshallmakeitsfindingwithinthetime allottedbyMinn.Stat.Section15.99,andmaytakeuptheapplicationwithout PlanningCommissionactionifthePlanningCommissionhasnotactedwithin sixty(60)daysofitsoriginalpublichearingdate.TheCityCouncil’sfindings areexplicitlynotanapprovaloftheproject,andareintendedtorepresentthe complianceoftheproposedprojectwiththePublicValuesStatement,the applicablezoningregulations,andtheComprehensivePlan.[Staffcomment:This processdirectionneedstoaddresstheimpactsofMinn.Stat.15.99,authorityfor Formatted:NotHighlight Counciltotakeactionwithoutcommissionreports(incasetheydon’tactina timelymanner),authoritytotableand/orseekamendments,potentialreferralfor EAW/AUARprocess,andpossiblyotheroutcomes.Inaddition,thissection shouldexplicitlystatethatCouncildirectiontomoveforwardisNOTatapproval thatgrantsanydevelopmentrights,butratherawillingnesstocontinue exploringtheuseofthePUDflexibilityforthesubjectsite.] 4.AftertheCitypolicymakershavereviewedandcommentedontheConceptPUD plan,citystaffshallmeetwith any other responsible agencies,asapplicable,to exploreopportunitiesofpartnershiptoenhancethestatedpublicvalues. (c)PUDPreliminaryPlatandRezoning –DevelopmentStagePUD (i)InitiationofProceedings 1.ConcurrentapplicationsforrezoningtoPUDandaPreliminaryPlatshallbe submittedtotheCitywithinoneyearoftheCityCouncil’s recommendation findings onthePUDConceptPlan.[Staffcomment:Counciltakesanactionor makesafinding,notarecommendation.]Failuretosubmitapplicationsfor rezoningtoPUDandaPreliminaryPlatwithin the oneyear timeframe ofthe CityCouncil’sfindings willrequiretheapplicanttobegintheprocess withthe CollaborativePUDmeeting.anewfrom thatpointforward.[Thisrequirement needsclarificationastotiminganddatespecifics.] 2.TherequestsforrezoningtoPUDandPreliminaryPlatshallbeinitiatedby applicationofthepropertyownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofilean applicationpursuanttoSection2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications.The DevelopmentStagePUDrequestconstitutesaseparateapplicationandshallbe subjecttonewtimelinesforthepurposesofMinn.Stat.Section15.99. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforrezoningtoPUDandPreliminaryPlatshallbeinaccordance withSection2.3,CommonReviewRequirements. 2.TheapplicationforrezoningtoPUDshallbeinaccordancewithSection2.4(B), ZoningOrdinanceTextandZoningMapAmendments. 3.TheapplicationforPreliminaryPlatshallbeinaccordancewithCityCodeTitle 11,Chapter4,DataRequiredforPreliminaryandFinalPlats;andshallinclude theadditionalinformationrequirementslistedinSection2.4(P)(9)(c)(iii)below tobeconsideredcomplete(exceptasexemptedbytheCommunityDevelopment Department). 4.IfthePUDisproposedtodevelopoveratimeframeexceedingtwoyears,aPUD Master Phasing Plan [Staffcomment:Thisappearstoonlyberequiredfora phasedproject–thatis,the“MasterPlan”isreallyonlya“PhasingPlan.]for theentireproject(tobecompletedinphases)maybesubmitted.Subsequent PUDFinalPlanapplicationswouldonlygrantapprovalforanindividualphase. Formatted:NotHighlight Formatted:NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight (iii)SpecificPUDPreliminaryPlatSubmittalRequirements AnapplicantshallprovideaseparatePUDDevelopmentPlanclearlydelineatingthe proposeddevelopmentandallfeaturesnotconsistentwithunderlyingzoning regulations(e.g.setbackdeviations).Ataminimum,theplanshouldshow:[Staff comment:Thislistneedstoincludelanduses,netdevelopablelandbylanduse, buildingdesignandmaterials,landscapingdetail,screening,fencing,othersite improvements,proposedgrading,proposedstreetsandutilities,impactsonnatural resources,ThislistseemsveryincompletetomeforPUDatthisstage–anditalso seemsmoreheavilyweightedtoaplatreviewthanaPUDreview.Therequired submissionlistjustseemstobemissingalotofinformationwewouldnormally expectatthisstage.] 1.Administrativeinformation(includingidentificationofthedrawingasa “PreliminaryPUDDevelopmentPlan,”theproposednameofthesubdivision, contactinformationforthedeveloperandindividualpreparingtheplan,signature ofthesurveyorcertifyingthedocument,dateofplanpreparationorrevision,and agraphicscaleandtruenortharrow); 2.Areacalculationsforgrosslandarea,wetlandareas,wetlandbuffers,right-of- waydedications,conservationareas,andproposedpublicandprivateparks; 3.Existingzoningdistrict(s); 4.Layoutofproposedlotswithfuturelotandblocknumbers.Theperimeter boundarylineofthesubdivisionshouldbedistinguishablefromtheother propertylines.Denoteoutlotsplannedforpublicdedicationand/oropenspace (schools,parks,etc.); 5.Areacalculationsforeachparcel; 6.Proposedsetbacksoneachlot(formingthebuildingpad)andcalculated buildablearea; 7.Proposedgrosshardcoverallowanceperlot(ifapplicable); 8.Existingcontoursatintervalsoftwofeet.Contoursmustextendaminimumof 200feetbeyondtheboundaryoftheparcel(s)inquestion; 9.Delineationofwetlandsand/orwatercoursesoverthepropertyandwithin200 feetoftheperimeterofthesubdivisionparcel; 10.Delineationoftheordinaryhighwaterlevelsofallwaterbodies; 11.Location,width,andnamesofexistingandproposedstreetswithinand immediatelyadjacenttothesubdivisionparcel; 12.Easementsandrights-of-waywithinoradjacenttothesubdivisionparcel(s); 13.Thelocationandorientationofproposedbuildings; 14.Proposedsidewalksandtrails; 15.Proposedparkingareas; 16.Proposedparks,commonareas,andpreservationeasements(indicatepublicvs. privateifapplicable); 17.AnyotherinformationasdirectedbytheCommunityDevelopmentDepartment. (iv)PUDPreliminaryPlatandRezoningtoPUDReview 1.TheapplicationforrezoningtoPUDshallbereviewedinaccordancewith Section2.4(B),ZoningOrdinanceTextandZoningMapAmendments. 2.TheapplicationforPreliminaryPlatshallbereviewedinaccordancewithCity CodeTitle11,Chapter3,Section2,PreliminaryPlatProcedure. 3.Aspartofthereviewprocessforbothapplications,theCommunityDevelopment Departmentshallgenerateananalysisoftheproposalagainsttheexpectationsfor PUDsandthepreviouslyestablishedpublicvaluesstatementtoformulatea recommendationregardingtherezoningtotheplanningcommissionandCity Council. 4.Theplanningcommissionshallholdapublichearingandconsiderthe application’sconsistencywiththeintentandpurposeofthePUDand comprehensiveplangoals.Theplanningcommissionshallmake recommendationstotheCityCouncilonthemerit,neededchanges,and suggestedconditionsoftheproposedrezoning,preliminaryplatandPUD developmentplan. 5.InapprovingordenyingtheordinancetorezonethesubjectpropertytoPUD,the CityCouncilshallmakefindingsonthefollowing: a.ThePUDplanisconsistentwiththecity’scomprehensiveplan; b.ThePUDplanistailoredtothespecificcharacteristicsofthesiteand achievesahigherqualityofsiteplanningandgreaterpublicbenefitsthan wouldbeachievedunderconventionalprovisionsoftheordinance; c.ThePUDplanaddressesthepurposeandintentofthePUDrezoninglaidout inSection2.4(P)(1),andthepublicvaluesstatementestablishedatthe beginningoftheprocess d.ThePUDplanaddressestheexpectationsofaPUDlaidoutinSection 2.4(P)(7); e.ThePUDplanmaintainsorimprovestheefficiencyofpublicstreets,utilities, andotherpublicservices; f.ThePUDplanresultsindevelopmentcompatiblewithexistingadjacentand futureguidedlanduses; g.HowthePUDplanaddressesthepurposeandintentofthePUDrezoning laidoutinSection2.4(P)(1),andthepublicvaluesstatementestablishedat thebeginningoftheprocess. h.WhetherthePUDcanbeaccommodatedbyexistingpublicservices,suchas parks,police,fire,administration,andutilities,orthedeveloperhasprovided forthegrowthandextensionofsuchservicesasacomponentofthePUD. Formatted:Font:NotBold i.WhetherthePUDisdesignedtotakeadvantageof,andpreserve,thenatural featuresofthesubjectproperty,includingwaterways,forestedareas,natural prairie,topography,views,etc. 6.Anordinancerezoningthepropertyshallbeadoptedthatincludesaneffective datethatcoincideswiththeapprovalandrecordingoftheFinalPlatforthe property. (d)PUDFinalPlat (i)InitiationofProceedings 1.AfinalplatthatconformswiththepreliminaryplatandassociatedPUDrezoning ordinanceshallbesubmittedwithin180daysofapprovalofthe ordinanceand preliminaryplatapproval,unlessotherwiseextendedbytheCityCouncil.Ifthe applicantfailstosubmitafinalplatapplicationorextensionrequestwithinthis timeperiod,the zoning shallrevertbacktotheunderlyingzoningdistrictthrough arezoningordinanceadoptedbytheCityCouncilPUDapplicationshallbe consideredvoidandtheapplicantshallberequiredtobegintheprocesswiththe CollaborativePUDmeeting. 2.TherequestforPUDFinalPlatshallbeinitiatedbyapplicationoftheproperty ownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofileanapplicationpursuanttoSection 2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforPUDFinalPlatshallbeinaccordancewithSection2.3, CommonReviewRequirements. 2.TheapplicationforPUDFinalPlatshallbeinaccordancewithCityCodeTitle 11,Chapter4,DataRequiredforPreliminaryandFinalPlats. 3.Inadditiontogeneralcitycoderequirements,applicationsforaPUDFinalPlat shallalsoincludeatleasttheinformationinSection2.4(P)(9)(d)(iii)belowtobe consideredcomplete(exceptasexemptedbytheCommunityDevelopment DepartmentDirector). (iii)SpecificPUDFinalPlatSubmittalRequirements 1.IfaPUDMasterPlanfortheentireprojectwassubmittedandapprovedaspart ofthepreliminaryplatreview,anupdatedMasterPlanshallbesubmitted incorporatingallchangesrequiredbythepreliminaryplatapproval. 2.ThePUDDevelopmentPlanshallbeupdatedtoincorporateallchangesrequired bythepreliminaryplatandrezoningapprovals.Thisdocumentmustclearly showalldeviationsfromstandardzoningbeingapprovedaspartofthePUD. 3.TheCity andapplicant shallprepare,andtheCityandapplicantshallexecute,a developer’sagreementwhichreferencesallPUDplans,specifiespermitteduses, allowabledensities,developmentphasing,requiredimprovements,completion datesforimprovements,therequiredletterofcredit,allrequireddevelopment Formatted:Font:NotBold Formatted:Indent:Left:1.5",Tabstops: 1.75",Listtab+Notat3.25" Formatted:Indent:Left:1.25",Tabstops: 1.5",Listtab+Notat2.38" Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold fees,escrows,andwarranties,andanyotherinformationdeemednecessaryby theCity.Thisclausewillnotworkaswritten.Adevelopmentagreement shouldlisttheresponsibilitiesofthedeveloperandtheCityatthetimeof approvalandplatting,andthePUDOrdinance shouldlistthelandusesand performancestandardsofthedistrict.TheDAwillonlybevaluablefor dealingwiththeoriginaldeveloperattheonsetoftheproject–the ordinancewillneedtoaddresstheongoingoperationofthedistrict, includingsubsequentowners,landusechanges,newconstructionrequests, etc.,etc. 3.4.TheCityshall,uponrecordingoftheFinalPlat,publishthePUDOrdinance specifyinglanduses,densities,performancestandards,andongoinggeneral obligationsofoccupantsofthePUD.Suchordinanceshallcreateazoning districtthatisspecifictothepropertyforwhichthePUDwasapplied,andshall bedesignatedinsuchawayastobeabletomarktheofficialzoningmapto identifythePUDordinance.ThePUDordinanceshallalsodesignatethatsuch propertyistherebyrezonedtothePUDdistrictasadopted. 4.5.Up-to-datetitleevidenceforthesubjectpropertyinaformacceptabletotheCity shallbeprovidedaspartoftheapplicationforthePUDFinalPlat. 5.6.DevelopershallprovidewarrantydeedsforPropertybeingdedicatedtotheCity forallparks,outlots,etc.,freefromallliensandencumbrancesexceptas otherwisewaivedbytheCity Council. 6.7.Developershallprovidealleasementdedicationdocumentsforeasementsnot shownonthefinalplatincludingthosefortrails,ingress/egress,etc.,together withallnecessaryconsentstotheeasementbyexistingencumbrancersofthe property. (iv)PUDFinalPlatReview TheapplicationforPUDFinalPlatshallbereviewedinaccordancewithCityCode Title11,Chapter3,Section3,FinalPlatProcedure. (10)PUDAmendments ApprovedPUD’smaybeamendedfromtimetotimeasaresultofunforeseencircumstances, overlookedopportunities,orrequestsfromadeveloper.Atsuchatime,theapplicantshall makeanapplicationtothecityforaPUDamendment.Allsuchamendmentswillbe processedasoneofthefollowing: (a)AdministrativeAmendment –TheCommunityDevelopment Department Director may approveminorchangesinthelocation,placement,andheightofbuildingsifsuch changesarerequiredbyengineeringorothercircumstances,notforeseen atthetimethe PUDFinalPlanwasapproved,providedthechanges areindeedminor providedthe changes conformtothereviewcriteriaappliedbythePlanningCommissionandCity Council,andareconsistentwithallrequirementsofthePUDordinance.Underno Formatted:Fontcolor:Auto Formatted:Font:NotBold Formatted:Tabstops:Notat2.38" Formatted:Font:NotBold Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight Formatted:Font:NotBold circumstancesshallanadministrativeamendmentallowadditionalstoriestobuildings, additionallots,orchangestodesignatedusesestablishedaspartofthePUD. (b)PUDAdjustment –anadjustmenttoaPUDmaybemadethroughreviewandapproval byasimplemajorityvoteoftheCityCouncilwithorwithoutreferraltothePlanning Commission.Toqualifyforthisreview,theminoradjustmentshallnot: (i)Eliminate,diminishorbedisruptivetothepreservationandprotectionofsensitive sitefeatures. (ii)Eliminate,diminishorcompromisethehighqualityofsiteplanning,design, landscapingorbuildingmaterials. (iii)Altersignificantlythelocationofbuildings,parkingareasorroads. (iv)Increaseordecreasethenumberofresidentialdwellingunitsbymorethanfive percent. (v)Increasethegrossfloorareaofnon-residentialbuildingsbymorethanthreepercent orincreasethegrossfloorareaofanyindividualbuildingbymorethanfivepercent (residentiallotsnotguidedforspecificstructuresizesareexcludedfromthis requirement). (vi)Increasethenumberofstoriesofanybuilding. (vii)Decreasetheamountofopenspaceoralteritinsuchawayastochangeitsoriginal designorintendedfunctionoruse. (viii)Createnon-compliancewithany special conditionattachedtotheapprovalofthe FinalPUDPlan. (c)PUDAmendment –anychangenotqualifyingforanadministrativeamendmentora PUDadjustmentshallrequireaPUDamendment.AnapplicationtoamendaPUDshall beadministeredinthesamemannerasthatrequiredforaninitialPUDbeginningatPUD PreliminaryPlat. (11)PUDCancellation APUDshallonlybecancelledandrevokedupontheCityCounciladoptinganordinance rescindingtheordinanceapprovingthePUD.Inanyevent,itshallnotbenecessaryforthe counciltofindthecreationofaPUDdistrictwasinerror.TheordinancerevokingthePUD shallincludeasectionrezoningthepropertytoagriculturaluse,ortheCityCouncilmay determinethatamoreappropriatebasezoningdistrictshouldbechosentofurthertheintent andobjectivesoftheComprehensivePlan.[Staffcomment:Rescindingtheordinancewould havetheeffectof“un-zoning”theproperty.Thisclauseneedssomework,sincerevocation probablyshouldrequireapublichearingandsomedueprocess,presumingthatapproval conferssomedevelopmentrights.Particularlywheretheremaybesomeconstructionthat hasoccurred,rescindingthePUDordinancewouldbeproblematic.] Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight (12)Administration Ingeneral,thefollowingrulesshallapplytoallPUDs: (a)Rulesandregulations:NorequirementoutlinedinthePUDprocessshallrestricttheCity Councilfromtakingactiononanapplicationifnecessarytomeetstatemandatedtime deadlines; (b)PlanCertification:TheCitymayrequirethatPUDplansbe certified atthetimeof submittaland/oruponcompletionofconstruction. (c)(b)Preconstruction:Nobuildingpermitshallbegrantedforanybuildingonlandfor whichaPUDplanisintheprocessofreview,unlesstheproposedbuildingisallowed undertheexistingzoningandwillnotimpact,influence,orinterferewiththeproposed PUDplan. (d)(c)EffectonConveyedProperty.IntheeventanyrealpropertyintheapprovedPUD Agreementisconveyedintotal,orinpart,thebuyersthereofshallbeboundbythe provisionsoftheapprovedFinalPUDPlan constitutingapartthereof aswellasthePUD zoningordinance;provided,however,thatnothinghereinshallbeconstruedtocreate non-conforminglots,buildingsites,buildingsorusesbyvirtueofanysuchconveyance ofalot,buildingsite,buildingorpartofthedevelopmentcreatedpursuanttoandin conformancewiththeapprovedPUD. Formatted:Font:NotBold,NotHighlight (5)PUDQualifications RezoningstoPUDwillbeconsideredonlyforareasoflandinsingleownershiporcontrol, exceptinthefollowingcircumstances: (a)Naturalfeaturesofthelandaresuchthatdevelopmentunderstandardzoningregulations wouldnotbeappropriateinordertoconservesuchfeatures; (b)ThelandisintendedtobedevelopedinaccordancewithapriorPUDadjacenttoor acrossthestreetfromthesubjectproperty; (c)ThePUDprocessisdesirabletoensurecompatibilityandcarefulconsiderationofthe effectofadevelopmentonsurroundinglanduses. (d)Multiplepartyownershipisadequatelysecuredthroughacorporation,partnership,or otherlegalentitythatwillensuretheabilitytofulfillalloftheobligationsofthePUD process,includingapprovals,development,andsecurities. (6)PermittedUsesWithinPUDs UseswithinaPUDshallbegovernedbytheordinanceestablishingthePUDandbythe conditions,ifany,imposedbytheCityintheapprovalprocessandPUDdocuments (7)ExpectationsofaDevelopmentSeekingaRezoningtoPUD Theprovisionsofthissectionareintendedtoachievethefollowingpublicvalueswithina PUDzoningdistrictandassociatedsubdivision: (a)Ensurehighqualityconstructionstandardsandtheuseofhighqualityconstruction materials; (b)Promoteavarietyofhousingstyleswhichincludefeaturessuchassideorrearloaded garages,frontporches,varyingroofpitches,andfoursidedarchitecture/articulation; (c)Eliminaterepetitionofsimilarhousingtypesbyencouragingahousingmixturethat diversifiesthearchitecturalqualitiesofaneighborhood; (d)Promoteaesthetically-pleasingdesignwithintheneighborhoodandappearsattractiveand invitingfromsurroundingparcels; (e)Incorporateextensivelandscapinginexcessofwhatisrequiredbycode; (f)Providehigh-qualitypark,openspace,andtrailopportunitiesthatexceedthe expectationsestablishedintheComprehensivePlan; (g)Provideaconvenientandefficientmulti-modaltransportationsystemtoservicethedaily needsofresidentsatpeakandnon-peakuselevels,withhighconnectivitytothelarger community. (h)Promotedevelopmentthatisdesignedtoreduceinitialinfrastructurecostsandlong-term maintenanceandoperationalcosts; (i)Whereapplicable,maximizetheuseofecologically-basedapproachestostormwater management,restoreorenhanceon-siteecologicalsystems,andprotectoff-site ecologicalsystemsincludingtheapplicationofLowImpactDevelopment(LID) practices; (j)Fosterininclusivecommunitybyprovidingacomplementarymixoflifecyclehousing; (k)PreserveandprotectimportantecologicalareasidentifiedontheCity’snaturalresource inventory(NRI); (8)AreasofFlexibility (a)TheCityshallconsideranincreaseinthedensityorintensityoftheproject,alongwith relatedreductionsinlotwidthandsizeifthePUDprovidessubstantiallymoresite amenitiesandpublicvalues,asoutlinedinSection2.4(P)(7),thancouldbeachievedina conventionaldevelopmentfortheapplicablelandusezone. (b)TheCitymayconsideradecreaseintheamountofroadwidthrequiredorright-of-way requirementsifthePUDprovidessubstantiallymoresiteamenities,asoutlinedinSection 2.4(P)(7)–andparticularlythoseamenitiesthatwouldmitigatetrafficconcerns-thanare foundinaconventionaldevelopmentfortheapplicablezoningdistrict.Specifications andstandardsforstreets,utilities,andotherpublicfacilitiesshallbeatthediscretionof CityCouncilandmustprotectthehealth,safety,comfort,aesthetics,economicviability, andgeneralwelfareofthecity. (c)TheCityshallconsiderflexibilitywithregardtolotsize,width,anddepthwhen reviewingaPUDrezoningrequest.Specificationsandstandardsforlotsshallbeatthe discretionofCityCouncil,andshallencourageadesirablelivingenvironmentwhich assistsinachievingthegoalssetoutforPUDs. (d)TheCityshallconsiderflexibilityinthephasingofaPUDdevelopment.Changestothe proposedstagingortimingofaPUDmaybeapprovedbytheCityCouncilwhen necessaryorontheshowingofgoodcausebythedeveloper. (9)PUDProcedure AllrequestsforrezoningtoPlannedUnitDevelopmentshallfollowthestepsoutlinedbelow. (a)Collaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsetting Thecollaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsettingstepisintendedtoallowtheapplicant tomeetwithmembersoftheCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentandappointedand electedofficialstogainanunderstandingofthepublicvaluesrelatedtodevelopmentof thesubjectsite.Thefeedbackreceivedduringthisstepwillprovideguidancetothe applicantonelementsandobjectivestoincorporateintoafutureconceptplan. (i)InitiationofProceedings ArequestforaPUDConceptPlanReviewshallbeinitiatedbyapplicationofthe propertyownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofileanapplicationpursuantto Section2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforaPUDCollaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsettingsession shallbeinaccordancewithSection2.3,CommonReviewRequirements. 2.Inadditiontocommonreviewrequirements,asiteanalysisshallbesubmittedin anticipationofthepre-applicationactivitieswhichincludesthefollowing information: a.Locationofwoodedareasorsignificantfeatures(environmental,historical, cultural)oftheparcel; b.Indicatethebasefloodelevationlevel(ifapplicable)andshowthegeneral locationoffloodwaysand/orfloodfringeareas; c.Delineationoftheordinaryhighwaterlevelsofallwaterbodies; d.Delineationoftheshorelanddistrictboundary(ifapplicable); e.Generallocationsofwetlands(ifapplicable); f.Calculationofgrossacresonthesiteproposedfordevelopment; g.Calculationofnetacresonthesiteproposedfordevelopment,includinga calculationof,anddeductionfromthegrossacreageof,allwetlands, floodplains,slopesofmorethan18%,significantwoodlands,areasidentified intheCity’sNaturalResourcesInventory,andanyotherunbuildableareasof theprojectsite. h.Indicationofneighboringlandusessurroundingtheproposeddevelopment site.. (iii)CollaborativeProcessandProjectGoalSettingProcess 1.Theapplicantshallmeetwiththecitystaffforapre-applicationconferenceprior tosubmittalofaconceptplanapplicationtothecity.Theprimarypurposeofthe conferenceistoallowtheapplicantandstaffanopportunitytoreviewthe comprehensiveplanandtomakeapreliminarydeterminationiftheproposalis conducivetoaPUDrezoning. 2.Citystaffandtheapplicantshallworktogethertoscheduleaconcurrent worksessionwithpolicymakersofthecity(applicablecommissionsandCity Council)todiscussthepublicvaluesonthesiteusingtheestablishedpublic valuesinSection2.4(P)(7)asaguideline.Theresultofthismeetingwillbea publicvaluesstatement. 3.Atanappropriatepointduringtheprocess,theapplicantshallholda neighborhoodmeeting.Thecityandallownersofpropertywithin1,000feetof theproposedPUD(oralargerareaasdeterminedbytheCommunity DevelopmentDirector)shallbegivennoticeofthemeeting.Thepurposeofthe meetingistoinformtheneighborhoodoftheproposedPUD,discussthe conceptsandbasisfortheplanbeingdevelopedandtoobtaininformationand suggestionsfromtheneighborhood. 4.Theapplicantshallberesponsibleforthecostsincurredbythecityforattorney, engineering,planning,orotherCity-incurredcostsduringthesepre-conceptplan activities. (b)PUDConceptPlan Priortosubmittingformalpreliminaryplatandrezoningapplicationsfortheproposed development,theapplicantshallprepareaninformalconceptplanandpresentittothe appropriatecommissionsandCityCouncilataconcurrentworksession,asscheduledby theCommunityDevelopmentDepartment.Thepurposeofthismeetingistodetermineif allpartiesareonacommontrackandifthedevelopmentreflectsthestatedpublicvalues. TheapplicantmayrequestthattheConceptandDevelopmentStagePUDapplicationsbe consideredconcurrently.Allowanceforconcurrentreviewshallbeatthesolediscretion oftheCity,andtheapplicantassumesanyrisk,financialorotherwise,ofproceedingwith plandevelopmentbeyondthestageatwhichtheCityhasidentifiedPUDreviewis officiallyunderconsideration.Withoutspecificwrittenauthorizationfromthe CommunityDevelopment,noapplicationforDevelopmentStagePUDshallbe consideredcompletepriortoCityCouncilactionontheConceptStagePUD. (i)InitiationofProceedings ArequestforaPUDConceptPlanReviewshallbeinitiatedbyapplicationofthe propertyownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofileanapplicationpursuantto Section2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforaPUDConceptPlanReviewshallbeinaccordancewith Section2.3,CommonReviewRequirements. 2.Inadditiontocommonreviewrequirements,applicationsforaPUDConcept PlanReviewshallalsoincludeatleasttheinformationinSection2.4(P)(9)(b)(iii) belowtobeconsideredcomplete(exceptasexemptedbytheCommunity DevelopmentDirector).Seenoteabove. (iii)SpecificPUDConceptPlanSubmittalRequirements Anapplicantshallprovidethefollowinginformationunlesswaivedbystaff: 1.Alistingofcontactinformationincludingname(s),address(es)andphone number(s)of:theownerofrecord,authorizedagentsorrepresentatives,engineer, surveyor,andanyotherrelevantassociates; 2.Alistingofthefollowingsitedata:Address,currentzoning,parcelsizeinacres andsquarefeetandcurrentlegaldescription(s); 3.Anupdatedsiteanalysisincorporatinganyadditionalfeaturesorrequested changesidentifiedduringthecollaborativeprocessandprojectgoalsetting session; 4.Anarrativeexplaininghowtheidentifiedpublicvaluesforthesiteareaddressed bytheconceptplan; 5.Alistingofgeneralinformationincludingthenumberofproposedresidential units,commercialandindustriallandusesbycategoryofuse,publicuseareas includingadescriptionofproposeduse,andanyotherlanduseproposedaspart ofthePUD; 6.Calculationoftheproposeddensityoftheprojectandthepotentialdensityunder standardzoningregulations,includingbothgrossdensityandnetdensity, accountingfordevelopableandundevelopableland.Undevelopablelandshall includeallwetlands,floodplains,sensitiveecologicalareasidentifiedinthe NaturalResourceInventory,slopesgreaterthan18%,poorsoils,andareasof concentratedwoodlands. 7.Outlineadevelopmentscheduleindicatingtheapproximatedatewhen constructionoftheproject,orstagesofthesame,canbeexpectedtobeginandbe completed(includingtheproposedphasingofconstructionofpublic improvementsandrecreationalandcommonspaceareas). 8.AConceptPUDPlanillustratingthenatureandtypeofproposeddevelopment. Ataminimum,theplanshouldshow: a.Areacalculationsforgrosslandarea b.Existingzoningdistrict(s) c.Layoutofproposedlotsandproposeduses.Denoteoutlotsplannedfor publicdedicationand/oropenspace(schools,parks,etc.) d.Areacalculationsforeachparcel e.Generallocationofwetlandsand/orwatercoursesoverthepropertyand within200feetoftheperimeterofthesubdivisionparcel f.Locationofexistingandproposedstreetswithinandimmediatelyadjacentto thesubdivisionparcel g.Proposedsidewalksandtrails h.Proposedparkingareas i.Proposedparks,commonareas,andpreservationeasements(indicatepublic vs.privateifapplicable) j.Generallocationofwoodedareasorsignificantfeatures(environmental, historical,cultural)oftheparcel k.Locationofutilitysystemsthatwillservetheproperty l.Other:Anapplicantmaysubmitanyadditionalinformationthatmayexplain theproposedPUD. (iv)PUDConceptPlanReview 1.UponreceivingacompletePUDconceptplanapplication,theCommunity DevelopmentDepartment,alongwithotherdesignatedstaff,shallreviewthe proposalandgenerateastaffreportanalyzingtheproposalagainstthe expectationsforPUDs.Thereportshallbeforwardedtotheappropriate commissions—asdeterminedbytheCommunityDevelopmentDirector. 2.CommissionsreceivingthereportshallreviewthePUDrezoningrequest,and makearecommendationtotheCityCouncilwithregardtotheplatlayout, design,density,uses,deviations,andachievedpublicvaluesoftheconceptplan; ThePlanningCommissionshallberesponsiblefortheformalcommentstothe CityCouncil.Otherstaffandcommissionreportsshallbeprovidedtothe PlanningCommissionandmadeapartofthePlanningCommission’sreport. 3.TheCouncilshallconsidertherecommendationsofthecommissionsthathave conductedareview,andprovidefeedbacktotheapplicantontheproposedpublic values,proposeddeviations,andanyotheraspectoftheapplication.The Councilshalleithermakeamotionthattheapplicant—iftheychooseto proceed—moveforwardwiththePUDpreliminaryplatandrezoningrequests,or directtheapplicanttosubmitadevelopmentapplicationusingconventional zoningdistrictstandards.TheCouncilshallmakeitsfindingwithinthetime allottedbyMinn.Stat.Section15.99,andmaytakeuptheapplicationwithout PlanningCommissionactionifthePlanningCommissionhasnotactedwithin sixty(60)daysofitsoriginalpublichearingdate.TheCityCouncil’sfindings areexplicitlynotanapprovaloftheproject,andareintendedtorepresentthe complianceoftheproposedprojectwiththePublicValuesStatement,the applicablezoningregulations,andtheComprehensivePlan. 4.AftertheCitypolicymakershavereviewedandcommentedontheConceptPUD plan,citystaffshallmeetwithanyotherresponsibleagencies,asapplicable,to exploreopportunitiesofpartnershiptoenhancethestatedpublicvalues. (c)PUDPreliminaryPlatandRezoning–DevelopmentStagePUD (i)InitiationofProceedings 1.ConcurrentapplicationsforrezoningtoPUDandaPreliminaryPlatshallbe submittedtotheCitywithinoneyearoftheCityCouncil’sfindingsonthePUD ConceptPlan.FailuretosubmitapplicationsforrezoningtoPUDanda PreliminaryPlatwithinoneyearoftheCityCouncil’sfindingswillrequirethe applicanttobegintheprocesswiththeCollaborativePUDmeeting. 2.TherequestsforrezoningtoPUDandPreliminaryPlatshallbeinitiatedby applicationofthepropertyownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofilean applicationpursuanttoSection2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications.The DevelopmentStagePUDrequestconstitutesaseparateapplicationandshallbe subjecttonewtimelinesforthepurposesofMinn.Stat.Section15.99. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforrezoningtoPUDandPreliminaryPlatshallbeinaccordance withSection2.3,CommonReviewRequirements. 2.TheapplicationforrezoningtoPUDshallbeinaccordancewithSection2.4(B), ZoningOrdinanceTextandZoningMapAmendments. 3.TheapplicationforPreliminaryPlatshallbeinaccordancewithCityCodeTitle 11,Chapter4,DataRequiredforPreliminaryandFinalPlats;andshallinclude theadditionalinformationrequirementslistedinSection2.4(P)(9)(c)(iii)below tobeconsideredcomplete(exceptasexemptedbytheCommunityDevelopment Department). 4.IfthePUDisproposedtodevelopoveratimeframeexceedingtwoyears,aPUD PhasingPlan fortheentireproject(tobecompletedinphases)maybe submitted.SubsequentPUDFinalPlanapplicationswouldonlygrantapproval foranindividualphase. (iii)SpecificPUDPreliminaryPlatSubmittalRequirements AnapplicantshallprovideaseparatePUDDevelopmentPlanclearlydelineatingthe proposeddevelopmentandallfeaturesnotconsistentwithunderlyingzoning regulations(e.g.setbackdeviations).Ataminimum,theplanshouldshow: 1.Administrativeinformation(includingidentificationofthedrawingasa “PreliminaryPUDDevelopmentPlan,”theproposednameofthesubdivision, contactinformationforthedeveloperandindividualpreparingtheplan,signature ofthesurveyorcertifyingthedocument,dateofplanpreparationorrevision,and agraphicscaleandtruenortharrow); 2.Areacalculationsforgrosslandarea,wetlandareas,wetlandbuffers,right-of- waydedications,conservationareas,andproposedpublicandprivateparks; 3.Existingzoningdistrict(s); 4.Layoutofproposedlotswithfuturelotandblocknumbers.Theperimeter boundarylineofthesubdivisionshouldbedistinguishablefromtheother propertylines.Denoteoutlotsplannedforpublicdedicationand/oropenspace (schools,parks,etc.); 5.Areacalculationsforeachparcel; 6.Proposedsetbacksoneachlot(formingthebuildingpad)andcalculated buildablearea; 7.Proposedgrosshardcoverallowanceperlot(ifapplicable); 8.Existingcontoursatintervalsoftwofeet.Contoursmustextendaminimumof 200feetbeyondtheboundaryoftheparcel(s)inquestion; 9.Delineationofwetlandsand/orwatercoursesoverthepropertyandwithin200 feetoftheperimeterofthesubdivisionparcel; 10.Delineationoftheordinaryhighwaterlevelsofallwaterbodies; 11.Location,width,andnamesofexistingandproposedstreetswithinand immediatelyadjacenttothesubdivisionparcel; 12.Easementsandrights-of-waywithinoradjacenttothesubdivisionparcel(s); 13.Thelocationandorientationofproposedbuildings; 14.Proposedsidewalksandtrails; 15.Proposedparkingareas; 16.Proposedparks,commonareas,andpreservationeasements(indicatepublicvs. privateifapplicable); 17.AnyotherinformationasdirectedbytheCommunityDevelopmentDepartment. (iv)PUDPreliminaryPlatandRezoningtoPUDReview 1.TheapplicationforrezoningtoPUDshallbereviewedinaccordancewith Section2.4(B),ZoningOrdinanceTextandZoningMapAmendments. 2.TheapplicationforPreliminaryPlatshallbereviewedinaccordancewithCity CodeTitle11,Chapter3,Section2,PreliminaryPlatProcedure. 3.Aspartofthereviewprocessforbothapplications,theCommunityDevelopment Departmentshallgenerateananalysisoftheproposalagainsttheexpectationsfor PUDsandthepreviouslyestablishedpublicvaluesstatementtoformulatea recommendationregardingtherezoningtotheplanningcommissionandCity Council. 4.Theplanningcommissionshallholdapublichearingandconsiderthe application’sconsistencywiththeintentandpurposeofthePUDand comprehensiveplangoals.Theplanningcommissionshallmake recommendationstotheCityCouncilonthemerit,neededchanges,and suggestedconditionsoftheproposedrezoning,preliminaryplatandPUD developmentplan. 5.InapprovingordenyingtheordinancetorezonethesubjectpropertytoPUD,the CityCouncilshallmakefindingsonthefollowing: a.ThePUDplanisconsistentwiththecity’scomprehensiveplan; b.ThePUDplanistailoredtothespecificcharacteristicsofthesiteand achievesahigherqualityofsiteplanningandgreaterpublicbenefitsthan wouldbeachievedunderconventionalprovisionsoftheordinance; c.ThePUDplanaddressesthepurposeandintentofthePUDrezoninglaidout inSection2.4(P)(1),andthepublicvaluesstatementestablishedatthe beginningoftheprocess d.ThePUDplanaddressestheexpectationsofaPUDlaidoutinSection 2.4(P)(7); e.ThePUDplanmaintainsorimprovestheefficiencyofpublicstreets,utilities, andotherpublicservices; f.ThePUDplanresultsindevelopmentcompatiblewithexistingadjacentand futureguidedlanduses; g.HowthePUDplanaddressesthepurposeandintentofthePUDrezoning laidoutinSection2.4(P)(1),andthepublicvaluesstatementestablishedat thebeginningoftheprocess. h.WhetherthePUDcanbeaccommodatedbyexistingpublicservices,suchas parks,police,fire,administration,andutilities,orthedeveloperhasprovided forthegrowthandextensionofsuchservicesasacomponentofthePUD. i.WhetherthePUDisdesignedtotakeadvantageof,andpreserve,thenatural featuresofthesubjectproperty,includingwaterways,forestedareas,natural prairie,topography,views,etc. 6.Anordinancerezoningthepropertyshallbeadoptedthatincludesaneffective datethatcoincideswiththeapprovalandrecordingoftheFinalPlatforthe property. (d)PUDFinalPlat (i)InitiationofProceedings 1.AfinalplatthatconformswiththepreliminaryplatandassociatedPUDrezoning ordinanceshallbesubmittedwithin180daysofapprovalofthepreliminaryplat approval,unlessotherwiseextendedbytheCityCouncil.Iftheapplicantfailsto submitafinalplatapplicationorextensionrequestwithinthistimeperiod,the PUDapplicationshallbeconsideredvoidandtheapplicantshallberequiredto begintheprocesswiththeCollaborativePUDmeeting. 2.TherequestforPUDFinalPlatshallbeinitiatedbyapplicationoftheproperty ownerorotherpersonhavingauthoritytofileanapplicationpursuanttoSection 2.3(B),AuthoritytoFileApplications. (ii)Application 1.AllapplicationsforPUDFinalPlatshallbeinaccordancewithSection2.3, CommonReviewRequirements. 2.TheapplicationforPUDFinalPlatshallbeinaccordancewithCityCodeTitle 11,Chapter4,DataRequiredforPreliminaryandFinalPlats. 3.Inadditiontogeneralcitycoderequirements,applicationsforaPUDFinalPlat shallalsoincludeatleasttheinformationinSection2.4(P)(9)(d)(iii)belowtobe consideredcomplete(exceptasexemptedbytheCommunityDevelopment Director). (iii)SpecificPUDFinalPlatSubmittalRequirements 1.IfaPUDMasterPlanfortheentireprojectwassubmittedandapprovedaspart ofthepreliminaryplatreview,anupdatedMasterPlanshallbesubmitted incorporatingallchangesrequiredbythepreliminaryplatapproval. 2.ThePUDDevelopmentPlanshallbeupdatedtoincorporateallchangesrequired bythepreliminaryplatandrezoningapprovals.Thisdocumentmustclearly showalldeviationsfromstandardzoningbeingapprovedaspartofthePUD. 3.TheCityshallprepare,andtheCityandapplicantshallexecute,adeveloper’s agreementwhichreferencesallPUDplans,developmentphasing,required improvements,completiondatesforimprovements,therequiredletterofcredit, allrequireddevelopmentfees,escrows,andwarranties,andanyother informationdeemednecessarybytheCity. 4.TheCityshall,uponrecordingoftheFinalPlat,publishthePUDOrdinance specifyinglanduses,densities,performancestandards,andongoinggeneral obligationsofoccupantsofthePUD.Suchordinanceshallcreateazoning districtthatisspecifictothepropertyforwhichthePUDwasapplied,andshall bedesignatedinsuchawayastobeabletomarktheofficialzoningmapto identifythePUDordinance.ThePUDordinanceshallalsodesignatethatsuch propertyistherebyrezonedtothePUDdistrictasadopted. 5.Up-to-datetitleevidenceforthesubjectpropertyinaformacceptabletotheCity shallbeprovidedaspartoftheapplicationforthePUDFinalPlat. 6.DevelopershallprovidewarrantydeedsforPropertybeingdedicatedtotheCity forallparks,outlots,etc.,freefromallliensandencumbrancesexceptas otherwisewaivedbytheCityCouncil. 7.Developershallprovidealleasementdedicationdocumentsforeasementsnot shownonthefinalplatincludingthosefortrails,ingress/egress,etc.,together withallnecessaryconsentstotheeasementbyexistingencumbrancesofthe property. (iv)PUDFinalPlatReview TheapplicationforPUDFinalPlatshallbereviewedinaccordancewithCityCode Title11,Chapter3,Section3,FinalPlatProcedure. (10)PUDAmendments ApprovedPUD’smaybeamendedfromtimetotimeasaresultofunforeseencircumstances, overlookedopportunities,orrequestsfromadeveloper.Atsuchatime,theapplicantshall makeanapplicationtothecityforaPUDamendment.Allsuchamendmentswillbe processedasoneofthefollowing: (a)AdministrativeAmendment –TheCommunityDevelopmentDirectormayapprove minorchangesinthelocation,placement,andheightofbuildingsifsuchchangesare requiredbyengineeringorothercircumstances,providedthechangesconformtothe reviewcriteriaappliedbythePlanningCommissionandCityCouncil,andareconsistent withallrequirementsofthePUDordinance.Undernocircumstancesshallan administrativeamendmentallowadditionalstoriestobuildings,additionallots,or changestodesignatedusesestablishedaspartofthePUD. (b)PUDAdjustment –anadjustmenttoaPUDmaybemadethroughreviewandapproval byasimplemajorityvoteoftheCityCouncilwithorwithoutreferraltothePlanning Commission.Toqualifyforthisreview,theminoradjustmentshallnot: (i)Eliminate,diminishorbedisruptivetothepreservationandprotectionofsensitive sitefeatures. (ii)Eliminate,diminishorcompromisethehighqualityofsiteplanning,design, landscapingorbuildingmaterials. (iii)Altersignificantlythelocationofbuildings,parkingareasorroads. (iv)Increaseordecreasethenumberofresidentialdwellingunitsbymorethanfive percent. (v)Increasethegrossfloorareaofnon-residentialbuildingsbymorethanthreepercent orincreasethegrossfloorareaofanyindividualbuildingbymorethanfivepercent (residentiallotsnotguidedforspecificstructuresizesareexcludedfromthis requirement). (vi)Increasethenumberofstoriesofanybuilding. (vii)Decreasetheamountofopenspaceoralteritinsuchawayastochangeitsoriginal designorintendedfunctionoruse. (viii)Createnon-compliancewithanyconditionattachedtotheapprovaloftheFinalPUD Plan. (c)PUDAmendment –anychangenotqualifyingforanadministrativeamendmentora PUDadjustmentshallrequireaPUDamendment.AnapplicationtoamendaPUDshall beadministeredinthesamemannerasthatrequiredforaninitialPUDbeginningatPUD PreliminaryPlat. (11)PUDCancellation APUDshallonlybecancelledandrevokedupontheCityCounciladoptinganordinance rescindingtheordinanceapprovingthePUD.Inanyevent,itshallnotbenecessaryforthe counciltofindthecreationofaPUDdistrictwasinerror.TheordinancerevokingthePUD shallincludeasectionrezoningthepropertytoagriculturaluse,ortheCityCouncilmay determinethatamoreappropriatebasezoningdistrictshouldbechosentofurthertheintent andobjectivesoftheComprehensivePlan. (12)Administration Ingeneral,thefollowingrulesshallapplytoallPUDs: (a)Rulesandregulations:NorequirementoutlinedinthePUDprocessshallrestricttheCity Councilfromtakingactiononanapplicationifnecessarytomeetstatemandatedtime deadlines; (b)Preconstruction:Nobuildingpermitshallbegrantedforanybuildingonlandforwhich aPUDplanisintheprocessofreview,unlesstheproposedbuildingisallowedunderthe existingzoningandwillnotimpact,influence,orinterferewiththeproposedPUDplan. (c)EffectonConveyedProperty.IntheeventanyrealpropertyintheapprovedPUD Agreementisconveyedintotal,orinpart,thebuyersthereofshallbeboundbythe provisionsoftheapprovedFinalPUDPlanconstitutingapartthereofaswellasthePUD zoningordinance;provided,however,thatnothinghereinshallbeconstruedtocreate non-conforminglots,buildingsites,buildingsorusesbyvirtueofanysuchconveyance ofalot,buildingsite,buildingorpartofthedevelopmentcreatedpursuanttoandin conformancewiththeapprovedPUD. PlanningCommissionAgenda:2/21/12 1 10.CommunityDevelopmentDirector’sReport.(AS) CCDOrdinanceRewrite TheadhoctaskforceassignedtodirecttheCCDrewritemetonFriday,February10th.The groupincludesPlanningCommissionrepresentativesCharlotteGablerandBillSpartz,aswell asEmbracingDowntownSteeringCommitteemembersSteveJohnsonandSeanGrady. CouncilmemberTomPerraultwasalsoinattendance. CityPlannerSteveGrittmanledthegroupthroughvariousdevelopmentscenariostohelp determinehownarrowlyorlooselythegroupwouldliketheordinancestandardstobewritten relativetotheEmbracingDowntownframework,zonemapanddesignguidelines. Withthefeedbackgainedfromthefirstworksession,Mr.Grittmanwillbepreparingadraft ordinance,tobepresentedinasetoftwoworkshopswiththeadhocgroup.Thefirst workshop,scheduledfor4:30PMonMarch6th,willcoverthepermittedandconditionaluses tobeincludedwithintheCCD.Asecondworkshop,tentativelyscheduledforTuesday, March20th at4:30PM,willcoverothercodeperformancestandardssuchassignage,lighting, parking,transitions,etc. AfinaldraftoftheCCDordinanceisthenexpectedtocomebeforetheCommissionineither AprilorMay,dependingontherefinementsneeded. DevelopmentSurvey Resultsofthedevelopmentsurveyareattached.Unfortunately,theCityonlyreceived5 responses,outof18surveysemailed.Overalltheresultsarefavorable,althoughtheclarityof applicationmaterialsmayneedtobereviewedandimproved. GrowthProjections NACispreparingaprojectscopeandestimateforupdatingthegrowthprojectionscontained withinChapter3oftheComprehensiveLandUsePlan.Thatinformation,alongwiththe recommendation,willbeforwardedtothePlanningCommissioninMarch. FordProject TheCityhasreceivedplansetsforthenextrequiredapplicationforthisredevelopment project.However,noformalapplicationwithcorrespondingfeesanddepositshasbeen submitted.Theapplicanthasbeennotifiedinwritingthattheapplicationisincomplete.No otherstatusupdatehasbeenprovidedbytheapplicant. HousingStatistics AttachedtothisreportistheJanuary2012marketreportfromtheMinneapolisAssociationof RealtorsforbothMonticelloandtheTwinCities.ThereportindicatesthatMonticellois laggingbehindthemetroinclosedsalesandmedianhomepricewhichseemstoindicatethat thehousingconditionscontinuetoimprovefrominsidethemetroout.Moreinformationwill beprovidedasitbecomesavailable. PlanningCommissionAgenda:2/21/12 2 BertramChainofLakes WrightCountyandtheCityofMonticelloweresuccessfulwith2012grantapplication requestsmadethroughtheDNRRegionalParksprogramandtheLegacyParks&Trails program.ThegrantawardstotheBertramChainofLakesunderthoseapplications totaljustover$833,000.TheawardissufficienttofundaPhaseIVacquisitionofparcels 9,12and10,whichincludesamajorityofsouthandcentralBertramLakeandtotalsover140 land/wateracres.TheWrightCountyBoardofCommissionershasalreadyapprovedtheir localshareofthematchforthesegrants.TheCityCouncilapproveditslocalmatchon February13th,2012.Closingonthepropertyisanticipatedinfallof2012. CitizenServiceDeskSummaryfor2011 TheCitizenServiceDeskwascreatedtoprovideaconvenientoptionforcitizensto communicatewithallCityOfficesandforCityStafftoaddressconcernsandquestions,while providingatraceabledatacollection. In2011,theCitizenServiceDeskreceived381inquiries,3%fewerthan2010.The DepartmentofBuildingSafetywasonthereceivingendof28%oftheseHelpDeskinquiries. Inquiriesincludedthoseforassistancewithblight/nuisanceandbuildingpermits,aswellas rentallicensing. LandUse-RelatedLegislation Attachedisasummaryofrecentland-userelatedlegislationmakingitswaythroughthis year’slegislativesession.PlanningCommissionwillcertainlybemadeawareshouldanyof thesebillsbecomelawandsubsequentlyrequireamendmentorreviewofCitycode. 5.Forareasratedas"ImprovementRequested",pleasemakesuggestions,citeexamplesorprovide additionalcomment. Moreplanningsessionsinvolvingthedeveloper,designteam,citystaff,aplanningCommission andcouncilmemberpriortoactuallypresentingtotheplanningcommissionandcouncil.This couldreallyeliminatealotofthedifficultyinpresentingaprojecttothesepublicbodiesinsuch ashorttimeatthehearings.Itcouldreallyexpeditethewholeprocessbyhavinganelected memberofeachofthesebodieshavingsubstantialknowledgeandunderstandingofthese projectspriortothepublichearing. 1/3/20127:37PM Betteronlineaccesstoapplicabledocumentationandcurrentinformationonline. 12/29/20113:26PM ItwouldgreatlyimproveandencouragenewbusinessinMonticelloiftheCitywouldbemore forthcomingwithwhatprojectswouldbeapprovedpriortothecollectionoffee'sandexpenses. 12/19/201111:13AM 7.IftheCityofMonticellocouldimproveoneortwospecificaspectsofits planning/development/constructionreviewprocess,whatwouldyourecommend? Expediencyontheentirereviewprocess.Applicationofcommonsenseonthosefewunforseen issuesthatalwayscomesup. 1/3/20127:37PM Moreaccesstocommissionmembersandcitycouncilthroughouttheconceptual/development stagestoeliminateanysurpriseswouldbehelpful.I'mnotsureifcitystaffreviewswiththem priortopublichearings. 12/29/20113:26PM ApprovalorDenialpriortocollectionoffees 12/19/201111:13AM Setguidelinesandgetridofthecouncilreviewprocess 12/18/20117:54PM 8.Ifyouhaveothercommentsorsuggestions,pleaseaddthemhere. Thecollaborativemeetingwasexcellent.Wehaveagreatunderstandingofwhatthecity's expectationsarepriortoreallygettingintoit. 12/29/20113:26PM Checkfeesofothercitiesandcomparetoyours.Youareoffthechartsonfees,mostlyinthe areaofTRUNK... 12/18/20117:54PM 20112012+ / –20112012+ / – New Listings 17 16 - 5.9%17 16 - 5.9% Closed Sales 11 9 - 18.2%11 9 - 18.2% Median Sales Price*$150,000 $127,400 - 15.1%$150,000 $127,400 - 15.1% Average Sales Price*$135,968 $122,367 - 10.0%$135,968 $122,367 - 10.0% Price Per Square Foot*$77 $69 - 10.1%$77 $69 - 10.1% Percent of Original List Price Received*88.5%91.3%+ 3.2%88.5%91.3%+ 3.2% Days on Market Until Sale 137 109 - 20.3%137 109 - 20.3% Inventory of Homes for Sale 108 63 - 41.7%------ Months Supply of Inventory 6.5 3.5 - 46.0%------ Local Market Update – January 2012 A RESEARCH TOOL PROVIDED BY THE MINNEAPOLIS AREA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® - 5.9%- 18.2%- 15.1% Change in New Listings Change in Closed Sales Change in Median Sales Price January Year to Date Monticello * Does not account for seller concessions. | Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. 17 16 Year to Date 2011 2012 17 16 January 2011 2012 ** Each dot represents the change in median sales price from the prior year using a 6-month weighted average. This means that each of the 6 months used in a dot are proportioned according to their share of sales duringthatperiod|CurrentasofFebruary82012AlldatafromRegionalMultipleListingServiceInc|Poweredby10KResearchandMarketing|SponsoredbyRoyalCreditUnionwwwrcuorg Twin Cities Region Monticello -35% -30% -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% + 5% + 10% + 15% 1-20087-20081-20097-20091-20107-20101-20117-20111-2012 Change in Median Sales Price from Prior Year (6-Month Average)**b a 11 9 New Listings Closed Sales -18.2%-5.9% 11 9 New Listings Closed Sales -18.2%-5.9% during that period. | Current as of February 8, 2012. All data from Regional Multiple Listing Service, Inc. | Powered by 10K Research and Marketing. | Sponsored by Royal Credit Union www.rcu.org 20112012+ / –20112012+ / – New Listings 5,617 5,112 - 9.0%5,617 5,112 - 9.0% Closed Sales 2,151 2,417 + 12.4%2,151 2,417 + 12.4% Median Sales Price*$145,000 $140,000 - 3.4%$145,000 $140,000 - 3.4% Average Sales Price*$187,100 $181,544 - 3.0%$187,100 $181,544 - 3.0% Price Per Square Foot*$90 $88 - 3.0%$90 $88 - 3.0% Percent of Original List Price Received*88.3%91.2%+ 3.3%88.3%91.2%+ 3.3% Days on Market Until Sale 155 142 - 8.3%155 142 - 8.3% Inventory of Homes for Sale 22,897 16,463 - 28.1%------ Months Supply of Inventory 7.2 4.6 - 35.7%------ Local Market Update – January 2012 A RESEARCH TOOL PROVIDED BY THE MINNEAPOLIS AREA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® - 9.0%+ 12.4%- 3.4% Change in New Listings Change in Closed Sales Change in Median Sales Price January Year to Date Twin Cities Region * Does not account for seller concessions. | Activity for one month can sometimes look extreme due to small sample size. 5,617 5,112 Year to Date 2011 2012 5,617 5,112 January 2011 2012 ** Each dot represents the change in median sales price from the prior year using a 6-month weighted average. This means that each of the 6 months used in a dot are proportioned according to their share of sales duringthatperiod.|CurrentasofFebruary8,2012.AlldatafromRegionalMultipleListingService,Inc.|Poweredby10KResearchandMarketing.|SponsoredbyRoyalCreditUnionwww.rcu.org Twin Cities Region Twin Cities Region -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% + 5% + 10% 1-20087-20081-20097-20091-20107-20101-20117-20111-2012 Change in Median Sales Price from Prior Year (6-Month Average)**b a 5,617 2,151 5,112 2,417 New Listings Closed Sales Year to Date 2011 2012 + 12.4%-9.0% 5,617 2,151 5,112 2,417 New Listings Closed Sales January 2011 2012 + 12.4%-9.0% during that period. | Current as of February 8, 2012. All data from Regional Multiple Listing Service, Inc. | Powered by 10K Research and Marketing. | Sponsored by Royal Credit Union www.rcu.org -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% + 5% + 10% 1-20087-20081-20097-20091-20107-20101-20117-20111-2012 Change in Median Sales Price from Prior Year (6-Month Average)**b a 5,617 2,151 5,112 2,417 New Listings Closed Sales Year to Date 2011 2012 + 12.4%-9.0% 5,617 2,151 5,112 2,417 New Listings Closed Sales January 2011 2012 + 12.4%-9.0% From:MnAPA[mnapa@buffleheadweb.net] Sent:Tuesday,February14,20122:07PM To:AngelaSchumann Subject:StatutoryChangestoLocalDevelopmentMoratoria,LandDedication, andFeesAreUnderway Legislationproposingtochangemunicipalandcountyrequirementsforestablishinginterimordinances forthepurposesofevaluatingoramendinglocalplansandofficialcontrolsreceiveditsfirsthearinginthe GovernmentOperationsandElectionsCommittee onJanuary26andisexpectedtoreceiveadditional considerationandactioninFebruary.Themoratoriumrestrictionlegislationwasfirstintroducedin2011 asHF389andSF270. Unlikepreviousyears,consensusisemergingthatachangetotheuseofdevelopmentmoratoriaand subdivisionprovisionswilllikelybebroughttothefloorsoftheMinnesotaHouseandSenateforactionin 2012. Ingeneral,HF389(asdraftedinamendmentA2)prohibitsinterim(moratorium)resolutionsorordinances thatwould“halt,delay,orimpede,considerationofause,development,orsubdivisionforwhicha completeapplicationispending.”HF389A2alsochangesmunicipalsubdivisionbyregulatingdedication andfeesanddifferentiatingprocessesforparksandopenspacefromotherinfrastructure. Underthelegislation,bothmunicipalitiesandcountieswouldrequireatendaynoticeandlocalhearing requirement.Ifpassed,countyandmunicipallocalgoverningbodieswouldneedtosecurea supermajority(2/3)approvalinordertoenactaninterimordinance.Finally,localgovernmentswouldbe prohibitedfrominstitutinganinterimordinanceonanylanduseorsubdivisionapplicationsthatare characterizedas“complete”atthetimetheordinanceisadopted.Thebillidentifiesthatthecompleteness oftheapplicationisdeterminedby“meetingtherequirements”oftheordinanceandanapplicationthatis notcompletemustbereturnedtotheapplicantwithanexplanationandprovideforanopportunityto correct“thedeficiency.”Thebillprovidesthattheserestrictionsdonotapplyto“adult-use”or“sexually orientedbusinesses”orforaproposedusethatwouldbeconsidereda“nuisance”asdefinedin MinnesotaStatutessection561.01.” Ifthehouseversionofthebillbecamelawunderthe“A2”amendmentlanguagethatispendingin committee,interimordinancemoratoriumscouldnotbeinitiatedforcompletedsubdivisionapplications andwould: prohibitmunicipalitiesfromrequiringlanddedicationorpaymentoffeesinadevelopment contractthatarenotauthorizedbystatuteoragreedtobyallparties; requirethatfinancialsecurityforanyworkauthorizedunderadevelopmentcontract“havea roughproportionalitytotheworktobecompletedbyeitherthemunicipalityortheapplicant;and “unlessotherwiseagreed,atleastthreedaysbeforeapproval,themunicipalitymustprovidea copyofthecompletedevelopmentcontract,includingallexhibits,totheapplicant.” TheamendmentofferedintheJanuary26thmeetingalsorecodesMinnesotaStatutessection462.358, subdivision2bbyrequiringsubdivisionregulationstorequire“areasonableportionofthebuildableland” tobededicatedfor“streets,roads,sewers,electric,gas,andwaterfacilities,stormwaterdrainageand holdareasorponds,andsimilarutilitiesandimprovements. Theamendmentthendifferentiatesinfrastructurefromparksandopenspacededicationorin-lieufeesby addinganewsubdivisiontoMinnesotaStatutessection462.358.Thenewsubdivisionasdrafted: Allowsthemunicipalityto“choosetoacceptacashfeeassetbyordinancefromtheapplicantfor someorallofthenewlotscreatedinthesubdivision,basedonthe“averagefairmarketvalue”of theunplattedlandforwhichparkfeeshavenotalreadybeenpaid; defines"fairmarketvalue"forthepurposesofestablishingdedicationfeesas“thevalue negotiatedbetweenthemunicipalityandtheapplicant,orthemarketvalueofthepropertyas determinedbythemunicipalitybasedonanindependentappraisal; providesthatifamunicipalityacceptsacashfeeforaredevelopmentproject,thefeemustbe basedonlyonthenewvaluearisingfromtheredevelopment;and providesthatifamunicipalitychoosestoacceptacashfeeinlieuofdedicatedland,the municipalitymaycollectthefeeatanytimeaftertheapplicanthassubmittedbuildingpermitsfor developmentoftheapprovedsubdivisionandbeforecompletionofdevelopment. Changestointerimordinancerequirementsandmunicipalsubdivisionregulationsrelatingtoconditionsin adevelopmentcontract arecontainedinbothHF389andSF270.Provisionsrelatingtolanddedication andfeesweredraftedfortheHF389A2amendmentinGovernmentOperationsandElections Committee. AlthoughcommitteeactionwastakenonSF270in2011,thebillbeginsinitssamecommitteeandawaits newactionduringthe2012session. Plannersseekingtosubmitcommentsregardingthebill’spotentialaffectstolocalplanningmaychoose toprovidecommentsdirectlytotheirlegislatorsorthefollowingorganizationsthatrepresentstheinterests ofMinnesota’scities,counties,andtownships: TheLeagueofMinnesotaCities(www.lmc.org) TheAssociationofMinnesotaCounties(www.mncounties.org) TheMinnesotaAssociationofTownships(http://mntownships.org/) PlannersmayalsochoosetouseAPAMNasaconduitforcomments.Commentsregardingthe legislationmayalsobesentbyemailtoLegislativeCommitteeMemberMattBrownat mbrown@coonrapidsmn.gov. HF389Links BillStatus https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=House&f=HF0389&ssn=0& y=2011&ls=87 BillSummary(ForA2AmendmentintroducedintheJanuary26 GovernmentOperationsandElections CommitteeHearing) http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/bs/87/HF0389.html BillText(ForA2AmendmentintroducedintheJanuary26 GovernmentOperationsandElections CommitteeHearing) http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/docs/H0389A2.pdf