Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 06-06-2000Planning Commission Minutes • 6.6-00 G MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, June 6,2000 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Dick Frie. Robbie Smith. Roy Popilek. Richard Carlson. Rod Dmgsten and Council I.iaistm Clint I lerbst. Staff: Fred Patch. Steve Griuman and Lori Kraemer 1. Call to order. Chair Fric called the meeting to order at 7 PM. 2. Annrovnl of minutes of the reeular mectinu held ftlav 2.2000. ROY POPILEK MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF TI IF RI:Glll.AR MEETING OF MAY 2.2000. WITH CORREC'T'IONS. ROD DRAGSTI:N SECONDED'I'llE NIOTION. Motion carried. 3. Consideration of addine items to the aecnda. Rod Dragstcn requested a discussion regarding building code standards in the arca of the new Chelsea Road. Placed as Item 12. Robbie Smith requested an explanation on the City's enforcement procedure relating to blights. Placed as Item 13. 4. Citizens comments. None 5. Consideration ofan amendment to the •ranine ordinance for auto sacks in the 11-3 District nllowinu lora nrincinal huildine smaller than 4.500 sauare fret. Annlicant: Utmlo Moto Steve Grittman provided the staff report noting the applicant's request that the City consider lowering its standard for auto sales principal building sire from 4.500 square feet. Dunlo proposes to occupy the former Wendy's restaurant site which contains a building of about 2.950 square fret. Staff has investigated other zoning ordinance requirements for auto sales in neighboring communities and found the typical standard applied in Albertville. Buffalo. Delano. and Rig I.akc to be 1.000 square feet. applicable to any commercial building. This standard is a common one throughout thc'I'win Cities C� Planning Commission Minutes - 6-6-00 Cy area. A few metro communities tie the size of the sales lot to the size of the principal building, and sonic metro communities do not permit outdoor auto sales lots. Others limit the number of auto sales lots within the community to avoid their proliferation. If the City believes that a lower threshold building size would he appropriate. the square footage standard would need to he lowered to something below 2.950 square feet in order to accommodate the Dunlo Motors proposal on this site (assuming no building expansion). An alternative discussed by staff is the ratio of building to sales lot. To accommodate the Dunlo proposal and lot, the ratio would nerd to be no more than 16.5 square feet of lot area per one square foot of building area. ora "floor area ratio" (FAR) of no less than six percent. Contpariums were discussed. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Molly Peterson. co-owner of the Playhouse Childcare Center. addressed the Planning Commission stating she had shared the safety concerns at the last mating but wanted to add that she is also looking at the value of her property in the future. Paling that allowing a car dealership on this site would decrease her property. The public hearing %vas closed. Grittman stated that this is more an issue of what the Planning Commission sees as a C good use of this site. stating this is a new issue that the City has not dealt with. Gritunan added that he believes the Current standard is not there to deter auto dealers but possibh to deter auto sales lots with small buildings. Believes it was put there to encourage new showrooms, discourage small office space. The majority of the Planning Commission stated they would like to see a ratio set. Grittman states the reality is to deal with %'hat's placed before the Planning Commission at the time. adding that there is really no "standard" ratio and encouraged the Planning Commission to work with Dunlo if they believe this is a reasonable use of this site. If not, try to regulate for future applicants. Grittman stated the City could adopt a standard just for used car sales if that is their decision. It is used most commonly in more urbanized areas to regulate how much building is going on in a parcel, less common in suburban or this hype of setting. but it is legitimate. A combination of floor area ratio and acreage could also be used. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE TO TABLE ACTION ON TI IE A\IIiNDMGN'I'. SUBJI'C'I' TO'1'111i SU13\11SSION OF ADDI'rIONAI. INFORMA'T'ION REGARDING FLOOR AREA. ROBBIE SMITI1 SECONDEDTI IE MOTION. Motion carried. C / -'-- C� Planning Commission Minutes - 6-6.00 C A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE TO CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING AT 5 PM ON JUNE 26.2000. PRIOR TO T HE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.TO SUBMIT FINDINGS TOT111- COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION. ROD DRAGST'EN SECONDED THE MOTION. Motioncarried. Consideration ofan amendment to the Conditional Use Permit conditions for Arno Sales in a 11-3 District issued to Dunlo Motors. Aonlicant: Dunlo Motors. Stere Grittman provided the staff report regarding the Dunlo Motors request for an amendment to their approved Conditional Use Permit to allow a reduction in the size of the existing landscaped island north of the existing building and replacement of the required fence along the south boundary with a landscaped median. The original plan submission had proposed eliminating the north island altogether. replacing it with sales lot space. The stafl•repon had recommended retaining the island. a recommendation included in the CUP approval. With regard to the south boundary. concerns raised by the neighboring child care facility resulted in a recommendation that a fence be installed. 'Ihc applicant's wish is to replace the fence with a landscaped median to allow more efficient use of the parking and sales arca. '[he island is currently in place, and is the primary green space on the parcel together with the required perimeter landscaping. Any change mould reduce green arca and allitit traffic flow, although irallic is likely to be much less ofa concern for auto sales than it was lir u fast liiod restaurant. The south boundary would increase landscaped green arca. and would likely improve aesthetics in the arca. The child care operators had expressed concern with the condition of propeny adjacent to them. Chair Fric opened the public hearing. Andrew Duncanson. Dunlo Motors• addressed the commission noting his conversation with 1cfl O'Ncill• Deputy City Admin, in that the need for a fence was not necessary and too costly. stating Mr. O'Neill was in agreement on this item. This arca was originally an egress lane and they are asking to mWify. '11m public hearing was closed. 'There was discussion regarding cutting down the green space but noting that the fence was an issue with the childcare center area next door in regard to safety issues. Duncanson noted he did attempt on several occasions to call Ms. Peterson form the childcare center to discuss this but was unable to reach her. The Playhouse stated the issue was more about the fence protecting people from getting into the Childcarc arca. Ms. Mandel. Playhouse Childcare. was under the impression that it would be a privacy fence. Griuman stated the island should he reduced only enough for cars to get round it. The Planning Commission addressed Dave Peterson. Peterson Ford. concerning the 30 fl strip that Peterson owns. who stated he has no intention of developing it, building on it or parking on it. Chair Fric advised that Peterson Ford would 511 C_ Planning Commission Minutes - 6-6.00 be liable for any instances that might occur on this 30 B. strip of land. It was also C discussed that a buffer to this area would not buffer the childcare center from Peterson Ford. A MO'T'ION WAS MAUL f3Y ROBBIE SMITI1 TO RI:CO\1MEND APPROVAL OF '1'111: CUP AMENDMENT (a) REDUCING TIII: SIZE OF'1'111: I:XIS'I'ING ISLAND JUS'I' I:NOUGI I TO ALLOW'I'RAFFIC TO CIRCtJI.A'1'1:'I'IIROUGII'I'lll: AREA: (b) RI:QIJIRING'I'IIE FENCI. ALONG 1*I11: SOUI'll BOUNDARY TO BE DI:I'I:RDIINI:D IN AGRI:EMI:NT wri-i TI 11: Cfl'Y. PEl'I:RSON FORD. DUNLO, MOTORS AND'I'IIE PI.AYIIOUSIi CIIILDCARI: CI:N'1'I:R. ROY POPILEK SI:CONDI:D'I'III: MO':ON. Motion carried. Consideration of an amendment to a Planned Unit Develonment in a 13-3 District to allow the esnansion of an auto sales and storaee lot. Annlicant: Dave Peterson's Monticello Ford. Chair Frie addressed Mr. Dace Peterson. Peterson Ford. regarding the required information that still needs to be supplied by the applicant. Stevc Griuman advised that it's a matter of adding detail to the site plan such as detailed landscaped plan. minimum requirements. and stating there are still a number of standards that need to be met. Dianc Mandel. Playhouse Childcare Center. addressed Mr. Peterson on the fact that there is no landscaping in effect and they feel they are engulfed by cars. At the Planning Commission meeting in November of 1999. Peterson Ford had stated they would contact the childcare center and work with them to design a landscape plan or buffer and to this date there has been no contact from Peterson Ford. Chair Frie stated at that point that this public hearing would be re -scheduled to a later date, once all of the initial items necessary were receival from the applicant. Mr. Grittman stated that a meeting should be set up with 1ctTO'Neill. Mr. Peterson and their architect as soon as possible and Mr. Peterson stated he would contact JcfTO'Ne18. Mr. Frie stated that possibly this item could he addressed at the special Planning Commission meeting at 5 pm on June 26. Staff has provided the applicant with comment on this item at the time of the previous submission. As noted in the rcpon, PUD requests are intended to be projects which demonstrate a superior site design. Due to the missing information. and site planning which does not meet the minimum standards. staffdoes not recommend approval at this time. Mr. Peterson notal his disappointment and City stafTalso stated their disappointed at not receiving the appropriate information to this date. The following information should be included on a subsequent submission: 4- Planning Commission Minutes - 6.6.00 a. Landscape Plan showing a minimum of 24 trees b. Screening of the storage arca in conjunction with the chain link fence. C. Screening of the parking/salcs inventory arca. with particular emphasis on the north boundary adjacent to the child care facility. d. Lighting details. ensuring that lights do not glare or spill over onto adjacent property. C. Identification of the proposed use of the vacant arca of the parcel in question. f. Submission of adequate plans for grading. drainage, and utilities in accordance with requests of the City Engineer and Public Works staff. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE TO TABLE ACTION ON'rm-, PUD AMENDMENT. SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL. INFORMATION DETAILED IN THIS REPORT, UNTII. Till: SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 5 PM. JUNE 26.2000. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED TI I1: INOr10N. Motion carried. 8-10. Consideration of an amendment to an Interim Use Permit to nermit the exnansion of a uildine in the I -I District. applicnnt: WAG Parmershin, Steve Grumman provided the report regarding the applicant's request for an addition to ( their building. WAG Partnership. owner of a building in the Industrial Park. has been leasing their building to the Monticello School District for use as an Alternative Learning i Program classroom. The ALP now wishes to expand the building to allow for additional student capacity. The property is zoned 1-I. Light Industrial. 'Me I -I District was amended to accommodate school facilities by Interim Use Permit (IUP) a few years ago. Interim Uses are uses which are intended to occupy property for a defined amount of time. after which the use will be discontinued and the propcny will be put to a land use anticipated by the zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. A building expansion to accommodate an interim use raises an issue as to whether the interim use is most likely to be permanent. The applicant has not requested an extension of the permit at this time. but such a request could reasonably he anticipated. The existing interim use permit is in fierce until sometime in 2001. If the City believes that the use is an acceptable one in the Industrial District. it may be more appropriate to amend the zoning ordinance to establish the use by Conditional Use Permit rather than Interim Use Permit. 'rhus. the applicant was also encouraged to apply for a text amendment and CUP in the I -I District. CUPS are permanent land uses and future termination and rc-usc arc therefore less of a concern. As with any Conditional Use Permit. any industrial property would be eligible. The City recently revised its ordinance to limit the location of institutional uses such as schools by establishing a PS. -5. CPlanning Commission Minutes - 6-6-00 G Public -Semi Public District. The issue at the time was to control the ability of institutional uses to consume industrial land. The City has greater discretion in rezoning actions than it does with Conditional Use Permits. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Wayne Hoglund, WAG Partnership. stated that everything seemed to be covered in the staff report. There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. The commissioners stated their feelings that the school is not the intent of this area and not consistent with the comprehensive plan. A safely issue was also brought up, although there have been no complaints with the school operating on this site and a previous car issue was resolved as well. Gene Garman. ALP, states that cost is a factor here and that WAG has been very generous to them. I Ic states that if the City puts them in a position to have to move, the ALP would probably fold. Alternative sites were discussed such as the old Senior Center, but it was stated by Mr. Garman that their current site is ideal as it is a remote site. Fred Patch, Building Official. also stated that there have never been any complaints received of any kind regarding the ALP operating out of this site. Mr. Frie stated that the bottom line is that an addition to the building can be granted. but that a school is not suitable for this site. Robbie Smith stated his approval of the ALP and that being a remote sites is useful versus downtown. It etas also noted that this is a privately owned building, paying taxes and leasing to the school. Gordon I loglund. WAG Partnership. stated that the SAC/WAC, trunk fres are heavier when a school is involved and therefore, if the City is not intending to extend the IUP or make this a permanent use, they would not be as inclined to add on to their building. Mr. Griuman noted in his report that sta0'does not recommend approval of the IUP expansion. 'Me City previously elected to place such uses in the PS District to avoid consumption of prime industrial land by institutional uses. land along County Road 117 is in the heart of the City's industrial arca. and with good access. should be considered an excellent location for an industrial tenant. If the City believes that expansion of the use is acceptable, it should consider adoption of the Conditional Use Permit as a pemtanent land use. However. this action would have the same impact on industrial land use as the IUP. StafTwould recommend that the better solution would be to identify a location for the ALP which can be established as a permanent use and which does not conflict with the industrial development goals stated in the Comprehensive Plan. -6- Planning Commission Minutes - 6.6-00C Decision I: Amendment to the existing Interim Use Permit to expand the building. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITII TO RECO;NMEND DENIAL OF TIIE IUP AMENDMENT. BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE USE IS INTENDED TO BE 'TEMPORARY AND EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING IS INCONSISTENT WITH 11 1AT IN'T'ENT. RICI IARD CARI.SON SI:CONDI:D'I'I11: MOI'ION. Motion carried. Decision 2: Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance to change school facilities in the I -I District from Interim Uses to Conditional Uses. A MOTION WAS MADE DY ROBBIE SMITII TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF '1'111: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. BASED ON A FINDING TIb1'f TME SCHOOL USE IS COMPATIBLE WITII 7111: ACTIVITIES IN TT II: INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. TI IERE WAS NO SECOND TO' 1IE MOTION. Motion failed. A MOTION WAS MADE 13Y ROY POPILEK TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF TIIE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. BASED ON A FINDING T'IIAT"fill: SCHOOL USI: IS NOT COMPAT' BLE WITII THE ACTIVITIES IN THE INDUSTRIA. DISTRICT OVER THE LONGTERM. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED ( T1 If: AIOT'ION. Motion carried 4 to I with Robbie Smith voting in opposition. CDecision 3: Conditional Use Permit for school use in an 1-1 District. Decision 3 is o moot decision. 11. Consideration of n reuuest for n simple subdivision affectinu Lots 1 I and 12. Block 2_ Oakwood Industrial enlL Steve Griuman provided the staffrepon noting the request by 11 Window Company that the property line dividing Lots I I and 12 be moved 33 fest to the cast, thus increasing Lot 12 and decreasing Lot 11. This lot line adjustment is for the purpose of placing the entire building on Lot 12. It also results in 30 foot setback which meets the minimum prescribed by ordinance. Both lots would share the driveway from Dundas Road. This is an important housekeeping matter that cleans up a longstanding problem. This is still a buildable lot. Them was discussion as to why 11 Window is requesting this adjustment at this time. Fred Patch. Building Oficial, asked if this property line should have just disappeared and Grittman stated it should have been combined and the owner has not been in compliance with the ordinance. It was stated that this is not uncommon 7- Planning Commission Minutes • 6.6-00 for buildings that were built at that time. and Grittman also stated some cities have a clause that states they cannot profit from a sale of the lot once combined. DICK FRIE MOTIONED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL of niE SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AFFECTING LOTS I 1 AND 12. BLOCK 2.OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL. PARK BY SHIFTING TllE LOT LINE 35 FEET TO THE EAST. WITII CLARIFICATION PROVIDED BY STAFF TO THE CITY COUNCIL_ AS TO *fill.. INTENDED USAGE OF' III PROPERTY. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED' III MOI ION. Motion carred. 12. Buildinu Codes as they relate to the new Chelsca Road area. Rod Drogsten asked for information regarding building standards that the City will determine in this arca. Ordinance at this time does not address buildings. Dragstcn asked if the City would have anything in place before new commercial buildings are proposed. Fred Patch. Building Official. stated that the City is not creating any new districts and the standards for this area would be the same as any other areas zoned the same. Steve Grittman noted that the City could establish architectural review standards if desired. 13. Enforcement of City Code relating to hlighis. Certain sites were discussed and what the proper procedure for cleaning them up was. Fred Patch explained the procedures. They discussed other options of enforcing these codes. Monetary fines were discussed. It was also noted that calls to the City regarding blight complaints are anonymous. A recommendation %sass made by Robbie Smith that Building Official Fred Patch review the issue of s stricter ordinance regarding blights and bring this item back to the Planning Commission at their neat regular meeting in July. 13. Adioum. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROY POPILEK TO ADJOURN TILE MEE 1'ING AT 9:20 PNI. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried. co ing Sccr tart' i -g-