Planning Commission Agenda 06-05-2012
REGULAR MEETING
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, June 5th, 2012
6:00 PM
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
CCD AD HOC TASK FORCE MEETS AT 4:00 PM PRIOR TO REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING
Commissioners: Brad Fyle, Charlotte Gabler, William Spartz, and Barry Voight
Staff: Angela Schumann, Ron Hackenmueller, Steve Grittman
1. Call to order.
2. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes.
a. Regular Meeting of May 1st, 2012
b. Special Meeting of May 15th, 2012
3. Citizen Comments.
4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Variance from required building setbacks
for a detached accessory structure in an R-1 (Single-Family Residential) District.
Applicant: Bauer Construction, Inc.
Location: Lot 10, Block 1, Briar Oakes Estates 2nd, 990 Shady Oak Circle
PID 155097001100
6. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Administrative Lot Combination and
Conditional Use Permit for detached accessory structure an R-2 (Single & Two-Family
Residential) District.
Applicant: Michaelis, Jeff
Property Location: Lots 1 & 2, Block 38, Lower Monticello, 618 and 630 East 4th Street
7. Public Hearing - Consideration of request for Interim Use Permit for a School use in an I-
2 (Heavy Industrial) District.
Applicant: Monticello Public Schools
Property Location: Lot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, 1248 Edmonson Avenue
8. Transportation Advisory Committee Appointment
9. Community Development Director’s Report
10. Adjourn.
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Variance from the minimum 6 foot
building separation requirement in the R-1, Single Family District for Lot 10, Block
1, Briar Oaks Plat 2 (990 Shady Oak Circle), PID: 155-097-001100. Applicant: Chip
Bauer Construction, Inc. (NAC)
Property: 990 Shady Oak Circle
The site is located South of Briar Oaks Boulevard and east
of Jason Avenue Northeast. The property is bordered on
the north, south and west by single family residential uses.
A wetland borders the property on the east.
Planning Case Number: 2012-016
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Variance to allow a building separation less than 6 feet.
Deadline for Decision: July 8, 2012
Land Use Designation: Places to Live
Zoning Designation: R-1, Single Family Residence District
The purpose of the "R-1" single family district is to
provide for low density, single family, detached
residential dwelling units and directly related
complementary uses.
Current Site Use: The site is occupied by a single family residence.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: R-1, Single Family Residential
East: R-1, Wetland and Single Family Residential
South: R-1, Single Family Residential
West: R-1, Single Family Residential
1
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Project Description:
The applicant wishes to construct a 126 square foot (9' x 14') detached accessory
building within one foot of the home. Specifically, the building would be placed beneath
an existing deck located on the east side of the residence. According to Section 5.3(b) of
the Ordinance, detached accessory buildings must be six (6) feet or more from any other
building or structure on the same lot.
According to the applicant, the structure would be built upon a 4 inch concrete slab and
be finished in steel siding which would match that used upon the home. The building
would have shed roof measuring just over 8 feet at its highest point. The roof is proposed
to be finished in steel, the color of which would match the home. The applicant feels that
placement of the building beneath the deck will provide needed storage without
disrupting rear yard views.
Ordinance Requirements:
Section 2.4(C)(4)(a) of the Zoning Ordinance states that approval of a variance may only
be made upon a determination that practical difficulties will result based on all of a
certain set of criteria. The criteria, as well as a Staff response, is provided below:
(i) The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if the
provisions of the Ordinance are strictly applied.
Staff Response. While the "buildable" area of the subject property's rear
yard is somewhat limited by a wetland, extensive rear yard land area does
exist on site to construct the building without the need for the variance.
To be noted is that a significant difference exists between the "wetland
limits" as depicted upon the submitted site survey and the rear yard
drainage and utility easement boundary. In review of an aerial photograph
of the site, it appears that the wetland boundary follows the easement line
and not the "wetland limits" identified upon the survey. The aerial
photograph also depicts a play structure well within the "wetland limits"
identified on the site survey.
Also to be noted is that if the building were to be attached to the home (as
an addition), the processing of the setback variance would not be
necessary.
In the opinion of staff, the subject property can still be put to reasonable
use if the provisions of the Ordinance are applied.
(ii) The circumstances rendering the property unusable are unique to the
property.
2
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Staff Response. The subject property is not considered unusable. Ample
land area exists within the rear yard to construct the proposed detached
accessory structure and meet applicable setbacks (including the 6 foot
building separation setback).
Moreover, the primary rationale for the shed in the proposed location is to
avoid views from the home — an argument that virtually any property
owner could make if that were the standard of review. This makes it clear
that the issue is not unique to this property, and secondly, that such a
rationale would contribute to the establishment of a precedent for other
similar requests.
(iii) The circumstances rendering the property unusable were not created by
the owner thereof.
Staff Response. As noted, the subject property is not considered
"unusable", and as such, this factor is not met. While the abutting wetland
overlays a portion of the subject property, a significant amount of usable
(and buildable) land remains in the rear yard.
(iv) A variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
Staff Response. The neighborhood in which the accessory structure is
proposed appears to have similar -sized detached accessory structures. In
this regard, the construction of the proposed 126 square foot building
would not alter the character of the neighborhood (regardless of its
location in the rear yard).
(v) Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a sufficient basis for
a Variance if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of
the regulation.
Staff Response. It is the opinion of staff that reasonable use of the subject
property exists under the terms of the Ordinance regulations. It appears
that the request for variance relates to more the applicant's desire to retain
rear yard open space than to economic considerations.
Other Considerations. The purpose of the six foot separation requirement relates to
both a fire code requirement and to various zoning -related "property condition" issues.
Under normal circumstances, residential structures must maintain a six foot separation, or
include a firewall improvement to impede the spread of fire from one structure to the
other. From a zoning standpoint, structures that are too close to each other commonly
3
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
end up as locations where debris and junk gets stored, or weeds grow without the ability
to adequately maintain the space. Similarly, building materials may deteriorate without
space to maintain them. As in most zoning codes, Monticello's ordinance requires a
separation for zoning purposes, and sets that separation at six feet since it tracks with the
fire code standard.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Decision 1: Adopting Resolution No. 2012-053 approving a Variance from the
minimum 6 foot building separation requirement in the R-1, Single Family District
as requested at 990 Shady Oak Circle.
1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2012 - 053 approving the Variance from the
minimum 6 foot building separation requirement as proposed in the application of
May 5, 2012, contingent on compliance with those conditions specified in Exhibit
Z.
2. Motion to denying Resolution 2012 - 053 for a Variance from the minimum 6 foot
building separation requirement as, based upon findings to be made by the
Planning Commission, and consistent with those attached to this report in Exhibit
Y.
3. Motion to table action on the request, pending additional information as identified
by the Planning Commission and staff report.
C. STAFF RECOMMNDATION
Staff does not feel that the variance evaluation criteria of the Ordinance have been
demonstrated. In review of the submitted application materials, it appears that ample
land area exists within the rear yard of the subject site to construct the proposed detached
accessory structure and meet applicable setbacks (including the 6 foot building separation
setback). The variance could also be avoided by simply constructing an addition to the
home (underneath the deck). As a result, staff is unable recommend approval of the
requested variance.
Should City Officials be inclined to approve the request however, we would recommend
that the conditions listed in attached Exhibit Z apply.
10
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A.
Aerial Image
B.
Applicant Narrative
C.
Site Plan / Survey
D.
Site Photographs
E.
Building Plans
F.
Resolution 2012-053
G.
Draft findings of Denial
Z.
Conditions of Approval
5
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
ConsiderationofarequestforVariancefromrequiredbuildingsetbacksforadetachedaccessorystructureinanR-1(Single-FamilyResidential)District
Lot10,Block1,BriarOakesEstates2nd,990ShadyOakCircle,PID#155-097-001100
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012 —053
Date: June 5, 2012 Resolution No. 2012-053
Motion By: Commissioner Seconded By: Commissioner
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED SIX FOOT BUILDING
SEPARATION BETWEEN A PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
WHEREAS, Chip Bauer, on behalf of the property owners at 990 Shady Oak Circle, has requested a
variance from the zoning ordinance requirement that residential buildings are separated by at least six
feet; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application for Variance pursuant to the
regulations of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 5th, 2012 on the application and the
applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are
incorporated by reference into the resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in
relation to the recommendation of approval:
1. The application is consistent with the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan for Places to Live.
2. The proposed accessory building will meet both the intent and the specific standards of the
zoning ordinance.
3. The parcel is of inadequate size to support the proposed accessory building in a compliant
location.
4. The proposed structure improves aesthetics on the site by sheltering the accessory structure in a
location where it will be less visually prominent.
5. The shape and environmental conditions on the property create practical difficulties in complying
with the building separation requirement; and
M
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
6. Such conditions creating the practical difficulties are unique to the property in question and not
created by the applicant; and
7. The use is not expected to be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or welfare of persons
residing near the use.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota:
1. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.357, the application for Variance is hereby approved by the
Planning Commission, sitting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals.
2. The accessory building shall be utilized solely for the storage of residential personal
property of the occupant of the principal dwelling.
3. The building shall be constructed in such a way that complies with the applicable fire
code regulations.
4. The accessory building shall match the color and finish materials of the principal
dwelling.
5. A building permit shall be received and all requirements imposed by it be satisfied.
ADOPTED this 5t' day of June 2012, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota.
ATTEST:
Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
D
Bill Spartz, Chair
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Exhibit G
Draft Findings of Denial
990 Shady Oak Circle
Variance for Accessory Building Separation
1. The property has a number of available options for shed location that comply with
Zoning Ordinance regulations.
2. Options include attaching the accessory building to the principal building, or placement
on the property in locations that meet the setback and building separation standards.
3. With such options, there are no practical difficulties in complying with the code.
4. The conditions leading to the variance request (visibility of the proposed building) are
common to many residential properties, and as such, are not unique as required by the
zoning ordinance.
5. Approval of the variance as requested would tend to create a precedent for other
residential property owners in accessory building placement.
0
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval
Chip Bauer Construction, Inc.
Setback Variance at 990 Shady Oak Circle
1. The accessory building shall be utilized solely for the storage of residential personal
property of the occupant of the principal dwelling.
2. The building shall be constructed in such a way that complies with the applicable fire
code regulations.
3. The accessory building shall match the color and finish materials of the principal
dwelling.
4. A building permit shall be received and all requirements imposed by it be satisfied.
7
6.
A.
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Simple Subdivision, Administrative
Lot Combination, and Conditional Use Permit for a detached accessory structure in
an R-2 (Single & Two -Family Residential) District. PIDs: 155-015-038080 and 155-
015-038010. Applicant: Jeffrey Michaelis (NAC)
Property: Lots 1 & 2, Block 38, Lower Monticello
618 and 630 East 4th Street
The two sites which are part of the simple subdivision
application are located east of Ramsey Street between East
4th Street and the Burlington Northern rail line.
Planning Case Number: 2012-019
REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Simple Subdivision and Administrative Lot Combination to
convey a portion of 618 East 4th Street to 630 East 4th Street
and a Conditional Use Permit to allow more than 1,200
square feet of accessory storage space upon the expanded
easterly property (630 East 4th Street). A total of 1,440
square feet of accessory use space is proposed for the site.
Deadline for Decision: July 9th, 2012
Land Use Designation: Places to Live
Zoning Designation: R-2, Single and Two Family District
The purpose of the "R-2" single and two-family residential
district is to provide for low to moderate density one and
two unit dwellings and directly related complementary
uses.
Current Site Use: Single family residential uses presently exist upon both 618
and 630 East 4th Street.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: R-2, Single Family Residential
East: B-1, Clinic/office
South: R-3, Multiple -Family Residential
West: R, 2, Single Family Residential
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Project Description:
The applicant wishes to acquire approximately 7,720 square feet of land from the
abutting 27,400 square foot parcel to the west (618 East 41h Street) and combine it with
his property (addressed 630 East 4th Street). To accommodate such conveyance, the
processing of a simple subdivision is required.
Within the land area to be acquired, the applicant wishes to construct a 576 square foot
(24' x 24') detached accessory garage. The applicant's home presently has an 864 square
foot attached garage. In total, 1,440 square feet of accessory storage space would exist
upon his property.
The applicant intends to use the detached accessory structure for the storage of a collector
car, snowmobiles, ATV's and lawn/garden equipment.
Simple Subdivision. Prior to processing a conditional use permit for the proposed
accessory building, the land upon which the building is to be constructed must be
acquired and combined with the applicant's parcel via simple subdivision. Basically, the
subdivision involves the conveyance of the southern 116 feet of the neighboring property
(Parcel B) to the west to the subject property (Parcel Q.
In consideration of the subdivision request, an assurance should be made that no
nonconforming conditions will be created as a result of such action. Within R-2 Districts
(Original Plat), a minimum lot area of 10,890 square feet is required. Both proposed lots
exceed this minimum area requirement. Further, the subdivision will not create any
nonconforming setbacks.
The proposed subdivision is considered relatively straight forward. Of minor concern
however, is the location of the north lot line of Parcel B which will result in the creation
of an additional corner monument. Over time, additional lot corners sometimes result in
property line disputes. This can be a concern, but is not considered to be reason to deny
the request, given the conditions prevalent in the neighborhood.
The City Engineer should provide additional comment on the proposed simple
subdivision including and specific recommendations related to grading drainage and
related easements.
Conditional Use Permit. According to the Ordinance, the combination of attached
garages and detached accessory buildings in residential zoning districts may not exceed
1,200 square feet except by conditional use permit. The applicant is proposing a total of
1,440 square feet upon the expanded site.
2
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
CUP Evaluation Criteria:
In consideration of conditional use permit applications, Chapter 2.4 (D) of the
Ordinance establishes a number of criteria that must be satisfied. These are as
follows:
(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 5 for the proposed use.
Accessory Building Requirements
Chapter 5.3.D. of the Ordinance states that if more than 1,200 square feet of
accessory storage space is to be allowed upon a residentially zoned lot, certain
conditions must be satisfied. The following is a listing of the various conditions
followed by a staff response:
1. The total accessory storage space shall not exceed 1, 500 square feet.
Staff Response. A total of 1,440 square feet of accessory storage space is
proposed. Thus, this requirement has been satisfied.
3
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
2. Accessory building space is to be utilized solely for the storage of
residential personal property of the occupant of the principal dwelling,
and no accessory building space is to be utilized for commercial purposes.
Staff Response. The applicant intends to use the detached accessory
structure for the storage of a collector car, snowmobiles, ATV's and
lawn/garden equipment. As a condition of CUP approval, commercial
activities will be prohibited in both the attached and detached garages.
3. The parcel on which the accessory building is to be located is of sufficient
size such that the building will not crowd the open space on the lot.
Staff Response. The expanded lot will sufficiently accommodate the
proposed accessory building as evidenced by compliance with applicable
setbacks. No driveway access to the accessory building is proposed which
will minimize site impacts.
4. The accessory building will not be so large as to have an adverse effect on
the architectural character or reasonable residential use of the
surrounding property.
Staff Response. The building is not expected to negatively impact
surrounding residential properties. The accessory building measures 576
square feet in size (24' x 24') which is typical of a two -stall garage. The
building is to be located in the southwest corner of the site, along the
adjacent rail line. In such area, similarly -sized detached structures presently
exist.
While it is assumed that the building's overhead garage door is to face east,
this should be clarified upon the submitted building elevation.
5. The accessory buildings shall be constructed to be similar to the principal
building in architectural style and building materials.
Staff Response. According to the applicant, the detached accessory building
will match the existing home to the extent possible. The building will be
finished in horizontal lap siding which will be of similar texture, color and
width as that used upon the applicant's home.
4
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Decision 1: Recommending Resolution 2012 — 054 approving the Simple
Subdivision (to convey a portion of 618 East 4th Street to 630 East 4th Street) as
depicted upon the certificate of survey dated May 14, 2012.
1. Motion to approve Resolution 2012 — 054 recommending approval of the Simple
Subdivision application dated May 10th, 2012, contingent on compliance with
those conditions specified in Exhibit Z.
2. Motion to deny Resolution 2012 - 056 recommending a Simple Subdivision,
based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission.
3. Motion to table action on the request, pending additional information as identified
by the Planning Commission and staff report.
Decision 2: Recommending Resolution No. 2012-054 approving a Conditional Use
Permit to allow more than 1,200 square feet of accessory storage space upon
property located at 630 East 4th Street.
1. Motion to approve Resolution 2012 — 054 recommending approval of the
Conditional Use Permit to allow more than 1,200 square feet of accessory storage
space upon the subject property as proposed in the application dated May ,
2012, contingent on compliance with those conditions specified in Exhibit Z.
2. Motion to deny Resolution 2012 - 054 recommending a Conditional Use Permit to
allow more than 1,200 square feet of accessory storage space upon the subject
property, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission.
3. Motion to table action on the request, pending additional information as identified
by the Planning Commission and staff report.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z, staff recommends approval of the Simple
Subdivision and Conditional Use Permit as presented.
5
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Aerial Image
B. Applicant Narrative
C. Certificate of Survey Detail, Garage
D. Building Elevations
E. Floor Plan
F. Certificate of Survey, Subdivision & Combination
G. Resolution 2012-054
Z. Exhibit Z - Conditions of Approval
0
ConsiderationofarequestforSimpleSubdivision,AdministrativeLotCombination,andConditionalUsePermitforadetached accessorystruc-
tureinanR-2(Single&TwoFamilyResidential)District
Lot1&partofLot2,Block38,LowerMonticello,630E.4thStreet,PID#:155-015-038010&155-015-038080
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012 —054
Date: June 5, 2012 Resolution No. 2012 -
Motion By: Commissioner Seconded By: Commissioner
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION RELOCATING A LOT LINE AND A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GARAGE SPACE OF MORE THAN 1,200 SQUARE FEET
ON A RESIDENTIAL PARCEL.
WHEREAS, John Michaelis proposes to acquire a parcel of land from a neighboring property owner at
618 East 4"' Street and add it to his current property at 630 East 4t" Street; and
WHEREAS, John Michaelis proposes to construct a detached garage on the newly acquired property,
resulting in garage space on the property of more than 1,200 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application for Subdivision and Conditional Use
Permit pursuant to the regulations of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 5th, 2012 on the application and the
applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are
incorporated by reference into the resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in
relation to the recommendation of approval:
1. The application is consistent with the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan for Places to Live.
2. The proposed subdivision and garage building will meet both the intent and the specific standards
of the zoning ordinance.
3. The parcel is of adequate size to support the proposed accessory building in a compliant location.
4. The parcels will both exceed the zoning regulations for lot size following the subdivision.
5. The proposed building will meet all zoning ordinance regulations, including those requirements
for accessory buildings on residential parcels.
91
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
6. The use is not expected to be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or welfare of persons
residing near the use.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota:
1. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.358, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
subdivision and lot combination as proposed.
2. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.357, the application for Conditional Use Permit is hereby
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission.
3. A building permit for the accessory structure shall not be issued until such time as the
certificate of survey has been recorded.
4. Accessory building space (attached and detached) shall be utilized solely for the
storage of residential personal property of the occupant of the principal dwelling.
5. No accessory building space shall be utilized for commercial purposes.
6. The submitted accessory building elevations shall be modified to specify the direction
of the structure's overhead door upon the subject site.
7. Exterior finish materials and color of the detached accessory building shall match the
site's principal structure.
8. Only one driveway is permitted for the single family parcel, in accordance with the
Zoning Ordinance regulations for residential property.
ADOPTED this 5'h day of June 2012, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota.
ATTEST:
Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
0
Bill Spartz, Chair
Planning Commission Agenda — 6/5/12
Exhibit Z
Simple Subdivision Conditions of Approval
618 East 4th Street and 630 East 4th Street
1. The City Engineer provide comment and recommendation regarding grading, drainage
and related easement issues.
2. The applicant shall record the certificate of survey with the County Recorder within 100
days of City Council approval.
Conditional Use Permit Conditions of Approval
630 East 4th Street
1. The City approve the requested Simple Subdivision as graphically depicted upon the
certificate of survey dated May 14, 2012.
2. A building permit for the accessory structure shall not be issued until such time as the
certificate of survey has been recorded.
3. Accessory building space (attached and detached) shall be utilized solely for the storage
of residential personal property of the occupant of the principal dwelling.
4. No accessory building space shall be utilized for commercial purposes.
5. The submitted accessory building elevations shall be modified to specify the direction of
the structure's overhead door upon the subject site.
6. Exterior finish materials and color of the detached accessory building shall match the
site's principal structure.
7. Only one driveway is permitted for the single family parcel, in accordance with the
Zoning Ordinance regulations for residential property.
7
Planning Commission Agenda — 06/05/12
7. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request to extend an existing Interim Use Permit
for the Alternative Learning Program (ALP). Applicant: Monticello Independent
School District (AS/NAC)
Property: Legal: Lot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park
Address: 1208 Edmonson Avenue
Planning Case Number: 2012-018
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s):
Deadline for Decision:
Land Use Designation:
Zoning Designation:
Current Site Use:
Surrounding Land Uses:
North:
Interim Use Permit extension
July 3rd, 2012 (60 days)
"Places to Shop"
I-2, Heavy Industrial
The purpose of the "I-2"
Alternative Learning Program
Office, zoned B-2
East:
Industrial, zoned 1-2
South:
Industrial, zoned 1-2
West:
Vacant, zoned B-4
Project Description: Extension of an existing three-year interim use permit for
Monticello School District Independent Learning Program
(ALP).
ANALYSIS
The Alternative Learning Program of the Monticello School District is seeking approval
for an extension of their Interim Use Permit to operate a K-12 education program in an I-
2, Heavy Industrial, zoning district.
The original permit was considered for the 1997-1998 school year, and was approved
concurrent with an ordinance amendment imposing conditions including the following:
Planning Commission Agenda — 06/05/12
1. A short-term termination date is established to ensure that the City's industrial
development objectives were not affected by the location of the school facility in
industrial areas.
2. The building was remodeled only to the extent that convenient re -use by office or
industrial users would still be possible.
3. The parking was judged to be adequate for the school use of the property.
In relationship to the first condition, the City has extended this interim use permit for five
3 -year terms since the original application. Each time, the discussion by both the
Planning Commission and City Council has related to the potential for an alternative
location or a more permanent approval. However, it was determined that the temporary
use was appropriate given the minimal impact on surrounding industrial properties and
the lack of immediate need for industrial space at that location. The principal building
has also continued to comply with conditions 2 and 3. No concerns have been logged by
the City related to the use or parking needs on site.
It should be noted that the long range land use designation for the parcel has from
Industrial to "Place to Shop" with the adoption of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The
parcel's designation as "Places to Shop" in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan was
due to two primary factors. The structure on the parcel, although zoned
industrial, was likely most conducive to an office or limited commercial use.
Secondly, the Comprehensive Plan recognized the parcels both north and south
of Chelsea along Edmonson as a "gateway" from the east to the commercial
sector lying along Highway 25. Thus, both sides of Chelsea immediately east of
Edmonson were guided "Places to Shop".
However, rezoning the property to a commercial zoning district at this time would
exclude the K-12 Education use, as such use is not listed as either conditional or interim
in any commercial zoning district. Rather, K-12 Education uses are allowed by interim
use permit in the I-1 and I-2 Districts. Therefore, the existing zoning is appropriate given
the current and proposed continued use.
In regard to the nature of the use as an interim or temporary use, the applicant has
indicated that they would like the ability to continue utilizing the site for as long as
possible. This is due to the success of the program in its location outside of the
traditional school campus setting. The ordinance does not set a maximum number of
extensions for interim use permits, nor does it mandate a limitation on the duration of the
permit. The City has discretion for both items. The ordinance does require that the
applicant enter into a consent agreement with the City which outlines the interim nature
of the use and assigns approved conditions.
In addition to the specific conditions assigned with the original interim use permit, zoning
ordinance 5.2(D)(7) stipulates additional requirements as follows.
N
Planning Commission Agenda — 06/05/12
K-12 Schools (public or private):
(a) Educational institutions on parcels exceeding 20,000 square feet in area shall be
located with direct frontage on, and access to, a collector or arterial street.
(b) The buildings are set back from adjoining residential districts a distance no less than
double the adjoining residential setback
The proposed interim use complies with both of these requirements.
Site Conditions
The principal building and lot comply with base zoning regulations, with the exception of
building setback and curbing of required parking area.
The side building setback on the north side of the property is required to be 15'; the
building appears to be set back only 8' from the property line. This is an existing non-
conformity which is not impacted or changed by this application.
The existing parking lot is paved as required by ordinance. However, no concrete
curbing exists around the parking area perimeter. This is an existing site condition, but
should parking needs on site require a parking area expansion, the parking lot will be
required to be curbed.
There is an also an existing detached accessory building on the site, which includes a
fenced outdoor storage area. Outdoor storage is permitted as an accessory use in the I-2
District. The current storage area meets all required ordinance regulations (per Section
5.3(1))(22)(c)) for such storage.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Motion to recommend approval of the Interim Use Permit for the Alternative
Learning Program, based on a finding that the use continues to raise no issues
with the surrounding users, and continues to comply with the conditions above,
subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z.
2. Motion to recommend denial of the Interim Use Permit, based on a finding that
the site should revert to an industrial use consistent with the current zoning.
3. Motion of other.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the IUP. The continued use of the site as an interim
educational use is an appropriate transitional use for the site given its industrial zoning
and commercial land use designation. The surrounding area will continue to develop
over the next three -five years. At the end of the requested IUP's next three-year term, the
City may then consider development patterns in the area in determining whether to allow
10
Planning Commission Agenda — 06/05/12
the interim use permit to expire and to zone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As
such, the interim permit may be the best alternative at this time. The conditions of the
approval have thus been changed to reflect the change in land use designation.
SUPPORTING DATA
Exhibit A:
Applicant Narrative
Exhibit B:
Site Location Map
Exhibit C
Site Images
Exhibit D:
Staff Report of 09/02/97
Exhibit E:
Planning Commission and City Council Minutes for 1997 Request
Exhibit F:
Planning Commission Minutes of 06/02/09
Exhibit G:
Use Table
Exhibit H:
2012 Official Zoning Map
Exhibit I:
Official Land Use Map
Exhibit Z:
Conditions of Approval
Exhibit Z
Interim Use Permit —1248 Edmonson Avenue NE
Monticello School District ALP
1. A short-term termination date of three years is established to ensure that the City's
development objectives are not affected by the location of the school facility.
2. The building shall be remodeled only to the extent that convenient re -use would still be
possible.
3. The parking shall be evaluated annually during the term of the interim use permit to
determine adequacy for the interim school use of the property. Any required expansion
of the parking area to meet parking needs will require curbed perimeter.
2
Planning Commission Agenda – 6/05/12
1
8. Transportation Advisory Committee Appointment.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
With the resignation of Planning Commission Chairman Rod Dragsten, the Planning
Commission representation seat is open on the City’s Transportation Advisory
Committee (TAC).
The Commission is therefore asked to appoint a new representative to the TAC. The
representative acts as the liaison between the two bodies.
The TAC is responsible for assisting the City in defining transportation needs,
lobbying support for transportation projects/studies, providing public education
support, developing funding sources, and establishing transportation investment
priorities, as well as to serve as a platform for future regional planning initiatives.
The TAC meets every other month at 7:30 AM at the Monticello City Hall.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to appoint Commissioner _________ to serve as the Planning Commission
representative to the Transportation Advisory Committee.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
None.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
Planning Commission Agenda – 6/05/12
1
9. Community Development Director’s Report.
Public Nuisance
This spring, the City sent letters to all property owners of large numbers of vacant
residential lots and property owners of large commercial/industrial properties
regarding the need to comply with City codes for noxious weeds and grass height.
Along with increased monitoring of sign violations (related to interim temp sign
ordinance), the Department of Building Safety has been asked to step up inspection
on these vacant properties. The City does have an accelerated compliance schedule
for grass and weed violations. A copy of the public nuisance ordinance is attached
for reference.
City Adopts New Logo
In April, the City Council adopted a new logo for the City. The logo represents a
blending of the two assets the community is most known for – the Mississippi River
and the Trumpeter Swan.
The logo will be gradually introduced in all City communication pieces and on City
equipment over the coming years. The logo can also be customized for the various
City enterprises, such as FiberNet and the Community Center. Changes to the City’s
newsletter and website are already in progress.
FiberNet Monticello Transitions to New Management
Please see attached press release. Contact City Administrator Jeff O’Neill with any
questions at 763-271-3224.
TAC Update
The TAC continues to make forward progress on planning for the Fallon Avenue
overpass. Meetings with surrounding property owners are nearing completion. Once
complete, City Engineer Bruce Westby will prepare a summary of issues and
Planning Commission Agenda – 6/05/12
2
comments for consideration by the TAC. The TAC will then prepare a final
recommendation, which will be presented to the Planning Commission as an update
and then to the City Council for formal consideration.
In relationship to second river crossing planning, City Engineer Bruce Westby is
working on arranging a regional planning and discussion forum.
Planning Commission will be kept up to date on both projects as the progress.
Great River Trailways & Trailhead Update
Please find attached the most recent mapping of the Great River Trailways Project.
The City has been successful in receiving both federal and state grant funding for
various components of the project (all of trail segments 1 and 2 and portions of trail
segments 3, 4 and the trailhead). Staff are waiting to hear back from the DNR on a
last round of grants, which may result in full funding by state and federal agencies of
the construction of all components shown on the map. The City local share will
include only the engineering and environmental costs.
The underpass component of the project is already in place and construction on the
fully funded components is scheduled to begin this fall.
Bertram Chain of Lakes Update
At the end of 2012, the City of Monticello and Wright County will own over half of
the 1,200 acre regional park property. (See attached map.) In addition, the City has
applied for a grant for the first acquisition of property related to the planned City
athletic fields, to be located north of Bertram Lake.
Beginning this summer, canoe access to both Long and Bertram Lakes will be
available to the public and maintained hiking trails will be open throughout the
acreage owned by the City and County. (Map attached.)
In addition, the YMCA of the Greater Twin Cities has received approval of their new
Bertram Lakes day camp Conditional Use Permit through Wright County Planning
Commission. Their new camp location is at the northwest end of Long Lake. The
existing camp is currently located on the north side of Bertram Lake. The YMCA
intends to begin construction of their new camp facilities in late 2012, which will
clear the way for acquisition of parcels surrounding Bertram Lake – including the
beach property.
With all of this forward progress occurring, staff have arranged a series of park tours
at the park for City staff, Chamber of Commerce members and members of the City
committees. If you have not been to the park and have questions about the on-going
acquisitions, this is an opportune time. Please let me know if you would like to
Planning Commission Agenda – 6/05/12
3
attend. If you are unable to attend at one of these times but would like a park tour,
please let me know, as well.
The tours are scheduled as follows:
9:00 – 11:00 AM, Friday June 15th
9:00 – 11:00 AM, Friday, June 22nd
CCD Ordinance
Final comments from the ad hoc committee will be reviewed during the meeting
immediately preceding the regular Planning Commission meeting. Those comments
will be paired with those of staff and those from the public obtained at the Open
House held on May 15th. A final draft will be presented during a public hearing
scheduled for July 3rd, 2012.
May 29th, 2012
For immediate distribution
Contact: Jeff O’Neill
City Administrator
763-271-3215
FIBERNET MONTICELLO MAINTAINING SERVICE AND SUPPORT
DURING TIME OF TRANSITION TO NEW MANAGEMENT
Monticello, Minnesota - With the current management contract for FiberNet
Monticello scheduled to expire at the end of the year, the City has held
discussions with FiberNet Monticello manager HBC regarding operation of the
system and renewal of the management contract. The City has also been
exploring other operation and management options.
The City was recently informed by HBC that they do not wish to renew the
management contract and prefer to end the agreement before the expiration date,
as allowed under the current agreement.
The City of Monticello would like to express appreciation to HBC for the key role
they played in successfully developing and delivering high quality and reliable
video, voice and internet service to the community. The HBC legacy in
Monticello includes the development of a well-trained FiberNet Monticello staff
and the establishment of a strong and loyal customer base, which provides a
great starting point for moving forward with new management.
It is anticipated that a draft agreement for interim management services by
another qualified and capable telecommunications company will be presented to
the City Council for consideration at the next Council meeting.
- - -
CITY OF MONTICELLO
PRESS RELEASE
5
3
7
4
9
8
1 2
12
10
Wright County
Parks
Created by: Wright County GIS, Office of the County Surveyor
April, 2010
08001,600400
Feet
Bertram Chain of Lakes
1250.37 Acres - Total Project Area
Parcel 5 - Purchase Option YMCA Owned
51.4 Acres
2010 Acquisition
(51.4 Total Acres - Land & Water)
Existing Regional Park Boundary
Bridge
Needs
Work
2012 Bertram
Work/Use Plan
Trail Length
19,724 ft
3.74 mi
Trails = End of June
Parking/Canoe = End of June
Gates/Entrance points = End of June
Picnic/Benches = End of July
Security Starts in May
Secure Unauthorized Points of Access
Lo
n
g
L
a
k
e
Be
r
t
r
a
m
L
a
k
e
Park BenchEasement