Planning Commission Agenda Packet 03-05-1996AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONnCELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday. March b, 1886 - 7 pm.
Members: Dick Frie, Richard Carlson, Jon Bogart, Richard Martie, Rod Dragsten
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held February 6, 1996.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizens comments.
5. Public Hearing --Consideration of approval of preliminary plat of the Briar
Oakes Second Addition. Applicant, C & S of St. Cloud.
6. Continued Public Hearing --Consideration of a conditional use permit which
would allow expansion of an office building in a PZM zone. Applicant, Ruff
Auto Parts.
7. Comprehensive plan progress report.
8. Monticello Community Partners/redevelopment planning progress report
(Dick Frie, Jeff O'Neill, Jon Bogart report).
8. Status of efforts to acquire riverfront property west of Bridge Park.
10. Update on code enforcement activities --Al Poach (Gary report).
11. Highway 26/Cedar Street Corridor Study update (Jeff report).
12. Adjournment.
l� N� NOW- 13t �U^a � ?aims
14
MINUM
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 6, 1996 - 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Dick Frie, Richard Carlson, Dick Martie, Jon Bogart,
Rod Dragaten
Members absent: Dick Martie
Staff: Jeff ONeill, Gary Anderson, Steve Grittman, Wanda
Kraemer
1. Vall to order.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dick Frie.
Chairman Frie corrected the spelling of Brian Stumfp's name.
COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 2,1886. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER CARLSON.
3. Consideration of items to the agenda.
Jeff ONeill, Assistant Adminitrator, reported that Al Poach had replied to the letter
sent regarding zoning violations. He was in the process of moving his buisness out
of the residential area to a business district in Big Lake. The buisness site he is
moving to must get clearance from the owner to allow Poach to sublease the site.
There will be an update at the next meeting.
4, Vitizeng co m nts.
none
1 •1! I, 1, ',1
: 1 • 1 S : •t : • M 11 11 •t 1
t 1�\
6. Puhfir
• , 11 11 1 1',
I 1 3 ' 1 1 11ont utility building nnd RtnictureFt ini 11
Applicant. Monticello,
John Simola, Public Works Director, explained that at the last meeting the
Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit allowing expansion of the
wastewater treatment plant site plan. Since that time additional land to the east of
the site has been purdutsed which will allow a redesign of the facility, resulting in
Page 1 ^
a�
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
short -and long-term cost savings to the City. Due to the fact that additional
property had to be acquired and due to the fact that significant site design changes
would result, it is necessary that the wastewater treatment plant again go through
the conditional use permitting process. The purchase of this property will result in
the facility being recessed into the hill which will reduce the visual impact of the
facility as seen from CSAR 75. The extra land will also allow the facility to be
constructed closer to the road to result in a greater setback distance from the river.
After additional review, it was found by HDR that the project can be constructed
without placement of fill material in the wetland; therefore, a variance to allow
filling of the wetland is not necessary. There will be some destruction of timber but
the area close to the river will remain untouched. But the area close to the river
will remain untouched. The area will be re -forested with pine trees. The pine trees
will be wrapped around the back and along the main driveway. The storm water
will go down the natural run off on Hart Blvd.
Bob Peplin, HDR, explained to the Commissioners the view from Hart Blvd of the
headworks building and the tanks. The whole area will be surrounded by a
security fence.
Jeff O'Neill inquired if the fence would block the pathway in that area.
Simola stated that there was ample room between the security fence and the river
for the pathway to go through.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing.
Paul Theilen, neighbor to the property, inquired how close the tanks would be to his
property.
Simola stated it would be about 200 feet and there will be a security fence between
the building and the trees. The entire site will be secured.
Paul Theilen then inquired if the area to the west could be constructed first and the
portion next to his house at a later date.
Simola answered Theilen that the boundaries need to be established and it is
possible that in the future the tanks will be smaller and the impact on the wetland
would be less. The site is also being built on the hill for the fill that is needed and
the side benefit of the gravity for sludge.
Chairman Frio closed the public hearing.
Chairman Frio stated that he wanted the distanoo from the river to the nearest
facility in the minutes and that the pathway would be left in that arca.
Simola replied that the distance would bo 200 feet to Theilen's house. There will be
Pogo 2 0aj
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
a large area available for pathway. The pathway could be winding through the
woods all along the river.
Commissioner Carlson stated that this will be a connection between Mississippi
Drive and Hart Blvd.
Paul Thielen added that this area would be the perfect place for a pathway because
of all the wildlife to watch.
Chairman Frie suggested Paul Theilen contact Jeff O'Neill and the attend the next
park meeting to talk about the pathway through this area. Frie stated that it
would be a great bird watching area and should be pursued.
Commissioner Bogart stated that he would like to see a low berm along Hart Blvd.
as additional aesthetic and buffering.
Simola answered that there is a seven foot berm in the the plans now.
Bogart stated a seven foot berm with trees on would be better.
RICHARD CARLSON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT WHICH WOULD ALLOW EXPANSION OF THE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT IN A PZM ZONE BASED ON THE FINDINGS THAT THE
FACILITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA, AND THE
SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING IS DESIGNED TO PRESERVE TO THE
EXTENT POSSIBLE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING PROPERTY; THE PROPOSAL
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY; THE
EXPANSION WILL NOT HAVE AN APPRECIABLE NEGATIVE EFFECT TO
THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST (BONDHUS); SCREENING AND BUFFER
YARD TECHNIQUES WILL BE EMPLOYED TO LIMIT THE IMPACT ON THE
PROPERTY TO THE EAST; ODOR CONTROL EFFORTS HAVE BEEN
DESIGNED INTO THE PLANS. IN ADDITION, THE SITE PLAN AS PROPOSED
WILL RESULT IN MUCH OF THE FACILITY BEING RECESSED INTO THE
SIDE HILL, THEREBY RESULTING IN LESS OF AN IMPACT ON THE VIEW
OF THE FACILITY FROM THE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE FACILITY IS
CONSISTENT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
ITEMS REQUIRED BY CODE.
A. CONFORMITY WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD IS
MAINTAINED AND REQUIRED SETBACKS AND CITED
REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
B. ADEQUATE SCREENING FROM NEIGHBORING USES AND
LANDSCAPING AS PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER
3, SECTION 2, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
Page 3
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
C. THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 22 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
ARE CONSIDERED AND SATISFACTORILY MET.
D. THE FACILITY MUST HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO A COUNTY OR
CII Y STATE AID HIGHWAY.
2. INSTALLATION OF ODOR CONTROL MEASURES NECESSARY TO
MAINTAIN OR REDUCE THE CURRENT PROBLEM.
3. NO TREE CLEARCUTTING TO OCCUR WITHIN 50 FT OF THE RIVER'S
EDGE.
4. CITY BUFFER YEAR REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET ON THE
HOGLUND SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THE TOP SIDE OF THE BANK TO
MEET THE BUFFER YARD FOR AN INSTITUTIONAUMULTI-FAMILY
BOUNDARY', THE LOWER VALLEY SIDE TO BUFFER INSTITUTIONAL
USE/SINGLE FAMILY.
b. A BERM INSTALLED ALONG HART BLVD. IF FEASIBLE.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that Kevin Cook, of Cook
Construction, was requesting the City to grant a 18 -ft variance to the requirement
that homes be set back 20 tt from the side lot line. The plans for extending Meadow
Oak Lane to the Briar Oakes Development were dropped, and instead it was
determined that a simple pedestrian path would be extended to connect the two
subdivisions in place of the roadway. Kevin Cook requests that a variance be
granted to the side yard setback on the pathway side of he property. It is his view
that the 20 -ft betback is not necessary at this corner because there will never be a
roadway extended to the west at this locations. He notes that the 6 -ft setback as
proposed allow for sufficient separation between the buildings and the property line
and results in a 35 -ft separation between the building line and the center of the
pathway. According to City pathway easements standards, we have required at
least a total easement width of 30 ft. Which results in a minimum of 16 ft on either
side of the path. Under this scenario, the setback distance from the center of the
line of the path to the home will amount to 35 ft.
Kevin Cook, Cook Construction, added that the reason he did not go through the
vacation or variance process was because of a time factor when getting the project
started. Cook didn't realize there was a 60 ft road right-of-way instead of the 30 ft
usually required for pathway easements. If a variance can be granted then this will
also allow the houses being built on Lots 5, 6, and 7, which are all 66 R wide, be
shifted for more room.
Page 4 9
Planning Commission Minutes - 02JO6196
O'Neill stated that if an 8 ft variance is granted it would meet Cook's needs but
there would still be wasted land in this area. The City does not need a 60 ft
easement for a pathway.
Cook stated nine feet were needed or else the garage will need to be made smaller.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing.
Chairman Frie stated that he has not heard any hardship to justify a variance,
would it be better to replat the subdivision?
Commissioner Bogart recommended that Cook Construction would request a
vacation of the roadway easement. There is not an hardship but this is a unique
situation because the roadway that was changed.
Commissioner Carlson inquired as to how this will effect the other lots. Does the
City have a 60 ft easement throughout the whole area?
O'Neill explained that this is the only lot that will be affected. The Lot 1, Block 4 is
owned by the City and is a pond area, and the lots across Red Oak Lane the homes
face Meadow Lane and that roadway is in.
Cook added that nicer homes could be build on the lots if the variance was allowed.
COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE
VACATION OF THE NORTH lb FEET OF MEADOW LANE AND THE NORTH 7
FEET OF THE UTILITY EASEMENT ON LOT 8 BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE
SITUATION OF THIS LOT. SECONDED BY ROD DRAGSTEN. Motion passed
unanimously.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the Planning Commission is
asked to consider recommending approval for two conditional use permits relating
to development of a wholesale pipe supply company in an 1.1 zone. This company
provides pipe to retailers for resale and provides pipe directly to contractors. The
site is located across from Custom Canopy in the northeast quadrant of the
intersection of Fallon Avenue and Dundas Road. The total land area occupied by
the site amounts to 2 acres. Of this amount, about 1 acre is dedicated to outside
storage.
The storage area will be surround by a 6 -ft. Opaque cyclone fence. Slate will be
installed in a baskot•weave fashion to assure full opacity. Staff has been informed
that the materials will not bo stacked higher than the height of the fence. This site
Page 5 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
is unique in that the area used for outside storage is adjacent to a proposed staging
area for project pick-up. In the past, the City has required that any area commonly
used by the public must be paved. Under the proposed site plan, a relatively large
staging area designated as a product pick-up location would be covered with a
heavy granular material. The developer notes that this material is preferred
because it can stand-up to the weight and turning movements of trucks using the
space, whereas a bituminous surface will not stand-up. Pipeline expecte up to ten
customers per day to pick up products at this location. In checking with the City
Engineer, he agrees with the developer that it is not uncommon to allow gravel
surfacing in this type of storage yard. It is likely, however, that bituminous would
stand up better to tight -turning movements necessary for the semi -trailer
deliveries. A gravel surface will require regular maintenance even if it is a crushed
material. It is likely that there would not be a significant cost saving between a
bituminous surface and the proposed gravel surface; however, if there is limited
public access to the storage yard, the impact would be mostly internal to their
operations.
Curt Christopherson, Pipeline Supply/Kant-Sing Partnership, stated that the larger
rock is going to be from the fence to the loading area. The general public will enter
through the front door or the main entrance. In the loading area there will only be
contractors that have 'checked in" through the main entrance. The trucks using
this area are heavy and it beat to go with crushed concrete because it will last
longer.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing.
Chairman Bogart abstained from the discussion because it was prepared by his
office, John Oliver.
Commissioner Frio stated that in the past the City has required that areas used by
the public be paved.
O'Neill stated that this situation is semi -retail. At what point does the loading area
become public space? Can we make a judgement call and not create a precedence?
Chairman Frio added that if the bituminous does not stand up and we circumvent
the paving because it is not used by the general public other than an occasional
sale.
Curt Christopherson, added that bituminous has been tried at other locations
owned by Pipeline azul has not worked. The other storage and loading areas has to
be changed to crushed concrete.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT ALLOWING OUTSIDE STORAGE. MOTION IS BASED ON THE
Page 6 (P
Planning Commission Minutes • 02106/96
FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED PLAN IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH
OUTSIDE STORAGE CONDITIONS AS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE. IN
ADDITION, THE CYCLONE SCREENING FENCE MUST UTILIZE SLATS IN A
MANNER THAT ACHIEVES 90% OPACITY. SECONDED BY ROD DRAGSTEN.
Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bogart abstained.
COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE A STALL AISLE
AND DRIVEWAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS PROPOSED BY THE
DEVELOPER WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: THE FENCE AT THE
ENTRANCE TO THE STORAGE AREA SHOULD BE SET BACK FAR ENOUGH
TO AVOID TRUCK PARKING ON THE STREET WHILE THE FENCE GATE IS
BEING OPENED; THE DEVELOPER WILL INSTALL THE HEAVY GRANULAR
BASE IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
CITY ENGINEER CRUSHED CONCRETE IN THE OUTSIDE
STORAGE/LOADING AREA. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARLSON.
Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bogart abstained.
Steve Grittman, City Planner, reported that Ruff Auto Parts, Inc. Is requesting
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing office facility
located within the PZM, Mixed Performance Zone. The Ruff Auto Parts operation
(auto salvage yard and office) is a legally non -conforming use with the PZM District
which has been in existence in its current location for many years. The owners
wish to add a second story onto the existing single level office building. Prior to
Ruff Auto Parts formal application for Conditional Use Permit approval, City staff
met with the applicant to discuss expansion options. Technical interpretations to
the Zoning Ordinance considers the existing office building and auto salvage
operation one in the same, the first being the central control and management point
for the later which share the same site and are physically integrated. Given the
legal non -conforming status of the business, the Zoning Ordinance would not allow
expansion of any aspect of the auto salvage operation if strictly applied. Section 3-1
states that "nonconforming uses shall not be enlarged or expanded, but many be
continued at the size and manner of operation'.
Jeff O Neill, Assistant Administrator, stated that from staffs viewpoint what we've
seen in the past is this a positive use in the community but what we are trying to do
is be creative so this business works with the City as a team to bring everything up
to speed. If the applicant would like to schedule a meeting to discuss the possibility
of a planned unit development many of the non -conforming issues could be
addressed.
John Simola, Public Works Director, stated that he would like to see the City come
up with away to make this an allowable use. Ruf" Auto Parts is an asset to the
community.
Pago 7
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
Ronny Ruff, Ruff Auto Parte partner, stated that the business has been in
Monticello for 49 years and for the last 20 they've had run-ins with the City. We've
tried to have our site rezoned to industrial. It has been the consensus that if we are
not allowed to expand we'll soon be gone. We take in oil, crush cars, take in
batteries, many things that are good for the City. If we are not allowed to put up
another building we can never expand. If the City will let the business expand we
could talk in the future about the PUD.
Brian Stumpf, employee of RufAuto,stated that Chuck (partner at Ruff Auto) was
out of town but he did want to tie in any conditions to this permit. He did not want
to discuss the issues at this time and will withdraw the application if any
conditions are attached.
Laura Rolland, neighbor, stated that she did not want nothing more on the
property because it already had lowered her property value.
Brian Stumfp explained to Laura Rolland that the office will not be higher than any
other buildings and the location of the office cannot be seen from her property.
Laura Rolland was confused as to where the location was and after the explanation
had no more questions.
Commissioner Carlson asked why there could not be discussion now. Every time
there is an expansion the Planning Commission address all the issues. It would not
be fair to allow Ruffs to expand without conditions being required when
Simonson, NSP, and a number of other businesses in town were required to
meeting the zoning requirements when they expanded. I have no objections from
Elm Street but 6th Street has become a major corridor and there needs to be
screening.
Chairman Frio stated that over the years there has been a 300% turn around in the
appearance of the site but there still seems to be a very defensive attitude from all
that has happened in the past,
Commissioner Carlson added that is makes sense to have dialogue rather than
stating that there is no interest and that it where it stops. From a City standpoint
you do not treat one business or resident different from another.
Brian Stumf p replied that we aro not asking to expand the boundaries and the
building expansion will not even be seen from the street.
Commissioner Carlson asked Brien StunfQ if he could see any benefit to the
landscaping that was required by NSP or Simonson?
Brian Stumib replied he could we the benefit of landscaping but that would depend
on the site.
Pegs 8 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
Ronny Ruff stated that when Chuck gets back well talk a bout what we should do.
Is the building application still ok are do the new regulations apply?
Gary Anderson, Building Official, as long as your application has been submitted
the new regulations will not apply.
Chairman Frie inquired if this item should be tabled until Ruffs could sit down
with City staff and establish the next step.
Commissioner Bogart stated that he did not have any problem with the addition
but it disturbs me that there is this take it or leave it option. He thought the City
was leaning over backwards with spot zoning and Ruffs could have a win/win
situation. Bogart added that he was not on the Planning Commission 20 years ago
but this is a chance to make things right. We always try to work with business. In
a PUD there is an underlining zoning blanket, you start from scratch, staff is ready
to work with you and there is a good chance for this to work.
Brian Stumpf added that Chuck may want to discuss this option but that would
need to wait until he could be asked.
JON BOGART MADE A MOTION TO TABLE THE CUP FOR EXPANSION TO
THE NEXT MEETING, TO ALLOW RUFF AUTO PARTS TIME TO EXPLORE
THE PUD CONCEPT. SECONDED BY RICHARD CARLSON. Motion passed
unanimously.
10. Review Hirrhway 2b/Chelsea Road Corridor Studv.
JefO'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained that some months ago, the City
Council authorized completion of a transportation study of Highway 25/Chelsea
Road corridor. The purpose of the study was to identify alternatives for relieving
congestion at the intersection of Oakwood Drive/Highway 25 and for the purpose of
identifying frontage road alignments and future stop light locations. This
information would be used to develop an official transportation plan which would
legally allow the City to block development where appropriate and acquired
properties needed for right -of -alignments. There are three road alignment options
to the study.
The purpose of the Planning Commission discussion will be to review the
alignments presented in the the report and make a recommendation to the City
Council as to the proper alignment.
The Highway 25/Chelsea Road Corridor Study was mailed to the Planning
Commissioner directly from OSM. The Commissioners did not have ample time to
review the study before the meeting and suggested it be on the next agenda,
allowing more time for review.
Page 9 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
A sketch plan outlining a commensal subdivision and associated road alignment for
a an 18 -acre parcel formerly owned by Stuart Hoglund has been present to City by
Bob Able for review. As discussed in the previous agenda item, the plat proposes
the extension of Chelsea Road along the boundary between Silver Fox Plat and
Abel's property. A cul-de-sac would be extended southerly from Chelsea Road
allowing access to interior lots. Eight commercial lots would be created under the
plan. The cul-de-sac would not be constructed until sale of the interior lots is
imminent. This alignment is preferred by the developer because it provides the
highest degree of flexibility for development of the land. Under this alignment the
cul-de-sac could be vacated in the event a larger single user is interested in the site.
Under Option Y2 of the transportation plan, the Chelsea Road alignment that
would swing Chelsea Road south through the interior of the site, the option of
selling the property to a larger single uses is lots.
O'Neill explained that Bob Able was looking for direction from the Planning
Commission to continue with his plat.
Bob Abel, developer, stated that he was willing to work with whichever road
alignment was decided on but he could not continue with his plat until this item
was decided. He did prefer Option 2 because it gave him the most flexibility work
with.
The Planning Commissioners discussed the three options but had not had ample
time to review the study.
COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM AND FOR
BOB ABLE TO CONTINUE DIALOGUE WITH CITY AND THE ENGINEER.
SECONDED BY RICHARD CARL -SON. Motion passed unanimously.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administntor, reported that the Planning Commissioners
will need to put together a work plan for the April joint meeting. At this meeting,
the Planning Commission, HRA, and Parks Commission will review the work plans
of all the committees. Would the Planning Commissioners prefer to compile the list
at a regular meeting or call a special meeting?
After discussion, it was decided to call a special mooting would be scheduled after
the adoption of the comprehensive plan to develop a 1-5 year work plan for the
Planning Commission.
COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC
Page 10
Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96
HEARING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SECONDED BY ROD DRAGSTEN. Motion passed unanimously.
13. Review MinFtigaippi River Crasuging, Stud .
Jeff O Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the Mississippi River Crossing
Study had determined six possible bridge site. Monticello was in this study but has
been taken out of the possibilities. The crossing at Enfield is still on the list.
Should the Planning Commission send a recommendation that supporta the Enfield
choice?
COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO HAVE STAFF FOLLOW UP
WITH A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ENFEILD FOR THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER
CROSSING. SECONDED BY CHAIRMAN FRIE. Motion passed unanimously.
14. COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARLSON.
Page 11
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/96
Kevin Schmitz of C & S of St. Cloud is requesting preliminary plat approval
of a revised design of the Briar Oakes Estate Second Addition. Briar Oakes
Estate Second Addition (the plat) is located north of the first addition of
Briar Oakes Estate and south of the City's Eastwood Knoll subdivision. East
of the plat is Meadow Oak 4th Addition. The revised plat made slight
modifications to the lots and affected roadways in the northwest corner of the
plat.
The changes to the original approved preliminary plat are relatively minor
and include introduction of a modified cul-de-sadloop street featuring a
center island. The revised plat also includes a reduction of the street width
at Shady Circle. The preliminary plat contains 32 lots, all of which are over
the minimum 12,000 sq ft. You'll note that storm water easements on the
plat reduce the usable area of a number of the larger lots.
Approximately half of the plat is heavily wooded with mature oak trees. The
grading plan has been designed to minimize the impact of the road on the
forest area. In addition, there will be no masa site grading of the forested
area. Site grading will occur on an individual lot basis as each home is
developed. This will enable the greatest opportunity for preservation of
trees.
The plat will be connected to Eastwood Knoll to the north via Eastwood Lane.
The City will be responsible for completing road improvements from the edge
of the plat to Eastwood Knoll. To the north of the plat is a power line
easement that stretches westerly in the direction of the middle school and
easterly to Meadow Oak Park. It also is the alignment for a pathway
connecting the neighborhood to these areas. It is expected that a major
segment of this pathway will be installed with this project, or the grading
will be installed, or the City will be obtaining funds from C & S of St. Cloud
which will be combined with other funds to build this pathway within the
next two years. Another smaller pathway segment links Shady Oak Circle to
the nearest cul-de-sac constructed with the first addition. Finally, there is
also a pathway extending from the east side of the plat toward the Meadow
Oak development which links to the pathway extending northerly along the
rear lot lines of the Meadow Oak development toward the Meadow Oak Park.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/96
In summary, once the pathways have been completed, Briar Oakes Estate
Second Addition will benefit from various pathways leading to and from
important destination points for this area serving to link the neighborhood to
nearby neighborhoods, parks, and schools.
The City Engineer is currently reviewing the design of the modified cul-de-
saciloop street in the northwest corner of the plat. The design proposed by
the developer calls for a 24 -ft wide loop street extending into the corner of the
plat. This loop street design creates longer street frontage for the three lots it
serves. It also features a center island that will be landscaped by the
developer and maintained through a homeowner association. The final
design, including the required roadway width of the cul-de-sacAoop street, is
being reviewed by the City Engineer. It is hoped that a final
recommendation to the Planning Commission by City staff will be available
in time for the meeting.
Motion to approve the preliminary plat with modifications to the
preliminary plat as suggested by the City Engineer and Planning
Commission.
Motion to deny approval of the preliminary plat.
V RT FF RECOMMENDATION:
The revised preliminary plat that is presented is very similar to the
preliminary plat approved in 1991. The plat meets the minimum
requirements. Sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer service is available,
etc.; therefore, staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat with
adjustments as required by the City Engineer and/or Planning Commission.
Copy of the plat.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/5/96
TrT.•T;l
As you recall, at the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, Brian
Stumpf and Ron Ruff described a proposal to add a second story to the
existing office building. The Planning Commission was hesitant to approve
the addition without certain site improvements being made such as screening
of outside storage. Planning Commission noted to the applicant that the City
has required many other applicants to make code -related improvements to
their site at such time that expansion occurs. Planning Commission did
indicate a strong interest in working with Ruff Auto toward legitimizing the
land use by creating a planned unit development zoning district and
establishing conditions for operation of the facility. Under the planned unit
development concept, Ruff Auto would be converted from a lawful
nonconforming use to a lawful use. Planning Commission tabled the decision
regarding the conditional use permit pending additional discussions between
City staff and Ruff' Auto regarding the potential creation of a Ruff' Auto PUD
zone.
Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, I met with Chuck Stumpf,
Brian Stumpf, and Ron Ruff. Chuck Stumpf is not convinced that creation of
a planned unit development at this point is in the best interest of Ruff Auto.
He requested that the conditional use permit request allowing expansion of
the office building be placed back on the agenda for a decision by the
Planning Commission. Stumpf indicated that he was not en ' y opposed to
the planned unit development concept; however, he was not interested in
pursuing it at this time due to time constraints. He appeared to be interested
in moving forward with development of the second story of the structure as
proposed under the current request, which, if approved, would expedite the
Project.
Please see the attached information from the previous agenda for alternative
actions with regard to this request. Please note that a decision to approve or
deny is nocessary at this time duo to state law limiting the time that is
allowed to cities for consideration of land use questions.
�'I QfdJe �V� �J�1t4F`io: nn
le 0--
t7t u c:
P%A
^" o0cJ ` tip
{tn At 8
P wj
t o
L�
FEB-01-1%6 15:Q NRC 612 5% 9837 P.02
N
FN.CcommuNir'fP6ANHIMGNORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
- DC610N - MARKET RESEARCH'
PLANNING REPORT
T0:
Monticello Mayor & City Council
Monticello Plaming Cominission
FROM:
Elizabeth Stockman / Stephen Cirdbrien
DATE:
31 January 19M
RE:
Monticello - Ruff Auto Parts, Inc. - Conditional Use Permit
FILE:
191.07 -96.02
Background
Ruff Auto Parts, Inc. is requestiM approval of a Conditional Use Pernik to allow
mpanslon of an existing offlee facility located withtn the PZM, Mixed Performance Zone.
The Ruff Auto Parts operation (auto salvage yard and office) is a legally non -conforming
use within the PSV) District which has been In existence in its current location for many
years. The owners wish to add a second story auto the existing atrgile level office building.
The following .,1, .. pnodda an overview, of Zo "Ordinance requirements, followed
by analysis of issues end decision cptlons. The applicant hes not sLdxrdtted adequate
plans which moot the subrds w regL&errww to outilned in the Zoning Ordhance, this the
Donfonnence with or viclaft of ad"ed standards cannot be property evaluated at this
time.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibtt 0 - Site Sketch
Exhibit C - Front Elevation of Second Story Addition
Exhibit D - Rear Elevetlon of Socond Story Addition
` 6 776 WAYZATA 90ULEVARD. SUIT[ say SST. LOUIS PARK. MINNLSOTA BB♦ 1 a
PNoNe alt -69 6.9e3e PAX e19-096.9937
V
FEB -01-1996 1548 NRC 612 555 9837 P.03
Zoning Ordinance Reaulremente
Zoning. The Ruff Auto Parts property is zoned PZM, Residential -Commercial Mixed Use.
The performance of the PZ Districts is to allow for development flexibility and special
design control within sensitive areas of the City due to WMronmental or physical
limitations. The PZM District is specifically aimed at creating a transition between
residential properties and tow intensity business land uses, allowing for the mix of such
I ses through innovative design and aesthete controls. The Ruff Auto Parts operation is
a legally non -conforming use within the PZM District
Condldonal Use Pemdt. The expansion of noreconfonning uses is prohibited within the
City. To facilitate the proposed addition onto an existing office building upon the Ruff Auto
Parts property, the applicants have requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit The
Conditional Use Permit process offers flexibility to the City Council to assign dimensions
or conditions to a project which Involves special circumstances.
Due to the ma of uses on this site, this option was offered to the applicant by City etaff
becalm of special, unusual, or extraordinary limitations and spedal problems of control
the use represeNs. Under the stndgi Conditional Use approach, the City would consider
the office use as a separate land use from the storage use. Since office uses are allowed
in the PZM District by Conditional Use Permit, the office could be expanded without
affecting the non4anfonning status of the storage. This approach requires the City to
interpret the non -conforming use language to refer to specific uses only and not to the
whole parcel.
Procedurally, the Planning Commission and City Council shall consider the possible
adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. Its judgement shall be based 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 acwaily depreciate the area In which it is
proposed.
4. The character of the surrounding area
S. The demonsLsted need for such use.
__ o
FEB -01-1996 15:49 NPC 612 595 9837
Additionally, in granting a Conditional Use Permit for development wfthin the PZM District,
the City Planning Commission and City Council must make the following findings of fact
1. The proposed project is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Monticello
C,ortmprehermsNe Plan goals and policies and in keeping with the intent of the Zoning
Ordinance.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the purpose of the performance Zoning
ordinance.
3. The proposed project will not have any adverse impacts as outlined in the
Conditional Use Permit section of the Zoning Ordinance.
4. The proposed project shall meet minimum screening and landscaping requirements
as outlined herein.
5. The proposed project shall provide adequate parking and loading as outlined
herein.
6. The proposed project provides a wider range of housing types, price ranges, and
styles within the community.
7. The proposed project will provide amenities and facilities and open spaces greater
than the minimum requirements under alternative zoning.
S. The proposed project shall in no way be detrimental to the environment Scenic
aspects and natural features shall be protected and preserved to the extent
possible.
8. The proposed project shall not Impose any undue burden upon public facilities and
services.
10. The proposed project le designed in such a manner to forme desirable and unified
wwonrnad within its boundarlos which will not be detrimental future land uses In
surrounding areas. Archlteehrra and site treatrrtartts shall be compatible with
adjacent structures and alte plans and shall respect the privacy of nelgftdng
homes and/or bualneases.
Other findings of fact submitted by the Planning Commission and City Council may be
requlrod to address additional requirements necessary to maks the project In compliance
with the Zoning Ordinance where the Planning Commission and City Council feel the
proposed project is laddng.
IM
FEB --01-1956 15:49 NFC
Lot Area, Width & Building Height. Within the PZM District the minimum required lot
area Is 12,000 square feet, the minimum required lot width is 80 feet, and the building
height limitation is two (2) stories.
Parting S Loading. Applications for a building permit In all zoning districts requires
submittal of a site plan drawn to scale and dimensioned Indicating the location of oft -street
parking and loading spaces Without this data, conformance with these standards cannot
be verified, however, the parking and loading requirements have been outlined as follows.
All parking areas are required to be surfaced with materials adequate to
control dust and drainage. They must be striped with white painted lines no
less than 4 inches wide and curbed around the perimeter with a six (6) inch
non -surmountable continuous concrete curb. All off-street parking areas of
five or more spaces must be screened and landscaped around the perimeter
and within median areas as required by ordinance. One curb cut Is
permitted per 125 feet of frontage and no such access may exceed 24 feet
in width without approval by the City Engineer. Curb cut openings and
driveways must be setback a minimum of five (5) feet from side yard property
Imes, be a m1rdmum of 40 feet apart and 40 fast from the intersection of two
or more streets. Parking and loading areas may not exceed a five (5)
percent grade nor may they be used for open storage of equipment or
materials. A fifteen (15) inch culvert is required under driveway access
openings unless the lot is served by public storm sower.
The mlMmum number of parking spaces required is twenty four (24) , calculated as follows:
Office Buildings Three (3) spaces plus one (1) space for each 200
square feet of fioor area =12 gwcos (based on a 30 x
60 building)
Warehouse, storage Eight (8) apaeea plus one (1) space for each two (2)
or handling of bulk goods employees on each shift based on mmdmum planned
employment or at a minimum at toast eight (6) spaces
plus one (1) for each five hundred (500) square foot of
floor area
0 12 spaces (based an a 30 x 60 buildins not
latawing tate number of employees)
Acceding to the submitted site elceidh the property Is short of parking spaces overall and
does not Indicate the proper dimensions of parking stalls.
9
FE3-01-1956 1549 NRC
Buildings of 5,000 square feet or more (up to 100,000 sf) require the provision of one (1)
loading berth measuring fifty-five (55) feet In length, ten (10) feet in width and fourteen (14)
feet in height All loading berths are required to be screened and landscaped from
abutting and surrounding residential uses and surfaced with bituminous paving. They may
not be located within the front yard and must be at least 50 feet from a street Intersection
or from residential areas.
The Ruff Auto Parts property is currently short of parking, loading and general storage
space. It is necessary at times to utilize the public right-of-way as a holding area for
vehicles or equipment when other merchandise is being moved on or off the site. This
raises concerns with public safety and liability and is an indication that the current site is
being over utilized. These items also place the site In the non -conforming category.
Screening & Landscaping. Screening is required to buffer all outdoor storage areas to
assure an aesthetic urban environment and shall consist of either a fence or vegetable
plantings. A required screening fence shall be constructed of masonry, brick, wood or
steel and must provide a solid screening effect not less than six (6) and not more than
eight (8) feet in height Buffer yards are required to reduce the negative impacts that result
when incompatible uses abut one another. A minimum buffer yard 40 feet in width with
building setbacks of at least 50 feet shall be required given the severe intensity of conflict
between the Ruff Auto Parts property and adjacent low density residential neighborhood.
The required number, sizes, and species of plantings must meet the minimum standards
established.
Detailed landscape plans are required In all cases where site plan approval is specified.
Where Iandacepe or man-made materials are used to provide screening from adjacent or
neighboring properties, a aoas-sedon drawing must be provided showing the perspective
of the site from the nelghboring property line at the property line elevation.
Building Materials. Every building within the City is required to be finished on all sides
with consistent architectural quality, materials, and design.
Slpna lix The type, size, location, height and number of signs which, exist upon the Ruff
Auto Pads property are not indicated on the application. Any signs which exist must be
brought into conformance with the City's sign regulations, If required by the City Council,
as provided in Section 39 of the Zoning Ordinance. Within PZM Districts, the maximum
allowable square footage of sign area per lot may not exceed the sum of one (1) square
foot per front foot of the building plus one (1) square foot for each front foot of lot not
occupied by a building, up to 100 square feet Each lot Is allowed one (1) pylon sign or
freestanding sign and one (1) wall sign or two (2) wall signs total.
0
FCB -01-1956 1550 NFC
Required Plans. The City Zoning Ordinance requires that any person desiring to improve
property shall submit a survey of the premises and information on the location and
dimensions of existing and proposed buildings, structures, easements, and other
information which may be necessary to insure conformance to City ordinances. The
submitted plans do not provide the necessary detailed information and do not show
property boundaries. Additionally, grading, drainage, and utility plans must be submitted
to the City Engineer for review and approval. The applicant has riot submitted the required
site or grading plans which are needed to verify the site and building conformance with
established performance standards. Applicants are required to submit final building plans
to the City prior to the granting of permits. No changes to the plans 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.
Muss Analysis
Prior to Ruff Auto Parts formal application for Conditional Use Permit approval, City staff
met with the applicant to discuss expansion options. Technical interpretation of the Zoning
Ordinance considers the existing office building and auto salvage operation one In the
same, the first being the central Control and management point for the later which share
the same site and are physically integrated. Given the legal non -conforming status of the
business, the Zoning Ordinance would not allow expansion of any aspect of the auto
salvage operation If strictly applied Section 3-1 states that 'non -conforming uses shall
not be enlarged or expanded, but may be continued at the size and manner of operation'.
The long term status of the Ruff Auto Parts business within Monticello has resulted in the
existing condition of the site and operation which is in violation of numerous Zoning
Ordinance regulations and performance standards - some obvious and others assumed
(due to lack of plans) - for instance setback, surfacing and screening requirements. Many
of these Issues were discussed at the initial meeting with City staff whereupon the
Conditional Use Permit altemative was chosen by the applicant. This is only one of
multiple options available In deciding the future expansion possibilities of the Ruff Auto
Parts property. Individual alternatives are discussed as follows.
Altemative Approach - Plamred Urdt Development. The consideration of the project
under the Conditional Use Portrait as proposed places the City In a difficult position. A
findliv that the office and storage uses are separate for the purposes of nonconforming
use troatmeM would be a policy position which could have precedent for other properties
in the community. The alternative to this approach would be to rezone the property to a
Planned Unit Development District doslgnation. Undo a DUD District, the uses could be
considered conforming, and the applicant could be allowed to expand without running afoul
of the non -conforming use sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Q
Moreover, the City and the property owner could agree to a staging of property
improvements which would both permit the expansion of activities on this site (or adjacent
available Iands), and provide a Gear outline for bringing the business Into conformance
with performance standards including parking, loading, setbacks, and possibly most
significantly, screening of outdoor storage. The use of PUD in this situation would be as
an actual mmning district, rather than by Conditional Use Permit overlying the base zoning
(as most often applied). In this way, the City can permit the use without rMng the
opening of the property to other Industrial or commercial uses.
Should the City opt to approve the project via the Conditional Use Permit or via another
means as outlined below, some or all of the pedonnar= standards may be enforced to
either reduce or eliiminate the site's non-confornance with established site Improvements.
The submittal of required plans is necessary under all scenarios to document both the
existing site status and planned improvements as well as potential timing of various
phases, A development agreement should also be required to formalize the process.
Derision One - Condltioml Use Pemdt for an expansion of the Office.
This option Involves a less restrictive interpretation of Zoning Ordinance reclulmmerts.
In this regard the office potion of the Ruff Auto Parts operation ( the Ion offensive aspect
with regard to compatibility issues) was conceptually separated from the esdorior salvage
activities which, most would agree, tend to have a more negative impact on neighboring
properties. The separation of the offico and salvage yard aspects of this oporatlon may
allow for expansion opportunities within the PZM District via the Conditional Use Permit
process because the office has a low Intensity neturo consistent with the Intent of the PZM
District.
There are no flied standards for Conditional Use Permits within the PZM District. In their
review, the Cly 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, and the nelghiming lend uses.
Altomadve A - Condldonal Use Pemdt Approval (without condltlom►
The altemaft would allow expansion of the existing office building through the
Conditional Use PemUt process without conditions being pieced on the approval. It could
be construed that the office facility is the cantor of business operation on site and that
without it the auto aaMW operation could not furcation. In this regard, the City may view
the approval as neoeasary to preserve a long-time community business. This altemative
would require a finding that the proposed office expansion Is separate from the storage)
salvage use, and Is not affected by the non-conbmdng use Issues on the site.
alp
FEB -01-1996 1551 NRC
Alternative B - Conditional Use Perrdt Approval (with conditions).
This alternative would allow expansion of the existing office building through the
Conditional Use Permit process but would require other site Improvements to progressively
bring the business operation Into closer conformity with adopted Zoning Ordinance
requirements and performance standards. Both the applicant and the City may benefit
from an agreement to expand whereby the applicant gains more space as desired in
exchange for the provision of site Improvements such as paving, screening and
landscaping. This is not ony, an equitable way to proceed but represents the intent of the
non -conforming use reguWbcns which stats thet'they not be permitted to continue without
restriction and that they will eventually be brought Into conformity'.
This is one of the preferred options of City staff, as staff cannot recommend approval
without improvement of the site and reductlontelimination of incompatible land use
relationships and negative outstanding Issues. In this regard, the primary focus is the
protection of public welfare and to uphold the integrity of the municipal land use plan. if
the City Council chooses this option, the setback density, screening, and submission
requirements outlined under the PZM standards outlined in Section 10-8 should be
followed.
Alternative C - Daniel.
As discussed previously, technical interpretation of the City's Zoning Ordinance would
classify the office facility as a directly related aspect of the auto selvage operation which
Is the principal use of the property. In this regard, the entire office -outdoor storage
operation would be considered one in the same as a single non -conforming use. The
Zoning Ordinance does not allow expansion of nonconforming use without bringing the
use into conformance with established design and performance standards.
Office faciiltlas allowed by Conditional Use Permit under the PZM District are specifically
limited to professional and commercial offices which have no storage of merchandise and
are service oriented with no retail sale of goods on the promises. The separation of the
office use from the aft salvage use for purposes of ordinance Interpretation and to allow
expansion of the facility through other options discussed above, one could conclude that
a negative precedent is being set whlch may pier, 1pt other property owners to request
deviation from adopted ordinance standards.
C
FEB -01-19% 15=51 NRC
Decision TWc - Rezoning to Plarmed unit Oavelopma d
This option proposes the reming of *m Ruff Auto Pana property to Planned Unit
Developanent to not only allow the desired amoe bait tp eowwak % but etimlrtata the non-
cortforttd. status of kte bushess opm edon and accept Om current properly eordigzatlon
as it mdais Linder the Planned Unit Development deslw atim flexibility in satbadre and
Over peftan me standards vrould be at the discretion of the City Council. This would
allow the Cllr to be as restrictive or as liberal as desired In spec6" perfcmance
standards to be rnet.
pe: Jeff aNeM
9
SITE LOCATION
Lai
O
co
i
;FAIAL, Itaot. d p
9
U
r)
N
co
i
;FAIAL, Itaot. d p
9
U
r)
_ � r r.�• q r
N
A
■ OJAI
t�e►�
V
Umom=
,
t-
News Release
Minnesota Pollution Control Aget icy PrI,tedonr cycl hiW.,vilt,.,
620 Lafayette Road Not Ili, SI. Paul, Minnesola 65:55-4194 h " PW'r
a f*%
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Man:1i 17, 1995 Contact: Scat 11vklsten, (612) 297-1607
(612) 282-3332 (rl'1')
Toll Gee 1.800.657-3864 (voicdL7Y)
MPCA RECOGNIZES TEN SALVAGE YARDS FQFJ
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFORTS
The Minnesota pollution Control Agcy (ht1'CA) Oday rectignized 10 vehicle salvage yards
from acron the state for their efforts toward protecting trite ersviroament front automobile wastes.
MPCA Commissioner Clmck Williams said other salvage yards in rhe state should look to these
10 salvage yards for examples of practices die lWusuy shoW d shrive for waren they manage,
recycle or dispose of auto wastes, such as used oil, batteries. waste tires and antiGeexe.
" llhese 70 salvage yards have put In o strong effort to protect the environment from vehicle
wastes and have also protected their businesses from futum cleanup liabillties;' Commissioner
i
Williams said. 'They've incorporated enviruntnenud proration into dreir everyday business
practices. These environmental practices are the ones we'll be looking for at all salvage yards in
die future."
The 10 vehicle salvage yards receiving special recognition she:
AAA Auto Salvage, Inc. — Rosemount
Balaton Auto Salvage — Balaton
Clwddock Light Truk & Auto Salvage — Rochester
• Hwy 73 Used Auto Pans — Georgetown
• John's Auto Pans — Minneapolis
Metro Auto Salvage — Lakeville
Ruff Auto Parts — Monticello
Sheldon's Used Auto Pans —Thief River Falb
Twin City Auto & Military —St. Paul
Viking Auto Salvage — Northfield
(inure)
Top Salvage Yards
Page 2
1 March 17,1995
The MPCA recently evaluated 476 salvage yards statewide as pan of a larger asaessmeat and
outreach effort. The Agency recognized these 10 businesses as being especially conscious of
environmental issues and taking steps to protect the environhnem.
At eight workshops hell between mid-December and late February throughout the state, the
MPGA presented Best Management Practices (DAM) to the veldcle salvage Industry. The BMPs
provide guidance on how to protect die environment and businesses from vehicle waste pollution,
and were developed with support from the Automotive Recycles of Minnesota, an industry trade
association. Ile 10 salvage yards, according to die Agency, already follow many of the
recommended practices and have developed innovative solutions for preventing poiludon.
i
A report on vehicle salvage facilldes (Published by die MPGA in January found that these
BMPs are the single most bnpo Cant activity businesses can adopt to protea die environment and
themselves from auto waste pollution.
Copies of the MPCA's Motor Veldcle Salvage Yard Envlraunenml Packer, containing the
DMI's as well as a training videotalhe and posters, are available from Lite Minnesota Bookstore in
St. Paul. Contact die bookstore at (612) 297.3000, or tull-free at 1.800.657-3757. TTY users
call 1-800-657-3706.
8 0 0
9
may 1, 1995
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Mr. Chuck Stumpf
Ruff Auto Parts
800 Elm Street A
MonticcBo, Minnesota Qf A
Dear Mr. Stu f C>K
I am w ' ' g to congratulate you on the recent recognition that you received from the Mimwsoto
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for your efforts to protect the envrraurtent at your vehicle tah-aW
yard.
Managing vehicle wastes properly and moorpoaling Best Manoscment Practices into your busircss
operations not only protects our air, water and roil, but also protects your business from costly future
cleanup liabilities.
Marry of the vehicle salvage operations in the state already have begun to irscorpomte waste
management practices that protect rhe enviroarnmt. But the MPCA wanted to recognize your
operation as are of a small group of busirxsses we observed that uere in compliance with nearly all of
the Best Management Practices our agency has been using in %vwkshops for the vehicb salvage
industry over several rnaruhs.
Again, ckmg ons on all your efforts to prdxt Minnesota's environment for all of us. Kap up
the good w I (�
S' rely,
L%
hes W. i
Con misi r
CWW:'
r
sso t Rd. x : et. hc, MN ee ti a61t9r: (ens) 2966800 (voka): (612) 2824132 UM
Regb OMca: DuI Ar • Brskwd • DehW takes • tieraha0 • Rodbsta
Epuet OppwKwWy Orv" • PrI ftd on n—I pope ooruekrhp p lap lox rEsn from pupr reryetr0 by caeumsm