Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda Packet 06-02-1992AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, June 2, 1992 - 7 p.m. Members: Dan McConnon, Cindy Lemm, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson, Richard Martie 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to order. 7:02 p.m. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held May 5, 1992. 7:04 p.m. 3. Public Hearing --A variance request to allow a detached garage to be built within the rear and side yard setback requirements. Applicant, Dennis Doran. 7:19 p.m. 4. Public Hearing --Consideration of amending the official zoning map of the city of Monticello by rezoning all of the Thomas Park subdivision and that part of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 lying southerly of I-94 from B-2 (limited business) to I-1 (light industrial). Applicant, City of Monticello Planning Commission. 7:29 p.m. 5. Public Hearing --A conditional use request to allow cpen and outdoor storage, open and outdoor sales as an accessory use in an 1-1 (light industrial) zone. Applicant, Monticello Boat Works. 7:59 p.m. 6. Public Hearing --A variance request to allow an open and outdoor sales area to be more than the maximum 30% of the gross floor area of the principal use. Applicant, Monticello Boat Works. 8:09 p.m. 7. Public Hearing --An ordinance amendment to Chapter 10-8 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance by including "Governmental and Public Utility Buildings" to be allowed as a conditional use in a PZM (performance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, City of Monticello Planning Commission. 8:19 p.m. S. Public Hearing --Consideration of granting a conditional use permit allowing operation of a public utility facility in a PZM zone. 8:29 p.m. 9. Public Hearing --An ordinance amendment to Chapter 10-6 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which identifies permitted uses in the PZM (performance zone mixed) zone by deleting or amending 10-6 [C), "Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter." Applicant, City of Monticello Planning Commission. 8:45 p.m. 10. Public Hearing --A preliminary plat request entitled "Silver Pox" commorcial subdivision to subdivide an existing 6.69 - acre tract of unplatted land. Applicant, Ed and Arlys Larson. 9:00 p.m. I1. Continued Public Hearing --A conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development include an area of at least 3 acres. Applicant, Investors Together. Planning Commission Agenda June 2, 1992 Page 2 i 9:15 p.m. 12. Continued Public Hearing --A replatting request to subdivide Outlot A of the East View residential subdivision. Applicant, Investors Together. 9:30 p.m. 13. Continued Public Hearing --A conditional use request allowing a townhouse development in an R-2 zone. Applicant, Investors Together. Additional Information Items 9:35 p.m. 1. Public Hearing --A conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development include an area of at least 3 acres. Applicant, Investors Together. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 9:37 p.m. 2. Public Hearing --A replatting request to Subdivide Outlot A of the East View residential subdivision. Applicant, Investore Toqether. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 9:39 p.m. 3. Public Hearing --A conditional ur,e request allowing a townhouse development in an R-2 zone. Applicant, Investors Together. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 9:41 p.m. 4. Consideration of calling a public hearing on rezoning Thomas Park Drive area from B-2 to I-1 zoning district designation. Applicant, Monti Motors and Hoglund Bus Company. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 9:43 p.m. 5. Consideration of application for a home occupation permit. Applicant, John Zavodnick. Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation. 9:44 p.m. 6. Review site plan for the public works facility expansion project; Consider calling for a public hearing on amendments to Section 10-6 (C) and 10-8 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Council action: Approved site plan review recommendation by the Monticello Planning Commission with one exception--tho proposed relocation of the new fuel dispenser area be left as is; Approved calling for public hearing as per Planning Commission recommendation. 9:46 p.m. 7. Consideration of setting a special Planning Commission meeting date for June 22, 1992, 6 p.m. 9:50 p.m. 6. Set the next regular meeting date for July 7, 1992, 7 p.m. 902 p.m. 9. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 5, 1992 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Dan McConnon, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson Members Absent: Cindy Lemm Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Dan McConnon at 7:02 p.m. 2. A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon Bogart to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held April 8, 1992. Voting in favor: Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson. Abstaining: Dan McConnon. 3. Public Hearinq--A conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoninq Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development include an area of at least 3 acres. Applicant, Investors Toqether. AND 4. Public Hearinq--A replattinq re_yuest to subdivide Outlot A of the East View residential subdivision. Applicant, Investors Toqether. AND 5. Public Hearin --A conditional use request allowinq a townhouse development 11 an R-2 zone. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, stated that Investors Together has encountered some engineering problems with their proposed townhouse plat. Due to the delay, they are requesting the Planning Commission to continue the public hearings. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the public hearings. There being no input from the public, Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for comments from the Planning Commission members. There being no input from the Planning Commission members, a motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Jon Bogart to continue the public hearings for the following items: A conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development include an area of at least 3 acres; A replatting request to subdivide Outlot A of the East View residential Page 1 ❑E� Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92 subdivision; and a conditional use request allowing a townhouse development in an R-2 zone. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Consideration of calling a public hearing on rezoninq Thomas Park Drive area from B-2 to I-1 zoninq district designation. Applicant, Monti Motors and Hoglund Bus Compamr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the request by Monti Motors and Hoglund Bus Company to rezone the Thomas Park Drive area from B-2 (limited business) to I-1 (light industt;:;1) zoning. O'Neill explained that the rezoning is proposed Luz all of the Thomas Park addition and a portion of an unflatted tract of land owned by Hoglund Bus Company lying just north of the Monti Motors lot in Thomas Park. O'Neill went on to explain that this is a request for the Planning Commission members to call for a public hearing on rezoning the areas described above from B-2 (limited business) to I-1 (light industrial) zoning. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input from the public. Mr. Wayne Hoglund, Hoglund Bus Company, explained that he would like the area that is currently used for old bus storage area to be rezoned from B-2 to I-1. If the area is rezoned, he intends to install a 6 -foot high screening fence around the perimeter of the bus storage area. Mr. Pat Townsend, part owner of Monti Motors, explained that he and hie partner, Mr. Jamison, are proposing to expand the existing Monti Motors business to include repair and sale of boats and boat -related accessories. Dan McConnon commented that information regarding the subject properties could be discussed at the public hearing. There being no further information, a motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Richard Carlson to call for a public hearing on the rezoning of the Thomas Park Drive area from B-2 to I-1 zoning. Motion carried unanimously. 7. Consideration of application for a home occupation permit. Applicant, John Zavodnick. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the request by Mr. Zavodnick to perform skate sharpening and to sell hockey - related accessory equipment from his home. O'Neill outlined the approved uses of a home occupation within residential Page 2 Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92 zoning districts. The proposed use by Mr. Zavodnick did not appear in the list of allowable uses within the home occupation section of the ordinance; however, the proposed home occupation may meet the intent of the ordinance. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input from the public. The Zavodnicks explained their proposed use would be primarily for the sharpening of hockey skates. Due to the present lack of a sporting goods store from which to purchase hockey - related equipment in the city of Monticello, the Zavodnicks are proposing to offer a service where equipment could be ordered from a catalog or purchased from stock at their residence. The proposed use of their residence would be primarily seasonal during hockey with hopes that they could establish a pick-up and drop-off center at the school for ice skate sharpening rather than individuals bringing the skates to their residence. Planning Commission members basically didn't have any problem with the sharpening of skates at the residence. The activity Is seasonal. They were concerned, however, with the additional traffic that would be encountered with individuals delivering and picking up skates. It was recommended that skates be picked up from teams after practice and delivered all at once, thereby reducing the number of individual trips. Another concern was the use of the residence for display of hockey -related equipment for sale. Planning Commission members stated that they would see no problem with the Zavodnicks operating as a mail order business only with deliveries made directly to purchasers. There being no further input from the Planning Commission members or the public, it was the recommendation of the Planning Commission members to approve a home occupation for the operation of a skate sharpening business at this residence and to encourage the owners to have a catalog order operation only for the purchase of hockey -related equipment with the equipment being shipped directly to the purchaser. Approval was given on a temporary basis for one hockey season only. Consensus was by all five commission members, as Cindy Lemm has now Joinod the meeting. O'Neill noted he would incorporate the Planning Commission comments into the permit terms. Page 3 9 I Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92 8. Review site plan--Dublic works facility expansion prosect. Consider calling for a public hearing on amendments to Section 10-6 (Cl and 10-8 of the zoninq ordinance. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the site plan for the proposed new public works expansion project. O'Neill explained that the public works facility expansion would consist of three phases, with phase I being the proposed new maintenance building. As part of phase II, a new salt storage building would be attached near the northeast corner of the proposed new maintenance building, and a new washroom bay would be constructed between the existing maintenance shop and the new maintenance storage facility building, and new restrooms and lunch area would be attached to the south side of the existing maintenance shop. Phase III would include connection of the existing maintenance shop and the existing water department and public works office building. In reviewing the site plan, O'Neill pointed out the proposed relocation of the motor fuel dispenser to the west end near the property line between the Nestcello Apartment parking lot and the public works facility. Evergreen tree plantings will be installed along the westerly property line with approximately 10 feet between each tree. Hard surfacing is proposed in phase I only on the westerly portion of the site extending to the existing pole building, along the west side of the new proposed maintenance building, and in the westerly portion of the existing water department and public works office building. O'Neill noted that technically, a zoning ordinance amendment is not necessary to allow the public works facility to be constructed because the existing use is considered a permitted use. Specifically, the zoning ordinance stateds PERFORMANCE ZONE PERMITTED USESt Only the following uses aro permitted uses within a PtM districts (C) Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter. Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92 A literal interpretation of the language above would indicate that the public works facility (former NSP site) is allowed as a permitted use because it existed prior to the adoption of the chapter (PZM district regulations). Staff is recommending that the ordinance be amended by eliminating Section [C] above because it also has the effect of labeling the activity conducted by Ruff Auto as a permitted use. As a permitted use, Ruff Auto could expand into other property in the PZM zone. The negative potential of this occurring is staggering. Much of the land near Ruff Auto is undeveloped and could potentially be used by Ruff for expansion areas. Particularly, the land owned by Tom Brennan between Ruff Auto and the freeway is in the PZM zone. From a technical standpoint, according to the literal interpretation of the ordinance, Ruff could expand his junk yard into these areas. O'Neill suggested that it was not the intent of the PZM regulations to allow Ruff Auto or other uses incompatible with the PZM district purpose to be allowed as permitted uses without the constraints associated with being lawful conforming uses. Unfortunately, a literal interpretation of 10-6 [C] would lead one to think that all uses in the PZM zone in existence at the time of adoption are now considered permitted uses. City staff requests the Planning Commission to review this matter and consider calling a public hearing on abolishing or amending 10-6 (C). In addition to abolishing 10-6 (C), Planning Commission is asked to call for a public hearing on establishment of a zoning ordinance amendment that would allow operation of a municipal public works facility as a conditional use in the PZM zone. Following are comments on the sketch plan submitted. 1. Screeninq Fence. Planning Commission recommends that the site plan be amended to include a fence along the western boundary of the property screening the view of t1i•-) public works facility from the apartment property. The :Tanning Commission did not support inserting metal elate in the existing fence. They felt it proper to either construct a new wood fence or install redwood slats in the existing fence. 2. Gasoline Storage and Disponsinq. Planning Commission strongly recommended that the station for storing and dispensing gasoline be moved to the other side of the property directly east of the exit from the new storage building. Page S 0 Planning Commission Minutes - 515/92 3. Orivewav and P arkina Phasing. Planning Commission felt that the plan as proposed, which shows the phasing in of drive areas with subsequent development phases, is consistent with what Planning Commission and the City have allowed in the past; therefore, the proposed phasing of parking and drive areas is acceptable. 4. Storage Areas. Planning Commission was comfortable with allowing the storage/drive areas to continue to be surfaced with a gravel surface. It was agreed that these areae caa be watered if complaints about dust are heard from adjoining property owners. 5. Landscaping. Planning Commission recommended that additional trees or screening material be planted in locations where they could provide additional screening of outside storage. It was also recommended that a row of seedlings be planted on the boundary of the property adjoining the railroad right-of-way. Finally, it was recommended that a bituminous surface be developed at the entrance to the gravel surface area on the east side of the property. This will reduce the amount of gravel material that could possibly track onto the county right-of-way. There being no further input from the Planning Commieaion members, a motion was made by Richard Nartie, seconded by Richard Carlson, to set a public hearing for the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on June 2, 1992, to consider an amendment to Sections 10-6 (CJ and 10-8 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Notion carried unanimously. Additional Information Iteme 1. A variance request to allow construction of a house and garage on a lot with less than the minimum square footage. Applicant, Ed Kruse. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 2. A conditional use request to expand a bowling alley facility In an 1-1 (light industrial) zone. Applicant, Al Joyner. Council actions Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation. Page 6 0 Planning Commission Minutes - 5/5/92 A conditional use request to allow auto body repair in a B-3 (highway business) zone. Applicant, John Johnson. Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation. 4. A request for an ordinance amendment to add private retractable antenna tower to be allowed as a conditional use in a PZM (performance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, Tom Ware. Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation. A conditional use request to allow a private retractable antenna tower to be allowed in a PZM (performance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, Tom Ware. Council action: Approved as per Planning Commission recommendation. A variance request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development includo an aroa of at least 3 acres. Applicant, Investors Together. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 7. A public hearing --A replatting request to subdivide Outlot A of the East View residential subdivision. Applicant, �I Investors Together. Council action: No action required, as Vc the request did not come before them. 8. A conditional use request allowing a townhouse development in an R-2 zone. Applicant, Investors Together. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 9. A variance request to allow construction of a warehouse building within the front, rear, and side yard setback requirements. Applicant, J.N. 011. Council action: No action required, as the request did not come before them. 10. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission members to set the next tentative meeting date for Tuesday, June 2, 1992, 7 p.m. 11. A motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Cindy Lemm to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Gary Anderson Zoning Administrator Page 7 0 Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 3. Public Hearing --A variance request to allow a detached garage to be built within the rear and side yard setback requirements. Applicant, Dennis Doran. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Mr. Doran is proposing to build a 24 -toot wide by 30 -foot deep detached garage. According to our ordinance definitions, the proposed garage would be considered an accessory structure with a side yard setback minimum of 10 feet and rear yard setback minimum of 5 feet. Mr. Dozen is proposing a 5 -foots side yard setback and a 20 - foot rear setback. There are three trees near his westerly side property line which he would like to save. He would have to drive around the elm tree nearest the house to reach the proposed garage. The two cedar trees he is proposing to leave in place near the proposed garage location do not appear to cause a conflict. In reviewing the site, you will note that there is sufficient green area to accommodate garage development within the 10 - foot side yard setback and the 5 -foot rear yard setback. Mr. Doran doesn't appear to clearly demonstrate a hardship requiring side yard and rear yard variances. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the variance request to allow construction of a detached garage within the rear and side yard setback requirements. 2. Deny the variance request to allow construction of a detached garage within the rear and side yard setback requirements. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends denial of the variance request to allow placement of a detached garage within the rear and side yard setback requirements. The applicant has failed to demonstrate a hardship for the proposed garage placement other than convenience. There is sufficient green area on his lot to move the garage to within 10 feet of the side yard setback 5 feet of the rear yard setback requirements. This would still allow room for a turn -around area between the garage and the stairway of the deck. D. SUPPORTING DATA: T Copy of the location of the variance request; Copy of the site plan= Copy of the ordinance section on the placement of a detached accessory building. US/ ----- -------- 1 ------ 14 US/ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY j MR DAYLE VEa+ES CMST. a .a n ✓ u •m LEGi7t0T • CENOTES IRON MOMMENT FOtM • GENOTn IRON MONUMENT SET • OFl•OM RAIL SEr EOT T. BIOCK 21, TOWNSIrE OF MMITICELLO, NRIOMT CW", MINNESOTA I Y 1 K•[N• CE•hy MAT TICS awn. PLAN 00 REPORT 1 M "I PREPARED n At 00 WOER MECT y DIRSIAEW. sioN NO SURVEYORS Mr. ANO MAT I AMA OULY REWSM'RE0 LAho SL WEYOP Lo"p ADW. P.O. Wx 179 .. ME LAWS Of ME STATE Or eIAWMTA gmtEWrA 953s AWIM w*'sv rAo RED No WE _Lson t-k- H case of doubt or on any question or interpretation, the decision of the Building Inspector shall be final, subject to the right of appeal to the Planning Commission and City Council. 5. On a through lot (a lot fronting on two (2) parallel streets), both street lines shall be front lot lines of applying the yard and parking regulations of this ordinance. (D] ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, USES, AND EQUIPMENT: 1. An accessory building shall be considered an integral part of the principal building if it is connected to the principal building either directly or by an enclosed passageway. 2. No accessory building shall be erected or located within any required yard other than the rear yard. 3. Accessory buildings and garages shell not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height and shall be ten (10) feet or more from all aide lot linea of adjoining lots, five (5) feet or more from the rear lot line, shall be ten (10) feet or more from any other building or structure on the same lot, and shall not be located within a utility easement. 4. No accessory building or garage shall occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of a rear yard, nor exceed cne thousand (1,000) square feet of floor area. 5. No permit shall be issued for the construction of more than one (1) private accessory structure for each dwelling. Each applicant for a building permit to construct any dwellings shall be required to provide off-street parking space for at least one (1) automobile per family to be housed in addition to any garage space to be used. (7/22/91, #211) 6. No accessory uses or equipment such as air conditioning cooling structures or condensers which generate noise may be located in a side yard except for side yards abutting streets where equipment is fully screened from view. NONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 116 CHAPTER 2 RULES AND DEFINITIONS SECTION: 2-1: Rules 2-2: Definitions 2-1: RULES: The language set forth in tho text of this ordinance shall be interpreted in accordance With the following rules of construction: [A] The singular number includes the plural and the plural the singular. [B] The present tense includes the past and the future tenses, and the future the present. (C) The work "shall" is mandatory while the word "say" is permissive. (D] The masculine gender includes the feminine and neuter. 2-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein defined: (AAJ ACCESSORY BUILDING OR USE: A subordinate building or use which is located on the same lot on which the main building or use is situated and which is reasonably necessary and incidental to the conduct of the primary use of such building or main use. (AS) ADDRESS SIGN: A sign communicating street address only, whether written or in numerical form. (AC] ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT: A temporary permit granted by the Zoning Administrator, after City staff approval, without a public hearing, granted to a specific Individual at a specific location, to address those requests and proposals for specific uses that are not allowed under the strict provisions of this ordinance, but that present no apparent conflict with the intent of this ordinance. An administrative permit may be renewed Indefinitely but cannot, under any circumstance, be transferred to another person or location. An administrative permit may be revoked upon ten (10) days' written notice when and if the use evolves into a use determined to be in violation of this ordinance. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 2/1 Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 d. Public Hearing --Consideration of amending the official zoninq map of the city of Monticello by rezoning all of the Thomas Park subdivision from B-2 (limited business) to I-1 (light Industrial) zoning. Applicant. City of Monticello Planninq Commission. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you recall, at the previous meeting Planning Commission called for a public hearing on the proposed rezoning of the Thomas Park subdivision from B-2 (limited commercial) to I-1 (light industrial) zoning. Planning Commission reviewed the same proposal as part of the review of the City's comprehensive plan some months ago. At that time, there was no interest expressed among property owners to rezone the property as proposed. In fact, Duane Schultz from Winkleman, owners of the building occupied by Fingerhut, was the only person to make a comment on the proposed rezoning. He basically indicated that he felt there was no need to rezone the property as proposed. After further review by the Planning Commission, it became the general conclusion that there was not an overriding need to change the zoning designation= therefore, the request was withdrawn prior to reaching the City Council. Planning Commission Is again asked to review the proposed rezoning based on the request submitted by the owner of Monti Motors, Pat Townsend, and the owner of Hoglund Bus Company, Wayne Hoglund. Both expressed an interest in utilizing their property for sales or sales and storage. In order for them to be allowed to lawfully use their property for outside sales and storage, they need to have the City pass a zoning ordinance amendment which would change the zoning designation from B-2 to I-1. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Hiqhest and Beat Use of the Land It could be argued that the B-2 (limited business) district is not appropriate for this area because it is not likely that the types of uses allowed in the B-2 zone would occur in the Thomas Park area (see list of B-2 uses provided). The B-2 purpose as described in the ordinance is to provide for low Intensity retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for whom the goods or services are furnished. The uses allowed in this district are to provide goods and Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 services on a limited community market scale and located in areae which are well served by collector or arterial street facilities at the edge of residential districts. It could be argued that the Thomas Park area simply does not fit this description. The Thomas Park area is not located along a collector or arterial street and is not at the edge of a residential district. Rather, it is on the edge of an Industrial district and highway commercial district. It would not appear, then, that this site is well suited for the types of uses permitted in the B-2 zone. Please refer to the supporting data for the list of B-2 uses allowed. Due to its poor location, it could be argued that it will be many years before the property will develop the types of uses listed in the B-2 zoning district regulations. FACTORS SUPPORTING DENIAL OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Planning Commission could take the position that there is a burgeoning residential area south of the new elementary school, and it is likely that in the next 5-10 years there will be a considerable incroaso in tho amount of residential property developed south of the existing industrial park in the area of the Kline farm and in the area of the Evergreens. When this occurs, the value of the Thomas Park area for commercial use will increase. Planning Commission could take the view that although there is not a demand for B-2 land at this time, the City should maintain the zoning designation in order to preserve the land to meet a future demand. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Notion to approve a zoning ordinance amendment calling for rezoning of the Thomas Park area from 8-2 to I-1 uses. Notion is based on the finding that the proposed .��. rezoning Is consistent with the comprehensive plan, consistent with the geography and character of the area, / and will not result in a depreciation of adjoining land values. Under this alternative, Planning Commission could take the view that the proposed rezoning area is consistent with the neighborhood. The rezoning area would make a logical extension of the I-1 zoning district to the south. Furthermore, the property housing Fingerhut will not necessarily be devalued duo to the proposed rezoning. The office building in place is consistent with the I-1 zone and will blend in with I-1 uses. The proposed Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 rezoning is also consistent with the comprehensive plan, which shows commercial and light industrial development in this area. Finally, Planning Commission could take the position that there is a need for the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. Without the ordinance amendment as proposed, Monti Motors and Hoglund Bus Company would not be able to lawfully expand their operation into these areas. It could be argued that it would not be fair to limit the use of this land for future purposes when in the short term the need is evident for storage and sale -3 areas, and such use will not interfere or devalue adjoining properties. Under this alternative, Planning Commission would be in position to review the specific request for a conditional use permit submitted by Monti Motors/Boat Works. 2. Motion to deny approval of a zoning ordinance amendment calling for rezoning of the Thomas Park area from B-2 to I-1 uses. Under this alternative, Planning Commission is not convinced that a strong enough argument has been made for the proposed rezoning request. Planning Commission could argue that although there is a short-term need for this type of land to be zoned I-1 due to the need for outside storage areas, Planning Commission could argue that this land area needs to be preserved for future demand of commercial land that could be brought about by the expansion of residential development South of the existing industrial areas. Planning Commission could also argue that there is sufficient outside storage already being used by Hoglund Bus Company at their existing site. Under this alternative, Monti Motors would not be allowed to intensify the use at the site as a boat works facility, and the City would be unable to sign any license form indicating that Monti Motors/Boat Works is operating in a manner consistent with the local zoning ordinance. The City then would have to determine whether or not it wants to take legal action to remove the boat works facility. D Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends that Planning Commission select alternative ♦1. It is our view that allowing the property to be rezoned from B-2 to 1-1 is proper given the character and geography of the area. It is our view that it will be many years before the property is usable for B-2 purposes, and there are significant B-2 and B-3 properties that are developable in other more convenient areas. In other words, there does not appear to be an overriding need to preserve this land for B-2 uses. Staff is concerned about the potential hazards associated with allowing outside storage to occur in this area. It is important that outside storage be controlled so that it is done in a manner consistent with the zoning ordinance. We would not want to allow activities or use of the land that would result in depreciation of the value of the structure that Fingerhut now occupies. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of zoning map; Copy of proposed zoning ordinance amendment; Copy of B-2 permitted uses; Copy of I-1 permitted and conditional uses. '� !t _ tl1 ����L��.1 1 ��.. H.- J'•ti �tjt� • �' i1 �% • "r. � t : < 9 t '(�-�1J ��� ,, t• • . !'/ f' �i dv:� ~,{���E�,���1 `vt fit't ."^' nd7 y +? " '",�i7t.J% � 'I'�'' �,tr'r r• �. w I ,'� r�: 7 NO. 94 �� ., J • \\� � •off _ �.. � � _ '� � ♦ 1 r ,1 ♦e9 �tt�ep0 � .. `tea at T i ct JA - oa9 eZc� 8.1 .1 t ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS THAT THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: Rezoning of all of Thomas Park subdivision from B -T (limited business) to I-1 (light industrial) zoning. Adopted this 8th day of June, 1992. City Administrator c Mayor 0 7 CHAPTER 12 "B-2" LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT SECTION: 12-1: Purpose 12-2: Permitted Uses 12-3: Permitted Accessory Uses 12-4: Conditional Uses 12-1: PURPOSE: The purposo of the B-2, limited business, district is to provide for low intensity retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for whom the goods or services are furnished. The uses allowed in this district are to provide goods and services on a limited community market scale and located in areas which are well served by collector or arterial street facilities at the edge of residential districts. 12-2: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in a B-2 district: [A) All permitted uses as allowed in the B-1, neighborhood business, district. (B) Art and school supplies. (C) Bakery goods and baking of goods for retail sales on the premises. (D) Bank, savings and loan, savings credit unions, and other financial institutions. (E) Bicycle sales and repair. (F) Candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, and soft drinks. (G) Camera and photograhic supplies. (H) Commercial (leased) and professional offices. (I) Delicatessen. (J) Dry cleaning pickup and laundry pickup stations, including incidental repair and assembly but not including processing. (R) Drug store. (L) Florist shop. O MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 12/1 1 MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE V 12/2 [MJ Frozen food store but not including a locker plant. (N] Gift or novelty store. [OJ Grocery, fruit, or vegetable store but not including sales from moveable motorized vehicle. [ P) Grocery, supermarket. (Q] Hardware. (R) Hobby store, including handi-raft classes but not to exceed fifteen (15) students. (S] Ice sales with storage not to exceed five (5) tons. [T) Insurance sales. (U) Locksmith. (V] Meat market but not including processing for a locker plant. (WJ Medical and dental offices and clinics. 1 (XJ Paint and wallpaper sales. (YJ Plumbing, television, radio, electrical sales, and such repair as are accessory use to retail establishment permitted within this district. (Z) Public utility collection offices. [AAJ Public garage. (BBI Real estate sales. (CC) Shoe repair. (DD) Glass sales and service. (EE] Professional and commercial offices. [PFJ Jewelry store/watch repair. (GG) Gas station /convenience store. (02/10/92, 1220) 12-71 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USESi The following are permitted accessory uses in a B-2 districts (A) All permitted accessory uses as allowed in a B-2 district. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE V 12/2 CHAPTER 15B "I-1" LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT SECTION: 156-1: Purpose 15B-2: Permitted Uses 15B-3: Permitted Accessory Uses 15B-4: Conditional Uses 15B-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of the "I-1," light industrial, district is to provide for the establishment of warehousing and light industrial development. 15B-2: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in an "I-1" district: [A] Radio and television. [B] Research laboratories. (C] Trade school. 7 (D] Machine shops. (E) Paint mixing. (F) Bus terminals and maintenance garage. [O] Warehouses. (H] Laboratories. [I] Essential services. (J] Governmental and public utility buildings. [K] Manufacturing, compounding, assembly, or treatment of articles or merchandise. [L] Manufacture of musical instruments, novelties, and molded rubber products. (M] Manufacture or assembly of electrical appliances, instruments, and devices. (N] Manufacture of pottery or other similar ceramic products using only previously pulverized clay and kilns fired only by electricity or natural gas. ? (0) Manufacture and repair of electrical signs, advertising structure, light sheet metal products, including heating and ventilation equipment. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 1SB/& N (P] Blacksmith, welding, or other metal shop. [Q] Laundries, carpet, and rug cleaning. [R] Bottling establishments. [S] Building material sales and storage. [T] Broadcasting antennae, television, and radio. (U) Camera and photographic supplies manufacturing. [V] Cartage and express facilities. (w) Stationery, bookbinding, and other types of manufacturing of paper and related products but not processing of raw materials for paper production. (x] Dry cleaning establishments and laundries. (Y] Electric light or power generating stations, electrical and electronic products manufacture, electrical service shops. (B) Engraving, printing and publishing. (AA) Jewelry manufacturing. [BB] Medical, dental, and optical laboratories. ICC] Storage or warehousing. [DD] wholesale business and office establishments. 15B-3: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted accessory uses in an "I-1" district: (A) All permitted accessory uses as allowed in the "18-4" district. 15B-4: CONDITIONAL USES: The following aro conditional uses in an "I-1" district: (Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by Chapter 22 of this ordinance). (A) Open and outdoor storage as an accessory use provided that: 1. The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential uses or, if abutting a residential district, in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (G), of this ordinance. 2. Storage is screened from view from the public right-of-way In compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 [G], of thin ordinance. (14) MORTICELL0 BONING ORDINANCE 156 0 NONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 158/x.{/ 3. Storage area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. 4. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (H], of this ordinance. 5. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. [B] Open or outdoor service, sale, and rental as a principal or an accessory use and including sales in or from motorized vehicles, trailers, or wagons provided that: 1. Accessory outside service, sales, and equipment rental connected with a principal use is limited to thirty (30) percent of the gross floor area of the principal use. 2. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of neighboring residential uses or an abutting residential district in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (G], of this ordinance. 3. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (H), of this ordinance. 4. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. 5. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. (C) Industrial planned unit development as regulated by Chapter 20 of this ordinance. (D) Amusement places (ouch as roller rinks and dance halls) and bowling alleys. (E] Consignment sales provided that: 1. Sales and storage are not to exceed 1,000 square feet in area. 2. At least 60% of the sales shall be of consigned merchandise. 3. No auctions shall take place on the premises. 4. There shall be no outside storage. NONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 158/x.{/ 5. The provisions of Chapter 22 are considered and satisfactorily met. 6. The parking requirements of Chapter 3, Section 5, are complied with in full. [F) Automobile repair - major and/or minor: 1. The entire site other than that taken up by a building, structure, or plantings shall be surfaced with a material to control duet and drainage which is subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 2. A drainage system subject to the approval of the City Engineer shall be installed. 3. The lighting shall be accomplished in such a way as to have no direct source of light visible from adjacent land in rosidential use or from the public right-of-way and shall be Ln compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 [N), of this ordinance. 4. At the boundaries of a residential district, a strip of not less than five (5) feet shall be landscaped and screened in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 7 [G), of this ordinance. 5. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened from view of abutting residential districts in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (G), of this ordinance. 6. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be minimized and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 9, of this ordinance. 7. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise. 9. No outside storage except as a 1 lowed in compliance with Chapter 13, Section 4, of this ordinance. 9. All conditions pertaining to a specific site are subject to change when the Council, upon Investigation in relation to a formal request, finds that the general welfare and public betterment can be served as well or better by modifying the conditions. 10. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. MONTICELL0 ZONING ORDINANCE 1Se I Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 5. Public Hearina--A conditional use request to allow open and outdoor storage and open and outdoor sales as an accessory use In an I-1 (light industrial) zone. Location is Lot 1. Block 1. Thomas Park Addition in the city of Monticello. Applicant. Monticello Boat Works. AND 6. Public Hearina--A variance request to allow an open and outdoor sales area to be more than the maximum 30% of the gross floor area of the orincioal use. Applicant. Monticello Boat Works. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: If the Planning Commission has recommended that the proposed rezoning be allowed, then it needs to consider whether or not It wishes to allow open and outdoor sales and storage to occur as proposed at Block 1, Lot 1, Thomas Park Addition. Under the regulations in the I-1 zoning district that regulate open and outdoor storage and sales, there are a number of conditions that Monti Motors needs to meet. Following is a review of the site plan in terms of the conditions noted by ordinances 1. "The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential uses, or if abutting a residential district in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 [G], of the ordinance." This particular requirement does not apply, as the storage area is not in view of a residential district. 2. "Storage is screened from view from the public right-of- way in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (Gj, of this ordinance." In order for the applicant to comply with this section of the ordinance, an opaque fence needs to be constructed or plantings need to be installed that screen the storage area from the view of Thomas Park Drive. Currently, a cyclone fence is in place for security purposes. This fence could become a satisfactory screening fence with installation of plastic or metal slats. 3. "Storage/sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust." If you visit the site, you'll notice that there is some grass growing in the storage and sales areas. There Is no vegetation along portions where most traffic occurs. ? It does not appear realistic to expect that grass will r Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 flourish in either the sales or storage areas. Planning Commission may want to consider requiring paving in high - traffic areas in order to control dust. "All lighting shall be hooded and so directed from the light source so it shall not be visible from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (H), of this ordinance." It does not appear that the proposed site will violate this condition. S. "Provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met." This condition basically requires that the proper process has been followed in obtaining the conditional use pormit. Open and outdoor service and sales will also be occurring at the proposed site. There is one condition in addition to the list above that applies Lo outdoor sales in the I-1 zone: 1. Accessory outside service sales and equipment rental connected with a principal use is limited to 301 of the gross floor area of the principal use. It does not appear to be clear where the storage area ends and the sales area begins. The two tend to be blurred together. It appears without doubt that the outside sales area is far in excess of 301 of the gross floor area of the principal use. In order for the conditional use permit to be granted, a separate variance will need to be granted which would allow outside sales area to exceed 301 of the floor area of the principal use. The other Items relating to outdoor service and sales are similar to the conditions noted above relating primarily to outdoor storage. In addition to the conditions noted in conjunction with outside storage associated with the boat works facility, there are a number of other conditions that relate to the use of the property for automobile repair, mayor and/or minor. Those conditions are included as information in your packet. It should be noted that the site appears to moot all the conditions required of an automobile repair shop In an 1-1 zone. Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 Parkinq/Landscapinq Parking. Approximately 12 parking spaces are available on site. This was estimated because the stalls were not striped. The site appears to satisfy the parking requirement as long as parking spaces are not used for boat storage. This should be an added condition of operation. Landscaping. The tree requirement for the site is 14 trees. I counted 3 now on site. One of the conditions should require planting of 11 trees or 6 trees with the remaining requirement in landscaping plantings. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Notion to grant a conditional use permit allowing Monti Motors/Boat Works facility to operate in an I-1 zone and qrant a variance to the requirement that outside sales shall not exceed 301 of the flour area of the principal use. Notion is based on the finding that the proposed use is consistent with the requirements set forth in the zoning ordinance and as such, the operation at the site will not result in a depreciation of adjoining land 1 values and is consistent with the geography and character of the area. Notion to approve the conditional use permit is subject to the applicant meeting the requirements noted by ordinance. Specifically, proper screening of view of the storage area from the right-of-way must be accomplished. In addition to meeting requirements noted by ordinance, the Planning Commission should consider adding the following conditions: 1. Plant 11 trees of a size consistent with code or 6 trees and landscape plantings. 2. No boat sales or storage in stalls reserved for parking. 3. Stripe the parking lot. 4. No storage or repairs in unscreened areae --sales only. 2. Notion to deny a conditional use permit. If the applicant is unwilling to comply with the r' requirements noted by ordinance or any other additional e Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 requirements deemed necessary by the Planning Commission, then Planning Commission should consider denying the conditional use permit. C. STAFF RECONMENDATION: City staff is supportive of granting the conditional use permit and variance request; however, we are concerned about making sure that the proper screening and landscaping has been put in place and maintained by the property owner. It would be our suggestion that the screening requirement be met through installation of a fence across the front of the storage area and extending along the eastern boundary of the property. Planning Commission may also require that the screening fence be extended above 6 feet in those areas where the materials stored extend higher than the fence. when you view the video, you will see that some materials are stacked such that they could be seen even with the presence of a 6'-8' fence. Planning commission may want to address storage of Items that extend higher than the fence. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of site map; Video will be available at the meeting for review. qmmm CYCLONE FENCE ' + Plant - ' 11 trees D ` BOAT STORAGE BOAT STORAGE e BOAT STORE r CLONE , FENCE SCREEN FENCE IN Install PLACE 1' elate • i ,r � t x� BOAT WORKS AND AUTO REPAIR i W GATE FENCE BEAUTY SHOP I ( I I STORAGE/SALES GRAVEL/SALES STORAGE No boat stor PARKING in parking 1�IIMINUB areas. Control Dust/sola area only. MONT-MOTORS/BOAT WORKS FACILITY - DRAWING NOTE TO SCALE KEY - Green - Crean space on site Yellow - Solea area Orange- Action it*= or conditions Blua - Paved araaa _ Pint - StoraQa araaa Al Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 7. Public Hearina--Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Chapter 10-8 of the Monticello zoning Ordinance by adding "Governmental and Public Utility Buildings" to be allowed as a conditional use in the PEM zone. Applicant, City of Monticello Planninq Commission. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you recall, at the previous meeting Planning Commission acted to call for a public hearing on an ordinance amendment adding "Governmental and Public Utility Buildings" to the list of conditional uses allowed in the PEM zone. Planning Commission is asked to add this conditional use to those listed in the PEN zone In anticipation of eliminating the section of the ordinance allowing public utility buildings to exist as a permitted use in the PEN zone. Following Is a review of information provided at the previous meeting. Technically, In order for the public utility building to be expanded as proposed, a zoning ordinance amendment is not necessary because the existing facility is considered to be a permitted use. Specifically, the zoning ordinance states: PERFORMANCE ZONE PERMITTED USES: Only the following uses are permitted uses within the PEN district: (C) Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter. A literal interpretation of the language would indicate that the public works facility, formerly the NSP site, is allowed as a permitted use because it existed prior to the adoption of the chapter (PEM district requlations) . Staff is recommending that the ordinance be amended by eliminating Section (C) above because it also has the effect of labeling the activity conducted by Ruff Auto as a permitted use. As a permitted use, Ruff Auto could expand into other property in the PEN zone. The negative potential of this occurring is significant. Much of the land near Ruff Auto is undeveloped and could potentially be used by Ruff for expansion areas. Particularly, the land owned by Tom Brennan tetween Ruff Auto and the freeway is in the PEM zone. In summary, from a technical standpoint, according to literal interpretation of the ordinance, Ruff could expand his parts business into these areas. 10 Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 City staff does not think it was the intent of the PEN regulations to allow Ruff Auto or other uses incompatible with the PEM district purpose to be allowed as permitted uses without the constraints associated with being a lawful non- conforming use. Unfortunately, a literal interpretation of 10-6 [C) would leave one to think that all uses in existence in the PEM at the time of adoption are now considered permitted uses. Again, Planning Commission is asked to establish a public works facility as a conditional use in the PEN zone in anticipation of removing this section of the zoning ordinance that allows the public works facility to exist as a permitted use. The conditions apply to a public utility building as noted by the proposed ordinance amendment are nearly the same as those listed under the B-2 district regulations. Please review the ordinance and conditions before reading on. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Notion to approve an ordinance amendment which would allow governmental and public utility buildings to be allowed as a conditional use in a PEN zone. Notion Ic based on the finding that the proposed conditional use and associated conditions are consistent with the purpose of the PEN zone. Allowing public buildings in the PEM zone will not tend to depreciate adjoining property values, and this type of use Is consistent with the geography and character of the PEN zoning district. Under this alternative, Planning Commission is satisfied that the public works facility is acceptable in the PEN zone. It should be noted that if the city municipal public works facility is allowed to expand in a PEN zone, then other governmental units such as the county and state could also develop facilities in the PEN zone. Although it does not appear likely at this time that such an event would occur, there iv a substantial amount of PZN land that is now undeveloped, and it could happen that sometime in the future arither governmental unit may wish to develop a public utility building and facility somewhere in the PEN zoning area. As a safeguard, a condition has been added that limits future public utility buildings from being located next to single and two-family homes. Planning Commission Agenda - 6/4/94 Z. Motion to deny a zoning ordinance amendment which would allow governmental and public utility buildings to be allowed as a conditional use in a PZM zone. Under this alternative, Planning Commission is not convinced that this type of facility should be allowed to expand or be established in the PLM zoning district. It could be argued that the PZM zoning district is semi - residential, and public utility buildings generally do not fit well in residential areas. C. STAFF RECOKKEMDATION: Staff recommends that the zoning ordinance amendment be approved. As you will note in the conditions associated with the ordinance amendment, the conditions have been written in a somewhat restrictive manner. The condition limiting the sites to those directly abutting a highway and the condition not allowing the public building to be located directly adjacent to R-1 or R-2 uses will help to properly locate any future public utility building in the PEM zone. D. SUPPORTING DATAs Copy of zoning ordinance amendment. 14=- 17 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT CHAPTER 10, SECTION 8, OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING CONDITIONAL USES IN A PZM ZONE BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING AND SHIFTING ALL LETTERING FOLLOWING THIS ADDITION: [N) Governmental and public utility buildings and structures necessary for the health, safety, and general welfare of the community provided that: 1. Conformity with the surrounding neighborhood is maintained, and required setbacks and side yard requirements are met. 2. Adequate screening from neighboring uses and landscaping is provided in accordance with Chapter 3, Section 2, of this ordinance. 3. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. 6. The facility must have direct access to county or city state aid highway. The facility may not be located on property adjoining property containing R-1 or R-2 uses. Adopted this 8th day of June, 1992. Mayor City Administrator 0 Ce At� P Planning Commission Agenda - 6/1/94 ` � t iJ a. Public Hearing --Consideration of granting a conditional use permit allowing operation of a Dublic utility facility in a PZM zone. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: If the Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the ordinance amendment allowing public utilities in the PZM zone, then Planning Commission needs to consider granting a conditional use permit allowing operation of a public utility facility In a PZM zone. Following is a brief review of the changes made to the site plan since the Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan presented at the previous meeting. Fuel Disoensinq Tanks At the City Council meeting conducted on May 11, 1991, Council reviewed the recommendations made by the Planning Commission and recommended that the fuel dispensing tanks remain in the position as was originally proposed. A copy of the meeting minutes are attached, which outline the reasons why it was felt that the tanks belong on the west side of the property versus the east side of the property. Council felt that the site plan should remain unchanged with the tanks on the west side of the property because the impact of fuel dispensing on the adjoining property can be minimized through installation of a screening fence. In addition, the proposed location of the fuel tanks will allow for adequate security of the fuel dispensing area and will result in optimum traffic flow. Council went on to request that the Planning Commission be responsible for the final design of the fuel dispensing area screen, which should be established via the conditional use permit Planning Commission review process. John Simola informed me that he does not have a strong preference either way with regard to the type of screening used. He did note that planting of evergreens in the short run may not provide as good of a scroen but in the long run will probably be butter looking than a cyclone fence with slate topped by barbed wire. Simola also noted that the above -ground gas tank will only be 614" high and 13' long, which will enable the tank to be screened rather easily. No specific strategy for screening the tank has boon recommended at this time. Planning Commission Is asked to review this q specific atom and come up with a recommendation. 13 Planning Commission Agenda - 6/7/92 Tree ReQuirement The tree requirement for this development site is 38 trees. I walked the site with Roger Mack and found that there currently are 37 trees on site. Actually, there are more than 37 trees= however, some of the trees did not meet the minimum in terms of size, and in those instances I counted one tree for every two trees that are undersized. After the adjustments were made for the smaller trees, the total number of trees counted amounted to 37. This does not include any trees that would be planted as part of an effort to screen the facility from the neighboring apartment units. The development, therefore, meets the tree planting requirement. Parking At the present time, there is sufficient parking apace to allow for one vehicle for each employee and up to six additional vehicles. Therefore, the plan meets the parking requirement. It should be noted that future phasing will result in displacement of some of the parking spaces. This will require that employee parking be developed at another location on the site. I B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to recommend granting the conditional use permit allowing a public utility building as a conditional use In the PEM zone. Motion is based on the finding that the proposed site plan conforms with the conditions noted by ordinance, which will result in a facility that is consistent with the character of the area and will not result in depreciation of adjoining land values. Under this alternative, Planning Commission Is satisfied with the site plan and is convinced that the facility site plan and design will fit well with the neighborhood. Motion to deny granting the conditional use permit allowing a public utility building as a conditional use in the PLM zono. Under this alternative, Planning Commission Isn't comfortable with the site plan as proposed and is concerned that if executed, the resulting activity at the site could result in depreciation of adjoining land values. C Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 C. STAFF RECOKMIENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission select alternative il. The proposed expansion of the public works facility will result in a number of changes to the site that will improve the appearance of the site; most notably, the boundary between the facility and the adjoining apartments will be treated with either a screening fence or evergreens, which will result in a buffering of the impact of the public works facility on the adjoining residential area. In addition, there will be some screening of storage areas from the view of the County Road 39 right-of-way. All in all, the project will result in significant improvements to the site, which will result in a direct benefit to the neighborhood. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of revised site plan; Copy of 5/11/92 Council minutes. Is C=InCML OSE PERRIT APPLICATION SITE PLM - REVISED 5/28/92 � — N • RBVISIOSS An EIGELIGET® !t9 PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY PEASE I _ II SITE PLAN SCHOOL PROPERTY ALONG ENTIRE NORTHEAST SIDE OF PROPERTY ON OTHER SIDE OF TRACKS r•,• / •. ;' GRAVEL SURFACE EVERGREEN STORAGE/DRIVE AREA F\ RAIL ROAD TRACKS SCREEN 10' ,t/ r — — -t '. SEP I / PRA50.II I \....;.� \ t tYhaea L �-•----........- W bei. Asphalt •�:s� �� FUTUREPu ' \ E ! s —/ di: panaer �©� '. t— —.- ASPHALT_.STORAGE AxF1� , k l pXAfEQ— _1 1 GRAVEL SURFACE O \ ter" L—_ --j— _ _ _ �'. EXISTING AS YRALT Bitnminoue\� \ J 4 A0 A Seem I'• fC _el/M I. �w.000_I iOMp.l1 • IfY�w_e Met uw.. Ivll ,C�1, O/ OIOIIIC000 ' ftff,I+rSlLfl�w•F T• COPY Council Minutes - 5/11/92 9. Consideration of approval of plans and specifications and confirmation of advertisement for bids for phase I of the public works facility expansion. Bret Weiss, reviewed the plans and specifications with Council. Clint Herbst indicated his concern regarding the cost ($62,000) to allow natural lighting to light the interior of the maintenance building. He asked what percent of the work done by the maintenance crew is actually done inside and wondered why natural lighting is so important given the amount of work actually completed inside the structure. Ren Maus asked if the natural lighting is nice or is it necessary. The City has had bad experiences with leaky roofs in the past. How is the skylight designed to assure the City that leaks will not occur? Bret Weiss reviewed the skylight design and noted that leaks should not be a problem. It was noted by John Simola that the interior space of the maintenance building will be used for more than just storing vehicles. During the day, the space will be used for vehicle maintenance, sign maintenance, and other activities that require adequate lighting. Council discussion then focused on recommendations made by the Planning Commission with regard to the site plan. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that during a sketch plan review, the Planning Commission recommended that the City consider changing the proposed location of the gas dispenser from the proposed location on the west side of the property near the entrance to the garage to the west side of the property. Planning Commission believed that this change should be considered because of the potential impact of the gas dispensing activity on the adjoining residential property to the east. O'Neill went on to inform Council that technically, public works facility expansion does not require a conditional use permit because the City ordinance states that all uses existing at the time of the establishment of the PZM zone are allowed as permitted uses in the PZM zone. Due to the fact that the public works facility was in place when the PZM zone was established, technically the expansion of the public works facility need not require a conditional use permit. It Council Minutes - 5/ 11/92 O'Neill went on to note, however, that it was his view, as well as the view of the City Administrator and Planning Commission, that a mistake was made in the drafting of the ordinance regulating the PZM zone. He noted that under the existing language, all uses, including the Ruff Auto parts business, would be allowed to expand into any PZM area without a conditional use permit. It was Rick Nolfste ller's recollection that the PZM zone never intended to allow uses such as the Ruff Auto parts business to be allowed to expand into any area in the PZM zone. Rick Wolfsteller also informed Council that in 1981, the public works facility expansion completed at that time did require a conditional use permit. It was his view that requiring a conditional use permit meets the spirit of the ordinance and the ordinance should be corrected accordingly. O'Neill went on to note that the Planning Commission has proposed to correct the situation by abolishing that section of the ordinance that would allow otherwise non -conforming uses in the PZM zone to be allowed as permitted uses in the PZM tone. In addition, the Planning Commission is proposing a zoning ordinance amendment which would allow a maintenance facility as a conditional use in the PZM zone. Dan Blonigen stated that the Planning Commission had no business providing input on the site plan for the public works facility. John Simola noted that he was unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting; therefore, he was not able to outline various reasons why the fuel dispensing facility needed to be located on the east side of the property. He noted that the location as proposed is the most convenient and efficient location in terms of vehicular movement on the site. At this location, vehicles can be fueled prior to entering the garage. Maintaining a secure area around the dispensing facility can be easily accomplished at this location with a fence. This fence can be opaque, which would thereby screen the fuel dispensing area. The location as proposed by the Planning Commission on the west side of the site would make it very difficult to secure the area and more difficult to screen as well. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve the plans and specifications and approve the component of the site plan which would result in the fuel dispensing facility to be located along the eastern side of the property as proposed in the original site plan. Fuel dispensing at this location is acceptable because Impacts on the adjoining property can be minimized through Installation of a screening fence; furthermore, the proposed location of the fuel tanks will allow for adequate security of tho fuel dispensing area and will result in optimum traffic flow. Final design of the fuel dispensing area screen is to be established via the conditional use permit/Planning Commission review process. Notion carried unanimously. O S Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 Public Hearing --Consideration of a zoninqL ordinance amendment to Chapter 10-6 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which identifies permitted uses in the PEN zone by deleting or amending 10-6 JClt "Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter." Applicant. City of Monticello Planning Commission. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As noted in a previous agenda item, the language contained in this section of the ordinance appears to allow those uses existing at the time of the adoption of the PEN zoning district to be allowed as permitted uses. Under the present law, those uses that were inconsistent with the previous zoning district regulations (Ruff Auto) would be allowed to expand. In reviewing this matter with Rick Wolfsteller, it was hie recollection that the section now under review was included in the PEN zoning district regulations to allow uses existing at the time of adoption of the PEN zone that were also consistent with the original zoning district to continue without the restrictions of being a non -conforming use. The problem is, there is no record kept of what the zoning district was prior to the rezoning to PZM, and there is no listing of what was allowed as a permitted use prior to the rezoning. It appears to staff that the simplest way to handle this matter is to eliminate the section of the ordinance as proposed and simply allow the permitted uses and conditional uses to occur as identified in the PEN regulations. Any existing uses that may have been in place and lawful prior to the inception of the PEN zoning district would continue to be allowed as lawful nonconforming uses. At such time that a lawful non -conforming use in a PEN zone needs to expand, the property owner will simply need to apply for an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Although the PEN zoning district is relatively large, there do not appear to be very many uses occurring that may have been allowed before but not now allowable under the PEN rule. The bottom line is, if a land use is not identified in the PEN zoning district regulations, then in order for it to expand or be located in the PEN zone, a zoning ordinance amendment will need to be adopted. i Al Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 i B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve an ordinance amendment abolishing Section 10-6 [C], "Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter." Motion is based on the finding that the current language is not consistent with the intent of the ordinance, as the literal interpretation of the language allows uses not consistent with the PZM zone purpose to be allowed as permitted uses In the PZM zone. 2. Motion to deny approval of an ordinance amendment abolishing Section 10-6 [C], "Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter." Under this alternative, the Planning Commission is comfortable with the language as existing in the ordinance. This alternative would allow Ruff Auto or any other use in existence prior to the adoption of the PZM zoning regulations that might be inconsistent with the PZM purpose to expand or be established in the PZM zone. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this section of the ordinance be abolished. It is not our recommendation to modify the language In order to try to capture the intent of the original language. It is our view that the simplest way to handle the matter is to abolish this section and consider amending the zoning ordinance on an individual basis to allow uses that might have been otherwise covered by this section of the ordinance. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. 17 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT CHAPTER 10, SECTION 6, OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING PERMITTED USES IN THE PZM ZONE BE AMENDED BY DELETING THE FOLLOWING: [CJ Those uses that exist prior to the adoption of this chapter. Adopted this 8th day of June, 1992. City Administrator 6� C Mayor V L 14 Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 lo. Public Hearin --A oreliminary Plat request entitled "Silver Fox^ commercial subdivision to subdivide an existina 6.69 -acre tract of unolatted land. Applicant. Ed and Arlvs Larson. ( J.O. ) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: A9 of 2 p.m., Friday, Nay 29, the required information has not been submitted to City staff= therefore, staff requests that Planning Commission continue the public hearing. to 250 East Broadway Kay 27, 1992 P. O. Box 1141 Y Monticello, MN 55362.9245 Phone: (612) 295.2711 Metro: (612) 333-5739 Fax. (612) 295.4404 Mr. Paul Wellen Paul Wellen i Associates 18 North 23rd Avenue St. Cloud, MN 56303 Dear Mr. Wellen: Enclosed you will find correspondence from the City Engineer which consists of a review of the grading and drainage plan associated with the Silver Fox commercial plat. Please review the comments and incorporate them into your update of the preliminary plat. If you have Questions regarding the City Engineer's comments, please talk to him directly. In order for this agenda item to be addressed by the Planning Commission, it is important that the updated version of the preliminary plat be submitted to City staff no later than noon on Thursday, May 28, 1992. If you should have any questions, give me a call. Yours truly, ITY OF MONTICELLO O'Neill sistant Administrator JO/kd Enclosure cci Bret Weiss, City Engineer John Simola, Public Works Director File Orr t11c. 2021 Fast Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55413 May 26, 1992 612-331.8660 FAX 331-3806 Engineers Architects Planners Surveyors Mr. Jeff O'Neill City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Bou 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Silver Fox Commercial Plat Review OSM Project No. 1748.97 Dear Mr. O'Neill: We have received and reviewed the preliminary plat submittal prepared by Paul Wellen and Associates dated May 4, 1992. It appears that most of the platting information has been included on the plan; however, the grading and drainage portion of the plan is not complete at this time. The following items should be further addressed: 1. The existing versus proposed contours are not clearly defined. The line type should be specified in the legend as to what each symbol represents. 2. Proposed driveway locations for lots one and three should be defined. The Wright County Engineering Department should be notified that a driveway access permit will be requested along County Road 117. 1 would assume that lot one will receive driveway access from Cedar Street. The Cedar Street access, however, should be located a sufficient distance from the Cedar Street and County Road 117 intersection. 3. The drainage patterns are not dearly defined. The stormwater discharge plan has not been provided for this site and should be developed for the future submittal. This should include potential runoff volumes for the existing and proposed conditions. 4. More spot elevations should be placed around the existing facilities so that the actual drainage patterns could be identified more easily. 5. The ditches have not been identified along the existing roads. These should be identified so that pad locations and elevations can be determined. � 6. All lots should have proposed FFE (Finished Floor Elevation) established. The existing building should have an as -built elevation placed on the plan. D Mr. Jeff O'Neill May 26, 1992 Page 2 The drainage from lot three is proposed to discharge to the southeast; however, this appears to be the low spot for the entire surrounding area Ponding may be required in this location if other drainage alteratives are not available. This should be further identified. The centerline elevations of the road along the plat should be placed at random intervals on the plan so that the pad elevations can be determined I will continue to pursue some of the drainage issues to determine if the City can assist the developer in any way. Please give me a call at 378-7440 should you have any questions or comments regarding this letter. Sincerely, ORR-SCHEIEN-MAYERON & AS -S JOCIATES, C Bret A. Weiss, P.E. Project Manager jme cc John Simola - City of Monticello C Planning Commission Agenda - 6/2/92 11. Public Hearin --A conditional use request to Section 20-2-C of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance which requires that a planned unit development include an area of at least 3 acres. �plicant, Investors Together. AND 12. Public Hearin --A replattinq request to subdivide Outlot A of the East view residential subdivision. Applicant, Investors Together. AND 13, Public Hearing --A conditional use request allowing a townhouse develovwnt in an R-2 sone. Applicant, Investors Together. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As of 10 a.m., Friday, May 29, the information requested from Investors Together has not been submitted to City staffs therefore, staff requests that the Planning Commission table these items. U. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of letter faxed and mailed to Otto & Associates and Investors Together dated May 27, 1992. 19 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 May 27, 1992 Monticello. MN 55362.9245 Phone•. (612) 295.2711 Metro: (612) 333.5739 Fax: (612) 295.4404 Mr. Ed Otto Otto 6 Associates 9 NM Division Buffalo, MN 55313 Dear Mr. Otto: Enclosed you will find a copy of the Battle Rapids site plan review prepared by the City Engineer. Please review his comments and incorporate them into the preliminary plat as requested. If you should have any questions regarding any pointe contained within the engineer's review, please call the City Engineer directly. Please submit your updated preliminary plat to City staff no later than noon on Thursday, May 28, 1992. If you should have any questions, please call. Yours truly, ITY OF MONTIgELLO *°°eil� A,stant Adminis rator JO/kd Enclosure cc: Investors Togothor File 1-11 t