Planning Commission Agenda Packet 09-05-1989AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MOWICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, September 5, 1989 — 7:30 p.m.
Members: Richard Carlson, Mori Malone, Dan MCOonnon, Cindy Lemm,
Richard Martie
7:30 p.m. 1. Call to order.
7:32 p.m. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held August 1,
1989.
7:34 p.m. 3. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow an additional
driveway within 40 feet of an existing driveway. Applicant,
Titan Recreational Products, Inc.
7:54 p.m. 4. Public Hearing - An ordinance amendment to allow as a
conditional use a laundromat/dry cleaners in a PZM
(performance sora mixed) sone. Applicant, Curt and Anna Mae
Hoglund.
8:04 p.m. 5. Public Hearing - An ordinance amendment to allow as a
conditional use a car wash in a PSM (performance zone mixed)
zone.
8:14 p.m. 6. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow a
laundromat/dry cleaners in a PZM (performance zone mixed)
zone. Applicant, Curt and Anna Mae Hoglund.
8:29 p.m. 7. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow a car wash
In a PZM (performance sone mixed) zone. Applicant, Curt and
Anna Mae Hoglund.
8:44 p.m. 8. Public Hearing - An ordinance amendment to allow as a
conditional use a church in an I-2 (heavy industrial) sone.
Applicant, A Glorius Church.
8:59 p.m. 9. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow a church
in an I-2 (heavy industrial) sone. Applicant, A Gloriue
Church.
ADDITIONAL INPORMATION ITEMS
9:14 p.m. 1. An ordinance amendment to allow as a conditional use a bed and
breakfast in a PEM (performance sorts mixed) zone. Applicant,
Merrill Busch. Council action: Approved as per Planning
Commission recommendation.
9316 P.M. 2. Consideration of an application for a conditional use permit
which would allow operation of a bed and breakfast in a PEM
(performance zone mixed) sone. Applicant, Merrill Busch.
Council actions Approved as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
Planning Commission Agenda
September 5, 1989
Page 2
9:18 P.M. 3. A sisple subdivision request to allow a subdivision of a B-3
(highway business) lot. A variance request to allow less than
the minimum 5 -foot green area separation from property line to
parking lot curb. Applicant, Monticello Auto Body. Council
action: The si:ple subdivision request was approved as per
Planning commission recommendation. The variance request was
denied as per Planning Compassion recommendation.
9:20 p.m. d. Set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning
Commission meeting for Tuesday, October 3, 1989, 7:30 p.m.
9:22 p.m. S. Adjournment.
I
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING 00MKISSION
Tuesday, August 1, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Richard Carlson, Cindy Lem, Richard Martie, and
Dan MCConnon.
Members Absent: Mori Malone.
Staff Present: Gary Anderson.
1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at
7:30 p.m.
2. Motion was made by Dan MCConnon, seconded by Richard Mattie, to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting held July S, 1989. Motion carried
unanimously with Mori Malone absent.
Ordinance amendment to allow as a conditional use a bed and breakfast in
a PZM (pertormance zone mlxec) zone. Applicant, Merrlil Buscn.
Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning Commieeion
members and members of the public that were present the City's intent to
propose an ordinance amendment to allow as a conditional use a bed and
breakfast in a PZM (performance zone mixed) zone. The list of conditions
were attached as eight separate conditions to a proposed bed and
breakfast facility. Those conditions were explained in detail to members
of the Planning Commission and members of the
public that were present.
With no further input from the Planning Commission members, Chairperson
Richard Carlson then opened the meeting for input from the public.
Mr. Robert Jamison, adjoining property owner to the east, was present to
express his pleasure with Mr. and Kra. Merrill Busch in their attempts to
renovate this historical site.
with no further input from the public, Chairperson Richard Carlson closed
the public hearing and opened the meeting for further input from the
Planning Coumission members.
With no further input from the Planning Commission members, motion was
made by Cindy Lem, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve an ordinance
amendment to allow an a conditional use a bed and breakfast in a PLM
(performance zone mixed) zone, with the following factors considered:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the municipal
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposal amendment is compatible with the geographic area and
the character of the surrounding area.
3. The proposed amendment will not lend to or actually depreciate
the area in which it is proposed.
d. The :meed for such use has been sufficiently demonstrated.
III, Motion carried unanimously with Mori Malone absent.
0
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/1/89
4. Consideration of application fora conditional use permit which would
allow operation or a Dem ano oreaxtast in a PZM zone. Applicant, Merrill
Busch.
Mr. Merrill Busch, the applicant for the proposed conditional use
request, explained to Planning Commission members his intended use of the
former Rand Mansion for a bed and breakfast facility. The Busch's intend
to utilize the main floor of the existing 2-1/2 story home for two
separate kitchen areas with additional dining and living rooms within the
main floor. The second floor of the to -be -renovated structure would
consist of five separate sleeping rooms with their own private
bathrooms. On the third floor of the proposed structure would be the
living quarters for the residents or owners of this structure, that being
Merrill and Duffy Busch.
With no further input from the public, Chairperson Richard Carlson then
closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the
Planning Commission members.
There being no further input from the Planning Commission members, a
motion was made by Dan McConnon, seconded by Cindy Lamm, to approve the
conditional use permit which would allow a bed and breakfast operation at
the former Rand Mansion now owned by Merrill Busch subject to the
conditions as listed in the recent ordinance amendment to the City
Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously with Mori Malone absent.
S. A eipQle subdivision request to allow a subdivision of a B-3 (hi3jhway
Dus iilevariance se) lot. A variae request to allow less tnan the mnnlmum 5 -.:Jot
Cgreen area separation rrom property line to parxing lot cure. Applicant,
ticeuo Auto awy.
Zoning Administrator, Gary Anderson, explained to Planning Commission
members Mr. Johnson's simple subdivision request and where the variance
request also lies in relationship to the site plan. The proposed simple
subdivision request does meet the minimum requirements under 9-3 zoning,
that being a minimum of 100 feet of lot frontage on a public
right-of-way. Mr. Anderson also explained to Planning Commission members
two of the conditions the City staff would like to see addressed to this
simple subdivision, those being the proposed new drainage and utility
easements be described and recorded prior to the issuance of building
permit for the proposed development of this building situ And a document
be recorded with Parcel B indicating that Parcel B is not serviced by
city water and sewer and that the buyer/seller is responsible for the
complete installation of a water and sewer installation into this
Parcel B. The recording of this document be recorded within 30 days of
the August 1, 1989, Planning Cbmaiaaion meeting date.
Chairperson Richard Carlson then opened the meeting for input from the
public. There being no input from the public, motion was made by Cindy
Lem, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve the simple subdivision
request to subdivide an existing 8-3 (highway business) lot into two lots
with the following conditions:
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/1/89
a. The proposed new drainage and utility easements be described and
recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit for the
proposed development of this building site.
b. A document be recorded with Parcel B indicating that Parcel B is
not serviced by city water and sewer and that the buyer/seller is
responsible for the complete installation of a water and serer
installation into this Parcel S. The recording of this document
to be recorded within 30 days of the August 1, 1989, Planning
Commission meeting date.
Motion carried unanimously with Mori Malone absent.
Chairperson Richard Carlson then opened the meeting for input from the
public in regards to Mr. Johnson's variance request. There being no
input from the public, Chairperson Richard Carlson closed the public
hearing portion of the variance request and opened the meeting for input
from the Planning Commission members.
Motion was made by Dan MoConnon, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve
the variance request to allow less than the minimum 5 -foot green area
separation from the property line to the parking lot curb. Motion
carried unanimously with Mori Malone absent. Reason for approval: Given
the constraints of the building as placed on the end of the building and
site layout with the minimum parking apace required, Mr. McConnon felt
that the variance request should be approved.
ADDITIONAL rNPGRMATION rTEKS
1. A variance request to allow a deck to be constructed within the side yard
setback requirement. Applicant, Michael and Dixie Talbott. Council
action: No action necessary, as the variance request did not come before
them.
2. A variance request to allow a canopy to be constructed within the front
yard setback requirement. Applicant, American Legion Post 1260. Council
action: No action necessary, as the variance request did not come before
them.
3. A variance request to parking and driveway area curb requirements. A
variance request pertaining to hard surface requirements and driveway
areas. A variance request pertaining to off-street parking requirement
of 25 stalls. Applicant requests a variance of eight stalls. A variance
request pertaining to screening of storage areas from the public
right-of-way. Applicant, Pair's Garden Center. Council action:
Appealed by Councilmexber Dan Blonigen. will be heard by the City
Council at its first regularly scheduled meeting in August on August 14,
1989.
4. A conditional use request to allow expansion of a storage and sales area
associated with a landscape center in a B�4 zone. Applicant, rair's
Garden Center. Council action: No action required, as the conditional
use request did not cane before them.
IS
Planning Commission Minutes — 8/1/89
5. It was the consensus of the four Planning Commission mestere present to
set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission
meeting for Tuesday, September 5, 1989, 7:30 p.m.
6. Notion was meds by Dan McCornon, seconded by Richard Martie, to adjourn
the meeting. The motion carried unanimously with Mori Malone absent.
The meeting adjourned at 8:44 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Awn
Gary raw
zoning Ju ministrator
C
9
Planning Oomaission Agenda - 9/5/89
3. Public Hearing - A variance request to allow an additional driveway within
40 feet of an existing ariveway. Applicant, Titan Recreationai Proaucts,
Inc. (J.O.)
7his item is removed from formal consideration, as the applicant did not
supply the information needed.
Planning Commission Agenda - 9/5/89
4. Public Bearing - An ordinance amendment to allow as a conditional use a
laundromat/dri cleaners In a PEM (Qertormance zone mixed) zone.
Applicant, Curt and Anna Mae Hogluna. MID
5. Public Hearin - An ordinance amendment to allow as a conditional use a
car wash in a $ZM (performance zone mixed) zone. AND
6. Public Hearing - A conditional use regest to allow a laundromat/dry
cleaners in a PEM (performance zone mixes) zone. Applicant, Curt and Anna
Mae Hoglund. AND
7. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow a car wash in a PZM
(Qerrormance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, Curt and Anna Mae Hoglund.
(J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The ordinance amendments along with the conditional use permit requests
associated with the agenda items above stem from a development concept
which calls for development of a residence/laundromat/dry cleaners/car
wash facility in a PZM zone. Staff, along with the applicant, requests
that the Planning Commission discuss this matter in general and table its
decision pending revision of the attached este/sketch plan. It is
requested that the Planning Commission table this issue, as there are a
number of details that should be resolved regarding the potential use of
the property that are not clearly described on the site plan. This
information is necessary in order to prepare a parking configuration that
reflects the need generated by the activity within the structure. For
instance, the ultimate need for parking space is not well understood, as
the applicant has not indicated what the ultimate use of the upper floor
will be. At this time, the applicant is proposing to use the upper floor
as hie residence. This upper floor, however, consists of 3,200 square
feet of floor spaco, which could be converted into three apartments or
could be converted into office space. Such a conversion would impact the
need for parking. It to important that the site plan be established so as
to allow expansion of parking as the use of the upper floor is
intensified. In addition, please note that the existing site plan shows
15 parking spaces, which is six parking spaces fewer than the required 21
spaces associated with a single apartment and 3,200 square feet of
service/retail space. If the upper floor is developed as office space,
then an additional 19 parking spaces would be needed according to the
ordinance. In other words, the current plan reveals 15 parking spaces
while the ultimate development might need as many as 40 parking spaces.
It is important that the site plan shows where the additional parking
spaces will be located at such time that the upper floor to developed into
office space.
As noted earlier, Planning Commission is asked to review this item only
and no decisions are requested regarding the zoning amendment issues.
Following are some considerations, however, to keep in mind during the
discussion.
Planning Commission Agenda - 9/5/89
LAUNDROMAT ACTIVITY IN THE PSM SONE
According to the zoning ordinance, laundromat activities are allowed in
the B-1 commercial zone, which, therefore, makes it a permitted use in the
PSM zone, as all uses in the B-2 and B-1 zones are considered allowable
uses in the PSM zone. Therefore, no zoning ordinance amendment is
required along with permission to operate the laundromat portion of this
development.
DRY/CLEANING As A CoNDrTIom USE IN THE PSM SONE
In contrast with the laundromat activities, dry cleaning is not allowed as
a permitted use in the B-1, B-2, or B-3 zones, and is allowed only as a
permitted use in the B-4 zone. There are no conditions associated with
operation of a dry cleaning establishment in the 9-4 zone. Therefore,
there are no preset conditions that we can use in conjunction with a
conditional use permit in the PSM zone. According to the City Planner,
dry cleaning establishments have been encouraged to develop in business
areas and discouraged from mixing with residential uses, as the chemicals
and fumes associated with dry cleaning operation can have a negative
impact on adjoining residential land uses. This is one reason why dry
cleaning is allowed only in the B-4 zone. Of course, if the zoning
ordinance is amended to allow a dry cleaning establishment to operate at
the proposed site, then the opportunity exists for dry cleaning
establishments to be located in any other PZM zone in the community.
Please refer to the zoning mop for information on where those areas are.
As you will see on the map, there are PSM zones that are adjacent to
residential areasr and as such, locating a dry cleaning establishment in
these areas might be detrimental to the property values of the adjoining
residential neighborhoods. Planning Commission my wish to give the
applicant the opportunity to explain the operation and to discuss the dry
cleaning techniques that will be used at the facility. The developer of
thio facility has indicated that the chemicals and processes that he
intends on using in conjunction with this facility will not create the
impact normally associated with a dry cleaning store. Planning Commission
may wish to get more detail information on this assertion, and if
possible, visit a facility that uses the dry cleaning techniques that are
proposed for this site. In that way, the Planning Comaission can get a
first hand idea of how this facility might impact a neighborhood that does
include apartments and townhomes.
After researching this matter more, Planning Commission may determine that
a dry cleaning operation is suitable in this area but may not be suitable
in other DEM zones. If this to the case, then the conditional use permit
may need to be written in a manner that will exclude dry cleaning
operations from being established in PEM areas that might be more
sensitive to the impacts of the dry cleaning activity.
7
V
Planning Commission Agenda - 9/5/89
Please carefully review the intent of the performance zone and think about
the proposed use in terms of the goals set forth for that zone. In terms
of the dry cleaning portion of the business, it may be that the PZM zone
is intended for limited or neighborhood retail development, whereas the
dry cleaning activity is more of a regional or highway business activity.
Therefore, this portion of the business may not be appropriate in this
zone for that reason. By the same token, however, this particular PZM
area directly abuts a major thoroughfare and, therefore, it might be an
appropriate area for this type of activity from a ccammercial standpoint.
CAR WASH
Again, Planning Commission is not asked to make a decision on this matter
until the site plan is finalized. As noted earlier, the car wash portion
of the project is planned for sometime in the future and will not be part
of the initial development. The applicants wish, however, to gain the
zoning amendment prior to development of the structure. Car wash activity
is allowable only as a conditional use in the 8-3 (highway commercial)
district. The conditions associated with car wash activity can be found
in the attached copies of the zoning ordinance. The issues pertaining to
allowing a car wash to locate in a PEM zone are similar to those issues
associated with development of a dry cleaning store in a PZM zone. Again,
the intent of the PEM zone is to establish a transition between
residential and neighborhood or limited commercial development. Car wash
activity to typically related to highway comamrcial development found in
heavily trafficked business areas. It may be that in this situation with
a PEM zone directly abutting a major thoroughfare, it may make sense to
create a conditional use permit for car washes in a PEM zone and then
design the conditions in a manner that will restrict car wash development
to limited areas within PEM zones. Per instance, one condition might be
that car washes would be allowed as a conditional use in a PEM zone when
the car wash facility directly abuts a major thoroughfare or frontage road
to a major thoroughfare. Another condition could include a requirement
that car washes in a PZM zone must not create a noise level greater than
the noise created by convenience store activities.
ZONING AMEM M M DECISION PACTOM
According to chapter 22 of the zoning ordinance, the Planning Caamission
shall consider possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment or
conditional use. Its judgement shall be booed upon, but not limited to,
the following factors:
1. Relationship to municipal comprehensive plan.
2. The geographical area involved.
3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which
it is proposed.
C. Time character of the surrounding area.
5. The demonstrated need for such use.
Planning Owmnission Agenda - 9/5/89
Planning Commission is asked to consider those five factors as the site
plan is discussed on Tuesday. At that time, we will be asking the
questions that will assist in determining the possible adverse affects of
the proposed amendment or conditional use on properties located in the PZM
zone.
D. DATA:
Oopy of the site/sketch plant Map showing project location and adjoining
properties and land useai Selected excerpts from the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance.
00
OR.
NT
L
10-8 IN) 3
10-10
3. Surrounding Property Owners: Surrounding
property owners shall be notified in writing
of any proposed developments. Applicants
shall be encouraged to meet with property
owners prior to public hearings or when
ever such a meeting will allow better
involvement of neighbors in the review
process. While complete consent of adjacent
property owners shall not be mandatory
for approval of projects developed under
the PZ-1Mized Zoning involvement
with adjacent owners shall be encouraged
through all steps within the approval
process.
6. Submission Requirements, Amendments and
Special Requirements:
(a) Ali applicants shall submit final
building plans plans to the City prior
to the granting of permits. No changes
to the plane shall be permitted without
consent from the City Council. All
requirements as a condition of approval
shall be addressed in the final development
agreement and indicated on all appropriate
plans. City Staff shall inspect
the work during constrnetion to assure
that such plans are followed.
(b) The City Council may at its discretion
place special requirements that will
ensure the complete construction
of all requirements. Such conditions
may include Performance bonds, time
limitations for commencement of the
work, and limitations on the hours
Of construction.
(c) when areas are to be preserved by
the developer the City may require
that such areas be fenced during
construction to ensure that equipment
will not damage preservation ares.
10-9: PROCEDURES: Applicants requesting s conditional
use permit shall submit plans, specifications, and
other materials as outlined in Chapter 20 of this
Ordinance. Application procedures shall be defined
pursuant to provisions contained in Chapter 20. Section 4
of this Ordinance.
10.10: COMPLIANCE: No development shall occur . nor shall
Z any building permits be issued for any construction,
that is not in accord with the approved final plans.
D
10-8 (M] 2(b)
iv. Usable Recreation
Space
10-8 (M] 2(c)
-when the project provides
unable recreational open
space above the normal
requirement that area
may also be deducted from
the lot area requirement.
V. Innovative Housing - when the project shall
propose innovative housing
opportunities a reduction
of the site requirements
may be permitted. Such
Innovations must be demonstrat9E
such that this type of
housing would not be feasible
without a density credit.
Financial feasibility
alone shall not be considered
unless the applicant can
demonstrate that the housing .
will benefit low and/or
moderate income households.
(c) Negative Credits
L. Under special conditions the
City may consider requiring additional
area requirements to ensure the
preservation of significant natural
site features, when utility demands
will place a burden on public
facilities, when projected traffic
counts ars greater than the carrying
capacity of the surrounding transportation
system.
11. when imposing negative credits
the City shall base such determinations
on studies prepared by qualified
professional City Staff or consultants.
when such conditions may warrant
the Staff shall direct the applicant
to have prepared such studies
that will demonstrate that the"
issues will in fact not cause
o negative impact to the health,
safety, and general welfare of
the City. Should the planning
Commission or the City Council
foal that these issues have not
y bean properly addressed they
shall withhold any approval until
such time u the applicant or
City Staff has prepared necessary
studies. �.'
10-8 (N] 1(e)
(e) When projects propose to construct
more then one principal structure
on the sacro lot the above guidelines
shall apply to the perimeter of the
site. Internal setbacks shall give
due regard to such consideration
as fire protection and public safety.
traffic visibility at circulation
intersections. Reduction of internal
standards shall be permitted if the
applicant can demonstrate that external
setbacks are adequate and that the
reduction is used to enhance the
layout or -hall preserve significant
natural features.
2. Density Requirements
(a) Density calculations shall be based
on the zoning raquirementa of the
district the project would be zoned
for if conventional zoning were applied.
(b) In applying these standards credits
for innovative construction methods
or provision of amenities above normal
/ construction may be permitted. The
l following is a list of density credits.
10-8 (N) 2(b)
i. Underground parking -400 sq. ft. per space
provided under the
structure.
li. preservation of
Natural Ieatures - Rhan the project will
preserve significant
natural futures the
area preserved may be
deducted from the required
lot area. This deduction
shall not include required
setbacks.
iii. Additional
Landscaping - When the project provides
for landscaping above and
beyond the normal requirement,
a density allowance shall
be permitted. The extent of
the credit shall be determined
by evaluating the visibility
of the project from adjacent
Weals and similar projecto
within the City.
1
10-8 ELI
[Ll STANDARDS: Except as specifically provided
herein, there shall be no fixed standards
for conditional uses within the Mixed Performance
Zoning District. In their review the City
shall take into account standards that are
contained in other sections of this Ordinance
that most closely resemble those that would
apply to a similar use if it were proposed
in a district other than the Performance Zone.
(Ml PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS: The following are
guidelines for reviewing projects within the
PZ -Mixed Zoning District. Procedures for
the review of such proposals ahall be as outlined
in the PUD section of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance. The City Staff and Planning Commission
shall review the project and give recommendations
so as to permit the City Council to make informed
findings of fact as outlined above. Variance
from these guidelines may be permitted when
site specific conditions and specific proposal
elements show that a strict interpretation
of the guidelines will either place undue
hardship on the developer or will be detrimental
to adjacent properties. In no case shall standards
be reduced so that the findings of fact outlined
above cannot be achieved AMD in no cans shall
the guidelines prevent the City from requiring
greater standards when specific conditions
oulined in above must be satisfied.
1. Setback Guidelines
(a) Setback requirements shall be boned
upon the toning requirements of the
District for which the project would
be toned if conventional toning was
applied, as described in Chapter 3,
Section 7 of this Ordinance:
(b) Site specific conditions such as
topography, existing and proposed
vegetation, and visibility from other
properties may warrant increasing
these standards. Setbacks should
not be reduced below those set forth
In the applicable toning district.
(c) The front yard guidelines shall be
an described in Chapter 1. Section 1
of the ordinance.
�(d)
10-8 (M) 1(d)
The rear yard setback shall be as
described in Chaptar 3, Section 3
Of this Ordinance unless natural topography shall
dictate a greater setback. The applicant
shall preserve vegetation and minimise
grading to the extent that consideration 1a /
given to these features. `
Planning Commission Agenda - 9/5/89
S. Public Hearing - An ordinance amendment to allow as a conditional use a
church in an I-2 (heavy industrial) zone. Applicant, A Glorius Church.
(J.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROM:
Daniel Gensler requests that the City consider amending the zoning
ordinance to allow church and related activities to be included as a
conditional use in the I-2 (heavy industrial) zone. The request stems
from the desire to develop a church on a triangular piece of land directly
west of Electro Industries and directly south of the softball fields
located on NSP land. To the south and west of the site lies the freeway.
To the north and east of the site is the NSP Training Center. Before
looking at this zoning amendment in terms of the proposed site, Planning
Ommdesion should analyze the proposed impact of this amendment in terms
of its relationship to the municipal comprehensive plan, geographical area
involved, whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in
which it is proposed, the character of the surrounding area, and the
demonstrated need for such use.
1. Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed amendment is adverse to the comprehensive plan in a
number of ways. In terms of the land use plan, the proposed church is
in an area designated for future industrial development. In addition,
the Comprehensive Plan recognizes this area as having considerable
industrial development potential. The comprehensive plan notes that
"If the Interstate 94 interchange is constructed near the NSP plant,
industrial development potential will develop for the land near the
interchange. Industrial development of the property is dependent upon
the construction of the interchange." Obviously, this area has been
designated for industrial use, as it is in close proximity to the NSP
power plant, it has valuable freeway exposure, and it is isolated from
residential areae. Establishing church activity as a conditional use
In the I-2 zone will defeat the purpose for maintaining these areae
for future industrial use.
2. The geographical area involved.
One of the reasons why the oonprehensive plan indicates that this area
should be developed as industrial land is because the area is
strategically located to accomodate industrial development. To the
north is the NSP Training Center, which is compatible with the
industrial use of the proposed church site. To the south is the
freeway, which is also compatible with the site. To the east is an
industrial facility nor operated by Electro Industries. And farther
to the east is a high density residential area which is compatible
with the site as a transition area between I-2 land uses and R-2 land
use.
Planning Commission Agenda - 9/5/89
3. Will use tend to depreciate area in which it is proposed.
The proposal to add church activities to the list of conditional uses
in the I-2 zone creates a considerable potential for land use
conflict. Although in this situation the conflict will be minimized
by the fact that the owner of Electro Industries has an interest in
the church, the proposed amendment will open the door for development
of churches in all industrial areas, including I-1 and I-2 lands.
This amendment creates the opportunity to place church facilities in
areas normally associated with uses which, because of the nature of
the product or character of activity, requires isolation from
residential or oommmercial use. It is likely that development of a
church in one of the industrial areae in the comity could diminish
the adjoining land value in terms of its marketability as industrial
land for the obvious reason that an industrial user would not wish to
locate in an area where his business might negatively impact church
related activities.
/. Character of surrounding area.
This decision factor relates to the previous factor in that operation
of church related activities are not consistent with the character of
an area normally associated with heavy industrial activities. It is
not difficult to imagine some of the problems that might develop with
churches being located in industrial areas.
S. Demonstrated need for such use.
At present, churches are allowed as a conditional use in the R-1, R-2,
and R-3 zones. There is a significant amount of territory within the
city of Monticello that could be developed as outlined in the attached
site plan. Therefore, it is difficult to demonstrate that there is a
ncod for adding this conditional use to the list of conditional uses
now allowed in the I-2 zone. Essentially, the applicant is requesting
that the City amend its zoning ordinance because it is convenient for
the applicant to develop a church facility on land that he now owns.
Planning Oomaiasion is asked to review the points above and establish a
finding of fact. If the Planning Commission feels that this potential
site might be suitable for a church facility, then it to suggested that
the planning Commission either approve the amendment which would allow
churches to be developed in the I-2 zone, or the Planning Commission could
consider extending the zoning boundaries of the R-3 zone to the proposed
site. This action would require a separate public hearing, and it would
also require that the manufacturing structure associated with Electro
Industries be rezoned to R-3, which would create a non -conforming use.
This alternative may not be acceptable to the owner of electro
Industries. Purthermore, the idea brings up a whole new set of
complications relating to spot zoning, and it may not make sense to extend
the R-3 boundaries and thereby create a non -conforming use.
Planning Commission Agenda - 9/5/89
H. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
7
1. Motion to request -to amend the zoning ordinance to allow churches to
be developed in the I-2 zone.
Motion based on the finding that the proposed amendment is not
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the geographical and character
of the area involved, the amendment will tend to actually depreciate
the area in which it is proposed, and the applicant has failed to
sufficiently demonstrate the need for such use.
In reality, this alternative is the only feasible alternative for the
Planning Commission. The proposed amendment may create considerable
land use problems in the future if adopted as outlined in the
discussion above. Although at face value the proposed amendment may
not create a considerable land use conflict in the area that it is
proposed, the implications of the amendment on a city wide basis are
very significant.
2. Approve amendment to the zoning ordinance which would allow a church
to be developed in the I-2 (heavy industrial) zone.
Approval of this amendment would pave the way for approval of a
conditional use permit which would allow a church to be developed in
this area. The positive reasons for recommending approval of this
zoning ordinance amendment are difficult to establish. However, it is
obvious that the owner of Electro Industries has a vested interest in
the church facility. And, therefore, the site specific conflicts
between the industrial area and the church facility will not likely be
significant. This particular amendment should only be approved if
there to some method by which the church could be located in this area
without setting a significant precedent for development of church
facilities in other industrial zones within the community. At this
time, I am at a loss to find a way to acca4plish this.
C. STAPP REMVU2MTION:
Again, at face value, it appears that development of a church facility in
this area may make acme sense, as the owner of the property has control of
the industrial land directly abutting the church grounds. On the other
hand, the proposed ordinance amendment would pave the way for development
of churches in areas unsuitable for such activity. As a further note,
even though the present owner of Electro Industries has control of the
situation, there to no guarantee that this arrangement will last forever.
It is very possible that Electro Industries may change hands and that the
relationship between the church and the industrial use may no longer be
close. It is likely that this could happen in the next 25 yearer and when
it does, there will be land use conflicts between the two facilities. Per
this renew and reasons stated above, City staff strongly recrowoends
denial of the proposed amendment for reasons noted in the motion above
under alternative I1.
Planning Oomission Agenda - 9/5/89
D. DATA:
Proposed site plant Location map showing site and adjoining land uses;
Ploor plan of the church; Excerpts from the comprehensive plan; Excerpts
from the Monticello Zoning Ordinance.
,,
• �9 0
'a +
--- - •� i ..+1': }..T: Vii,• 1
et
. - i \ 'Y.'rit-try ��•-- v. t t
•r.
ub11CFQUSS4
S 1,
rY.V
ptoP d)t
RCt� ' • '`=' •' ..i' •�5. .. ... t 7. • -t ,-„_ • 'tet . \ '
•c•ri .. .'t `;,, •'t. � �};+o l,``'s•:'ti ''� 1 .".`r,''l4'�' 1,• *-. 1 ; �,� _,
�jf(IL1,jiJ a.
i �, 0 , � ; a " 1 , , `� � �"''"'_,,,,•yaiir� h T � . �iBU�e 8
• �d� � !a ` + ,,.rte" `"`- t
14
ilp
do
b
CMcotsokio Mnut��,,u��>t{{. e
\N qPk Owe
Wmaga1 $ rptriP• ' i ,
1.
Ftom 187 �f
t
5
ban ���� ••�1`itAMG
l+
I,M •wa •
I
I
I
I
I
I
An ordinanco amondmont to allow as a conditi.-A ..--- --�
a Church in an I-2 (heavy industrial) cone.
A conditional use request to allow a church in an 1-2 (heavy
industrial) cone.
A CLORIUS CHURCH
I
12, -------------------
1Gaitir 575)/ Z � 30 197. S J
MS,4137- S . 4.Z57
SG FT ACRES
—DO- Nortk
.. 64'5
i
a0
'
ide
i
.. 64'5
KITCHO/l;l'I I!CII I' 1iU71 IIII li�l •li lli III I
IIII i) I li I I I a ,I I I �I I1 �
, •i' eraa t �, �•,
! r NUR
3L'II'CHAIRS
1 I
I_ I _
I _
- J-71 I�I
it II I �
I I I I
i
•its �. II• 1 •� I�• � i -I � I
1ooK VoRI� I E T
r' I
7o 1• N9 I 1
I , tg000 L1G1 /T' I 1
d
CHAPTER 16
"I-7" HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
SECTION:
16-1. Purpose
16-7: Permitted Uses
16-1: Permitted Accessory Uses
16-4: Conditional Uses
' 16-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of the "I-7" Heavy Industrial
District is to provide for the establishment of heavy
industrial and manufacturing development and use which
because of the nature of the product or character
of activity requires isolation from residential or
commercial use.
16-7: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses
in an "I-7" District:
(A] Any use permitted in the "I-1" Light Industrial
District.
(B] The manufacturing, compounding, assembly, packaging.
treatment, or storage of products or materials
including: Breweries, cement, stone cutting,
brick, glass, batteries (wet cell), ceramic
products, mill working, metal polishing and
platting, paint (pigment mfg.), vinegar works,
rubber products, plastics, meat packing, flour,
feed grain milling, milling, coal or tar asphalt
distillation, rendering works. distillation
of bones, sawmill, lime, gypsum, plaster of
parts, glue, sire, cloth, and similar uses.
(C] Automobile assembly and major repair.
(D] Creamery and bottling plant.
(s) Foundry.
16-1: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted
accessory uses in an "I-7" District:
(A) All permitted accessory uses allow od in an
"Ir1" Light Industrial District.
16-4: CONDITIONAL OSIS: The following are conditional uses
in an "I-7" District: (Requi&a a conditional uat
peat.[ based upon paocedumA set 6o4tt(t ist and teguWed
by CCvtea ft o6 thi.6 0itdinance. )
All eonditinal uses allowed in an "I-1" Light
Industrial District.
(B] The following uses provided they meet all requirements
of Chapter 3, Section 2 of this Ordinance,
and the provisions of Chapter 22 of this Ordinance
are considered and satisfactorily met.
1. Auto wrecking. junk yard, uses auto parts
(open storage) and similar uses.
2. Incineration or reduction or waste material
other than customarily incidental to a
principal use.
3. poison, fertiliser, fuel briquettes.
d. Kilns or other heat processes fired by
means other than electricity.
S. Creosote plant.
6. Acid manufacture.
7. Storage, utilisation or manufacture of
materials or products which could decompose
by detonation.
B. Refuse and garbage disposal.
9. Commercial stock yards and slaughtering
of animals.
10. Crude oil, gasoline, or other liquid storage
tanks.
C
v
CHAPTER 15
"I-1" LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
SECTION:
15-1: Purpose
15-2: Permitted Uses
15-I: Permitted Accessory 6665
15-6: Conditional Uses
15-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of the "I-1" Light Industrial
District
is to provide for the establishment of warehousing
and light
industrial development.
15-2: PERMITTED
USES: The following are permitted uses
in an
"I-1" District:
(AJ
Radio and television.
I IBJ
Research laboratories.
[C]
Trade school.
(D)
Machine shops.
i
(E)
Paint mixing.
(EJ
Bus terminale and maintenance garage.
(GJ
Warehouses.
IHJ
Laboratories.
III
Essential services.
(J)
Governmental and public utility buildings
and structures.
IKI
Manufacturing, compounding, assembly or treatment
of articles or merchandise.
L
(LJ
Manufacture of musical instruments, novelties
and molded rubber products.
(MJ
Manufacture or assembly of electrical appliances,
instruments and devices.
IN]
Manufacture of pottery or other similar ceramic
products, wing only previously pulverised
rr
t
clay and kilns fired only by electricity or natural
g".
Of
(OJ
Manufacture and repair of electrical signs,
advertising structures, light sheet metal products,
including heating and ventilation equipment.
(P)
Blacksmith, welding or other metal shop.
(Q]
Laundries, carpet and rug cleaning.
(RI
Bottling establishments.
(S)
Building material sales and storage.
(T]
Broadcasting antennae, television and radio.
(U)
Camera and photographic supplies manufacturing.
(VI
Cartage and express facilities.
(W)
Stationery, bookbinding and other types of
manufacturing of paper and related products,
but not prcessing of raw materials for paper
production.
(x)
Dry cleaning establishments and laundries.
(Y]
Electric light or power generating stations,
le1octrical
electrical and electronic products manufacture,
service shops.
(E)
Engraving, printing and publishing.
(AAJ
Jewelery manufacturing.
(BB]
Medical, dental and optical laboratories.
ECC)
Storage or warehousing.
(=J
Wholesale business and office establishments.
18-7: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted
accessory
uses in an •I-1* District:
(A)
All permitted accessory uses as allowed in
the ^B-6" District.
15-4: CONDITIONAL
USES: The following are conditional uses
in an
•I-1• Distriot: (Requ.Wta a eonditti,onal a6c
pevnit baaed upon putedunte set 6onth in and Regulated
by Chapter Y1 o6 this 0tdi aaece. )
(A)
Open and outdoor storage as an accessory use
provided that:
9
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 this Ordinance.
3. Storage area is grassed or surfaced to
control dust.
d. 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.
9. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this Ordinance
are considered and satisfactorily met.
[H1 Open or outdoor service, sale and rental as
a principal or an accessory use and including
sales in or from motorised 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 thin Ordinance.
a. Sales area in grassed or surfaced to control
dust.
S. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this Ordinance
are considered aid satisfactorily met.
(C) Industrial planned unit development as regulated
by Chapter 20 of this Ordinance.
[D) Amusement places (such an Roller Rinks and
Dance Halls) and Bowling Alleys.
U
' (E) Consignment sales provided that:
1.
Sales and storage are not to exceed
1,000 square feet in area.
2.
At least 801 of the sales shall be
of consigned merchandise.
3.
No auctions shall take place on%the
promisee.
4.
There shall be no outside storage.
S.
The provisions of Chapter 22 are considered
and satisfactorily met.
6.
The parking requirements of Chapter
3, Section 3 are complied with in
full.
(P] 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 dust 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 " to have no direct
source of light visible from adjacent
land in residential use or from the
public right-of-way and shall be in
compliants with Chapter 3, Section 2 (8)
of this Ordinance.
4.
At the boundaries of a residential
district. a strip of not lose than
five (S) fest shall be landscaped
and screened in compliants with Chapter 3,
Section 7 (0] of this Ordinance.
S.
Parking or car magazine storage space
shall be @crooned from view of abutting
residential districts in compliance
with Chapter 3, Section 2 (0) of this
Ordinance.
9
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.
1. provisions are made to control and
reduce noise.
8. No outside storage except as allowed
in compliance with Chapter 13, Section 6
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 ba served as wall or better by
modifying the conditions.
10. She provisions of Chapter 22 of this
Ordinance are considered and Satisfactorily
met.
(G] Truck/Heavy Equipment Repair
I.
The entire Bits other than taken up
by a building, structure or plantings
shall be surfaced with a material
to control dust and drainage which
is subject to .the approval of the
City Engineer.
2.
A drainage system subject to the approval
of the City Enginsar shall be installed.
3.
The lighting stall be accomplished
in such a way as to have no direct
source of light visible from adjacent
land in residential use or from the
public right-of-way and shall be in
compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (B)
of this Ordinance.
a.
At the boundaries of a residential
district, a strip of not lass than
five (5) fast shall be landscaped
and soreened in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section T (0] of this Ordinance.
v
CS. 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
commulication devices Shall be minimized
and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 9 of thin Ordinance.
7. Provisions are made to control and
reduce noise.
I
S. No outside storage except as allowed
in compliance with Chapter 13, Section d
of this Ordinance.
9. AU conditions pertaining to a specific
sits 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.
11. A specific area shall be designated
for the exterior storage of semi -truck
trailers and/or other vehicles and/or
equipment accessory and incidental
to the truck which in being repaired/eerviced.
`i1
in the Sherburne County and Wright County area. It is
important not to alienate the commuter. Although they may
not shop during the time that they are commuting and
working outside of the City of Monticello, they and their
families may likely live in the Monticello trade areas and,
therefore, it is important for them to have a positive
attitude toward the Monticello Shopping District.
To alleviate the problem, the City has worked with the
County to provide a special 'park and pool' commuter lot.
The park and pool lot is located between the Ford
Dealership and Interstate 94 directly off Highway 25. The
commuter lot is easily accessible by Oakwood Drive and
provides more than 150 parking spots. This lot should be
able to handle the growing number of coamurters for many
years. Considering the great success of handling the
commuter problem along with clearing the way for greater
consumer parking at the shopping areas, the City should
continue the park and pool commuter lot.
Because of ever changing transportation needs, the City is
well aware that it needs a continuous evaluation and
development program. one major project that will be
affecting traffic flow within Monticello in the next few
years is the upgrading of Highway 25. Also, with the
refurbishing of Highway 25 will come a new four -lane
bridge. It will replace the present two-lane bridge that
links Monticello with communities to the north. Realising
the importance of travel along Highway 25 and over the
bridge, construction crews will keep the roadway open as
much as possible minimising delays. Along with these past
and present improvements, the City will continue to budget
funds for the ongoing public works programs dealing with
ads.
]. Industrial Develop ,
The City has in the past taken steps to encourage
development of its industrial potential. The policies of
the Glide plan represent the City's commitment to
industrial development. The overall policy is one of
encouraging industrial base in the community for job
opportunities so as to prevent the City from becoming
simply a 'commuter bedroom city'. We feel that the
strategic location of Monticello, being acme forty-five
minutes drive from the Win Cities, offers the unique
opportunity for persona who wish to be close enough to the
metropolitan area to enjoy its benefits, but not have to
live in the metropolitan area. Industrial sites of the
community have good visibility, public utilities available,
and the community offers the necessary amenities to attract
industry, including an excellent school system, an
excellent hospital, a friendly environment, a strong
shopping district, and complete City services. The City is
well located with regard to nearby recreational amenities.
A*A
Industrial development is proposed in the Guide Plan for
the area southeast of the nearest interchange between
Highway 25 and Interstate 94, known as the Oakwood
Industrial Park. In addition, the area directly east of
the Oakwood Industrial Park and vest of County Highway 118
is recommended for industrial development. The area north
of Interstate 94 between Highway 25 and Washington is also
recommended for industrial development because of exposure
to Highvay 94 and 25.
Future industrial development should be governed by high
development standards including construction codes, proper
road access, adequate off-street parking, adequate loading
space, proper site and architectural design, and adequate
landscaping. These are not unreasonable requests to make
of new development. Some marginal industrial developers
may object to such high standards and therefore they may
refuse to locate in Monticello. However, good industrial
development will abide by such high standards if they are
assured that other industrial development will abide by
similar standards. The well designed and well maintained
industrial park will maintain its value not only to the
property ovner but to the City. The City's consultants
have met with the owners of the Oakwood Industrial Park and
produced revisions in the original plat plan which will
allow greater flexibility in lot site opportunities for
potential industrial developers.
I*ts Northern States Power Generatinq Plant has proven to be
hbor for the City of Monticello both !n the
s tax base and its cooperation with the
Portions of the NSP land are utilised for
creetioneI purposes near the Wright County Montissippi
Park. The Guide Plan rocognirea the need on the part of
the City to maintain a good relationship with the NSP
Plant. One of the features of the Guide Plan is the
proposal to ultimately construct a full interchange between
Interstate 94 and County Highway 75 to serve the plant
directly off of the Interstate. This is recommended tot
two reaoone$ first, it will avoid unnecessary routing of
traffic to and from the NSP Plant via County Highway 75 and
State Highway 25 through the center of the Community$
secondly. from a safety standpoint, direct access to the
freeway should be advantageous in time of major emergency
at the NSP Plant (See Figure 10).
It the Interstate 94 interchange is constructed neat the
NBP Plant, industrial development potential will develop
for the land neat the Interchange. Industrial development
of the property is dependent upon the construction of the
Interchange.
Mother type of development that is posoible it the
intersection is constructed is the usual interchange
SiC
commercial enterprises, such as restaurants, service
stations, and quick stop stores. Considering the success
and expansion of the fun market, this may be the most
likely type of development.
S. Transportation
The road system of the City consists of various streets and
highways, each performing specific tasks. Road systems are
grouped into a number of different classifications for
administrative, planning, and design purposes. The Federal Aid
financing system, State -County -City's administrative systems,
and commercial -industrial -residential -recreational systems are
examples of the variety of highway classifications. These
classifications usually carry with them a set of minimum design
standards which are in keeping with the importance of the system
and are governed by the specific transportation services the
system is to perform. The principal consideration for
designating roads into systems are the travel desires of the
public, land access requirements based on existing and future
Land use and the continuity of the system. Pour basic purposes
of the street system are:
1. Expressways Provide for expeditious movement of large
volumes of through traffic between areas of the City and
within the region and not intended to provide land access
service.
2. Arterial Svetems Provide for through traffic movement
between &teas of the City and direct access to abutting
propertys subject to necessary control of entrances, exits,
and curb use.
1. Collectoc Systems Provide for traffic movement between
major acterials and local streets and direct access to
abutting property.
1. Local, Svetems Provides for direct access to abutting land
and for local traffic movements.
The principal arterial of the region is Interstate 91 which
connects the City with the Twin Cities forty-five miles to the
southeast, and St. Cloud thirty miles to the northwest. She
interstate system is a national system connecting Monticello
with the state and the nation. (See Piques B)
State Highway 25 is the only intermediate arterial of the area
connecting Big Leke and Buffalo. The Highway 25 Bridge crossing
of the Missisippi River establishes Monticello as a crossroads
of the region between Sherburne and Wright Counties.
fie minor arterial system includes the County Highways 75, 39,
117, 106, 118, and Township highways. Included is the proposed
frontage road system which parallels the Interstate. The minor
arterials provide a grid network which are appropriately located
-62- &
COl4IUt1ITY FACSLSTIFS POLICY
1. Preaenily, the development of land for public facilities such as
parks and playgrounds is oonsidered more important than the
acquisition of such land. However, with respect to acquisition,
land must be purchased before proper sites are usurped by
Private developments or high land prices make acquisition
unfeasible. It is a desirable goal of the City to balance
acquisition and development efforts.
2. All public facilities are to be developed according to generally
accepted standards and the results of thorough study.
3. Where feasible, private developers will be required to set aside
a portion of their land for public use$ where this is not
feasible or desirable, developers will be required to contribute
cash in lieu of land, with such money to be utilized for the
purchase and development of recreational facilities.
s. School facilities should be Cully utilized by making building
and land available to the public for use when such does not
conflict with normal function of the school facilities.
S. Private developers will not be required to donate land for
school sites.
It6. Churches should have an ample site Cor building, landscaping,
potential expansion, and off-street parking. Parking should be
provided on the maximum design capacity. Churches should be
located adjacent to a thoroughfare or collector street and have
easy access to the area served. They should not be located on
minor residential streets and in the midst of residential
neighborhoods.
7. The City should not accopt substandard lands such as swamps,
power line easements, etc., for the development of park lands.
This shall include Lando laid out in oubdivision plans.
Open Space Policies
Before delineating open space policies, a definition of the term is
necessary. Traditionally, open apace has been primatily defined as
that area which is retained in or restored to a condition where
natural systems predominate and which may be used for recreation, or
preservation purposes. Open space was often regarded as a separate
and contained entity usually under the ownership of a governmental
jurisdiction.
Recent trends indicate that open space, like the people it serves, is
becoming mote directly integrated with its surroundings. Becoming
more a part of the total urban fabric, open apace is being mote
closely Integrated into the urban living and working environment.
Because of this integrating phenomenon, many of the advantage* and
responsibilities of open space are equally applicable to public and
private lands.
IlIDUSTRIAL PDLICIFB
1.
All land suitable for industrial develocment in the City should
be zoned to preserve it for said use and to avoid needless harm
to homes which might develop in potential industrial areas.
Lend used by industry is entitled to protection against
residential encroachment.
2.
Through proper land use planning, certain types of industry can
be good neighbors with areas used for residential and other
purposes the type of industry, screening (green planting,
fencing, etc.), required building design, and other factors
greatly affect the compatibility of such uses.
1.
Industries which produce undesirable affects injurious to the
public health, safety, convenience, and general welfare will be
discouraged.
•.
Excellence of site and building design will be a major factor in
approving or disapproving industrial development proposals
within the City.
S.
Performance standards will be utilised to judge industrial
proposals rather than the more rigid policy of judging
industrial uses by typed any industrial type use will be
permitted provided it can prove compliance with standards
governing smoke emission, noise, odors, vibrations, and the like.
6.
Encourage design and development of industrial parks with
exposureto Interstate 91 rather than scattering such uses
indiscriminately through the community.
1.
The City Public Works Division shall review, with respect to
aswer and water use, the impact each particular industry has on
those utilities and their expected life.
-so- 6D
,
COv,��o ��a� ,Gi�cGs aloes
do not follow the roper procedures which often results in their
decisions having been overturned by a court of law when challenged by
prospective developers. For example, in those instances when public
hearings are required, it is important not only to hold the public
hearing but to follow the proper legal requirements for public notice
in a legal newspaper.
A common mistake in the application of the Zoning Code involves the
double standard. Her example, different procedures may be used
depending upon whether the applicant is a long-time resident of the
community or a developer. It should be emphasised that the law does
not recognize differences between applicants and that the same
procedures must be used regardless of the background and stature of
the applicant.
The following are same questions which should be raised when
proposals for zoning amendments, variances, and conditional use
permits are brought before the planning Commission.
EDNING AMENDMENT
1. Has there been a change in the development policies of the "O
community?
2. Has there been a change in the conditions in the community such n Q
as rapid population or development change?
3. Was there a mistake made in the development of the original AD
zoning ordinance which needs to be corrected?
1. Is the zoning ordinance up to date?
S. Does the proposed amendment conform to the intent of the
Comprehensive Development plan?
6. Is the proposed use compatible with adjacent land uses? NO
7. Is the proposed amendment and land use likely to lead to aNQ
monopoly situation so as to amount to a spot zoning?
6. What is the affect of the proposed rezoning on such public
utilities as sanitary sewers, water, roads, schools?
9. Will the proposed development place an undue financial burden on Mb
the local co=unity?
ZONING VARIANCE
1. Does the zoning ordinance and its standards and regulations lead
to a practical difficulty or undue hardship on the part of the
property owner in the use of his property?
-73-
rUbLIL nt:xluAU HY'FLIkNI Iun
c: -v or ncw.-,cz _:.o
TYPE OF HEARING:
® CONOITIORAL USE - fee $125.00 + expenses.
0 REZONING - fee $250.00 + all necessary consulting expenses.
0 YARIAHCE - fee $50.00 for setbacks or $125.00 for others + expenses.
O OTHER - fee
App 1 1 ant (s) : A GLORIOUS CHURCH _
Applicants) address: P. 0. BOE 119 - MONTICELLO
Appllcant(s) phone(s): Home: 263-7812 Office: 295-2499
Address of property: 2200 BLOCI OF WEST RIVER STREET
Legal description of property: Lot : Block ; Subdivision
Other THE PART OF THE SH 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 121 LUNGE,
(SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION AUG 5. 1989) Q
Sea at1:
Currently zoned: I2 Proposed toning:
flames of property owners within 350 -feet: C] See attached
N.S.P.
BILL & ?WMILYN SEEFELDT
IIIeast e�nlaln the reason for the Public Hearing request: ORDINANCE Al07ENDMENT TO
CONDITIONAL USE FOR PURPOSE OF A CHRISTIM CHURCH
ite of plat to be subdivided: 4.9 acres APPROX.
.1.1me of firm �reparing subdivision plat: TAYLf1R LAND SURVEYORS - MONTICELLO. MN
04to 8-8-89 _S i gned DANIEL J. GASSLER.t�L6�:4G•
............................................................................
Ifor city use only)
Tato application recelvedl 1lccolpc tN0L'Q-:
1els'/f 7'3DO
Date of Public Haarinq at the ltannin.t Cil. m, llael
nuelsion of Planning eoearelsslon
1 a +C7 at-4chud
If a vac lanc as there an Appu/l/7/,0/,}'y�sal 0 HOP tl ro, attach a Copy of the Appoa L.
0.-1. of Councll conslderstlonl '�r�"e"7 Time, 7rd6,40%%
1lecision of the Counclll
,1 0 Sae attached
C'umvnts 1
1 0 See attached
u.ate -it pu5lleationl fr/Aj�'SljA (attach• Copy of the public nelri4.9noelec)
natr .,t rtallingI (Att.chs copy of the affidavit of maliln;)
8
Planning Coammission Agenda - 9/5/89
i
-. 9. Public Hearing - A conditional user eat to allow a church in an I-2
1n
tneavy nWial) zone. Applicant,AGlozius Church. (J.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
If the Planning Oomsaiesion recommends approval of the zoning amendment
which would allow church activity in the I-2 (heavy industrial) zone, then
it must consider its position with regards to the conditional use
request. It is staff's view that it is not likely that the zoning
amendment will be approved by the Planning Commission. Therefore, staff
has not worked an development of a list of conditions associated with
operation of a church facility in an I-2 zone. If the Planning Commission
does approve the zoning amendment which would allow a church facility in
the I-2 zone, then a list of conditions needs to be developed at the
meeting to control the impact and operation of the facility on the
adjoining properties.
B. ALTERHhTIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve a conditional use permit which would allow
development of A Glorius Church at the proposed site subject to the
following conditions.
D. .*. e*..Ai..w DATA:
Please see previous agenda item.
10