Planning Commission Agenda Packet 04-02-1996AGENDA
` REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMJSSION
Tuesday, April 2. 1888 - 7 p.m.
Members: Dick Frie, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the combined regular meeting held March 5 and the
special meeting held March 6, 1996.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizens comments.
5. Public Hearing --Consideration of a conditional use permit request which
would allow development of a 3 -bay quick lube facility. Applicant, Dan and
Linda Mielke.
6. Public Hearing --Consideration of a request for a conditional use permit
which would allow three or more business signs on a commercial building.
Applicant, Stephen Conroy.
7. Public Hearing --Consideration of a request for conditional use permits which
would allow outside sales of boats and outside storage. Applicants, Leonard
Haberman and Dean Rasmussen.
(``8. Update status of Poach shed construction activities. (Verbal update)
�19. Public Hearing. -Consideration of a request to update the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan. Applicant, Monticello Planning Commission and
Monticello City Council.
10. Other.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, March 6,1896 - 6:00 p.m.
Members Present: Dick Frie, Richard Carlson, Dick Martie, Jon Bogart,
Rod Dragsten
Staff Present: Jett O'Neill, Gary Anderson, Steve Grittman, Wanda Kraemer
1. Call to order.
Chairman Frie reconvened the meeting of March 5th to order.
MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARD CARLSON AND SECONDED BY
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR
MEETING FEBRUARY 6, 1996. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Consideration of ad ine i e A to the stgenrin.
There were no items added.
4. Ckimns comments.
There were no items added.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that 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 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 S
Addition. The revised plat made slight modifications, to the lots and affected
roadways in Cho northwest corner of the plat. The changes to the original
approved preliminary plat are relatively minor and include introduction of a
modified cul-do-sac/loop 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
aq ft. Youll note that storm water casements on the plat reduce the useable
area of a number of the larger lots. The grading plan has been designed to
Page I
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/06196
minimize the impact of the road on the forest area. It is expected that a
major segment of the pathway system will be installed with this project, or
the grading will be installed, or the City will be obtaining funds from C & S
which will be combined with other funds to build this pathway within the
next two years. The City Engineer is currently reviewing the design of the
modified cul-de-sac/loop street in the northwest corner of the plat. This also
features a center island that will be landscaped by the developer and
maintained through a homeowner association.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing.
Kevin Schmitz, developer C & S, stated that he had been working with City
staff and the City Engineer on the Briar Oakes project and did not have
anything else to add.
Chairman Frie closed the public hearing.
The Commissioners discussed the radius of the loop street and the
maintenance of the center island, Commissioner Bogart stated that he had
seen other 24 -ft loop streets where snow removal had worked. The center
island could be maintained through a homeowners association or by actually
deeding partial ownership of the property to each parcel adjacent to the cul-
de-sac. This should be discussed further with City staff.
Chairman Frie wanted Kevin Schmitz to be aware of the pathway costs in
the project.
Kevin Schmitz replied that he was aware of the pathway costs because he
had paid them on the first phase and discussed this issue with City Staff.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH MODIFICATIONS TO THE CENTER ISLAND
ROAD WIDTH, AND CUL-DE-SAC DESIGN AS SUGGESTED BY THE
CITY ENGINEER AND STAFF. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DRAGSTEN. Motion passed unanimously.
Pi Alit HynrinC•-Consideration ofapproval of nmlimina" glint of the Brig
Oakes Second Addition, Aenliont- C & S of St. Cloud.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that 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 tho addition without certain site
Page 2
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/06/96
improvements being made such as screening of outside storage. The
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. The 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 development
concept, Ruff Auto would be converted from a lawful nonconforming use t o a
lawful use. The 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.
O'Neill reported that he did meet with Chuck Stumpf, Brian Stumpf, and
Ron Ruff of Ruff Auto. Ruff Auto was not convinced that the creation of a
planned unit development at this point was the best solution. They 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.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing.
Chuck Stumpf, partner Ruff Auto, stated that he was confused as to how
much land should be included in the PUD. He said Ruffs would be willing to
move the fence along 6th Street back 10 ft and allow the City to do screening.
Also, they would be willing to work with the City on some issues but not if it
involved holding up the permit for the addition. The second story is needed
soon and it will take time to have a PUD worked out.
Chairman Frio asked Brian Stumpf, employee at Ruff Auto, if he had
additional comments. He did not.
Ron Ruff, partner at Ruff Auto, stated he did realize in the future something
would need to be done. He said that as the land develops around them it will
be easier to decide what screening is needed. The idea of a PUD scares him
because he is still uncertain of what it will involve.
Chuck Stump inquired as to the cost and the boundaries of the PUD. Jeff
O'Neill stated that the neighborhood will gain from conversion of a
nonconforming use to a PUD; therefore, a cost-sharing arrangement could be
justified. O'Neill asked Steve Grit nan, City Planner, what he would
estimate the cost to be. tirittman stated around $5,000.
Chairman Frio closed the public hearing.
Page 3
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/06/96
The Commissioners discussed the request and did agree that it would be
hard for Ruffs to pursue the PUD before the addition to the office. The
Planning Commissioners were concerned about establishing a precedent by
not requiring the site be brought up to code before issuing the CUP. The fact
that this business is the only one of a (rind in the City and has been
grandfathered in the City for many years does create a unique situation. The
Commissioner came to the decision that if there was an agreement to move
the fence along 6th Street and to screen the area and a consensus on a time
frame to review the possibilities of a PUD, then issuance of a conditional use
permit would be acceptable.
Chairman Frie suggested a time frame of six months. During this six months
the property could be surveyed and a PUD plan be developed.
COMMISSIONER CARLSON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE
EXPANSION OF AN OFFICE BUILDING OF A NON -CONFORMING USE
IN A PZM ZONE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. A SIX MONTH TIME FRAME BE ALLOWED FOR NEGOTIATIONS
TO MOVE FORWARD, WITH DIALOG, TOWARD A PUD AND BY
THE FIRST MEETING IN SEPTEMBER THE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECEIVE A REPORT.
2. THE FENCE ALONG 6TH STREET IS MOVED BACK 10 FT, WEST
OF KEVIN STUMPF'S PROPERTY.
3. THE AREA ALONG 6TH STREET IS SCREENED WITH 4 FT TO 6
FT PINE TREES AND THIS IS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE PARKS
COMMISSION. CITY ISM INSTALL THIS LANDSCAPING.
4. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO SHARE THE COST OF THE SITE
PLAN 50/60 WITH THE CITY WITH COSTS NOT TO EXCEED A
TOTAL OF $5,000.
Motion passed unanimously and was based on the following findings:
1. The expansion of the office building will not result in an increase or
intensificaiton of the non -conforming aspects of the site. For example,
no additional outside storage will result from the expansion.
Page 4
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/06/96
This situation is a unique, long-standing, pre-existing condition to
which the applicants have expressed an interest in negotiating a
solution. These conditions are not found in other areas of Monticello,
thus the conditional use permit approach is justified in this situation.
The site size, configuration, and elevation relative to the surrounding
properties makes complete conformance to city code, or establishment
of a PUD, unfeasible within the requested time frame for construction
of the addition. Accepting an agreement to plan for ultimate
conformance while allowing expansion in the short term accomplishes
Ruff Auto's short-term goals and has the potential of creating a long-
term plan that allows the neighborhood and Ruff Auto to co -exist.
Comte hre enaive plan repo .
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the public hearings for
the Comprehensive Plan are in April. The public hearings were delayed so
the joint meeting between Planning Commission, HRA, and Parks
Commission will be in mid May to review each Commissioner's
implementation steps. O'Neill also informed the Commissioners that he and
Steve Grittman, City Planner, would be attending the township meeting in
two weeks regarding the Comp Plan. The Township Board were all given a
Comp Plan to read and review. The meeting will allow the Board a time for
questions and comments.
Monticello Comrnnnity Partners (M .PU dy lopment planning pre as
report (Dick Frio, Jeff O'Neill. Ion Bogart).
Chairman Frie, Planning Commission representative to MCP Board, reported
that the MCP board has been established, officers elected, and a PO Box
address given. There has also been a fund raising committee established and
donations pledged by the board. There is a first draft completed for a job
description for a project manager. The Board is concentrating on review the
RFP for the downtown redevelopment project.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that eight downtown/
riverfront planning proposals were received by the City. The plan prepared
will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and ultimately be considered
for adoption as an amendment or update to the comprehensive plan.
Jon Bogart, Chairman Design Committee, reported that the Design
Committee was gathering information on the history of the building in the
downtown area. There appears to be some interesting building facado that
Page 5
Planning Commission Minutes - 3/08/98
have been covered up. The Design Committee is also organizing a Spring
Clean-up for East and West Bridge Park.
Jeff ONeill inquired if the tree trimming for Bridge Park should be brought
to the Parks Commission. The Planning Commission thought a
recommendation from the Parks Commission would be the best choice.
9. .S'tatuit of offibrts to acs, sire rivprfront property west of Bridge Park.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported the City is waiting for costs
from the contractor on the repair the fire damage at the riverfront property.
The homeowner is still not positive if the house will be left on the market.
The Planning Commission will be kept up to date on what happens.
. 1 • 1 M / • .
Gary Anderson, Building Official, reported that Al Poach had not returned
hie call but the site looked like he had moved, He would continue to monitor
the property.
4 11. Myhw y 25/Cedar Street Corridor Study uRdntg.
Jeff ONeill, Assistant Administrator, reported that as soon as the state
recommends one of the options a public information meeting will be
scheduled. MNDOT might not recommend a particular option but agree to
both of them and leave the final decision to the City.
12. Btm==wat.
JON BOGART MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
SECONDED BY DICK MARTIE. Motion passed unanimously.
Page 6
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2/96
.: M
W
Dan and Linda Mielke request a conditional use permit which would allow
development of a 3 -bay quick lube oil change facility at the new parcel created
directly south of the Subway Shop. In the B-3 zone, motor fuel station, motor
tiiel station/convenienoe store, auto repair minor, and tire/battery stores are
allowed in the B-3 zone as a conditional use. City stats' would interpret a quick
lube oil change facility as falling into this general category. As you will see in
the attached section of the code, there are 18 conditions that must be met by this
facility. It appears that the site and building plans will meet all 18 conditions.
However, we do not have enough information to determine if the site will meet
condition 02. Since we have not seen actual building plans at this point, it is not
possible to determine if the facility meets condition #2, which states that the
architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not
be so dissimilar to the existing building or area as to cause impairment in
property values. The plan's consistency with this requirement will need to be
evaluated after building plans are submitted. It is not suspected that this will
be a problem.
Development of this site plan presented some interesting complications due to
the potential that the Chelsea Road extension to Highway 26 might touch the
southern boundary of the property making it a corner lot. If this parcel does
become a corner lot, the access will be lost at its present position and must be
moved to another location on the property. The Mielke's are aware of this
potential and have established their building alignment and site plan
accordingly to allow them enough flexibility to take advantage of the future
potential of this site becoming a corner lot.
The site plan has been reviewed for consistency with setback, parking, and drive
aisle requirements. At this point, a landscaping plan has not been submitted;
therefore, it would be appropriate to approve any conditional use permit subject
to completion of a landscaping plan that is consistent with city code. If
Planning Commission so desires and believes that additional landscaping should
be applied at this site in conjunction with the conditional use permit request,
then it should add a separate condition accordingly.
According to the applicant, there will be no outside storage at this site;
therefore, a conditional use permit allowing outside storage is not necessary.
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2/96
B. AITFRNATfVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the conditional use permit allowing a 3 -bay quick lube
oil facility provided that the facility meets all the conditions outlined by
ordinance and subject to the following additional conditions:
1. Completion of a landscaping plan that is consistent with code
requirements.
2. Completion of site grading and drainage plan that is acceptable to
the City Engineer.
3. The conditional use permit is subject to staff review and approval of
the architectural design of the structure. If staff believes that the
design does not meet the requirements of condition q2, then staff is
directed to bring the matter back before the Planning Commission
for additional review.
This motion could be based on the finding that the quick lube oil facility
use and associated site plan is consistent with the character of the B-3
zone. Furthermore, the site plan meets conditions as outlined by
ordinance and additional conditions as required by the Planning
Commission.
Under this alternative, the item would move forward to the City Council
for review.
Motion to deny the conditional use permit allowing a 3 -bay quick lube oil
facility.
This alternative should be selected if the Planning Commission believes
that a quick lube oil facility operating under the site plan as proposed is
not consistent with the character, nature, and geography of the area, or
perhaps the facility is not consistent with the comprehensive plan.
C_ STAFF RF .OMMFNLATION:
Staff recommends alternative #I. The proposed use and site plan aro clearly
consistent with the intent and purpose of the B-3 zone. City staff has worked
hard with the Miclkes toward development of a site plan that provides flexibility
to utilize the site effectively in the short term under the existing road alignment
while leaving options open for effective use of the site in the event the site
becomes a corner lot.
Copy of site plan; Excerpt from zoning ordinance.
fti '
� r
1
t
oil
I `
e, ...�. ,
H �...
ACCESS ROAD
MY, 25
�4 p
t
9. Vehicular access points shall be limit -ed, shall
create a minimum of conflict with through traffic
movement and shall be subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
10. All signing and informational or visual
communication devices shall be in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 9, of this ordinance.
11. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise.
12. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
(C) MOTOR FUEL STATION, MOTOR FUEL STATION/CONVENIENCE
STORE, AUTO REPAIR -MINOR, AND TIRE AND BATTERY STORES
AND SERVICE PROVIDED THAT:
1. Regardless of whether the dispensing, sale, or
offering for sale of motor fuels and/or oil
incidental to the conduct of the use or business,
the standards and requirements imposed by this
ordinance for motor fuel stations shall apply.
These standards and requirements are, however, in
addition to other requirements which are imposed
for other uses of the property.
2. The architectural appearance and functional plan of
the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to
�i the exiating buildings or area as to cause
i impairment in property values or constitute a
blighting influence within a reasonable distance of
the lot.
3. The entire site other than that taken sip 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.
4. A minimum lot area of twenty-two thousand five
hundred (22,900) square feet and minimum lot
dimensions of one hundred fifty (190) feet by one
hundred thirty (130) feet.
S. A drainage system subject to the approval of the
City Engineer shall be installed.
6. A curb not lees than six (6) inches above grade
shall separate the public sidevalk from motor
vehicle service areas.
7. The light Ing shall 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 (H), of this ordinance.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 13/4
S
S. Wherever fuel pumps are to be installed, pump
islands shall be installed.
9. At the boundaries of a residential district, a
strip of not less than five (5) feet shall be
landscaped and screened in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 7 (G), of this ordinance.
10. Each light standard landscaped.
11. 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.
12. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of
conflict with through traffic movement, shall
comply with Chapter 3, Section S, of this
ordinance, and shall be subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
13. All signing and informational or visual
communication devices shall be minimized and shall
be in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 9, of this
ordinance.
14. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise.
15. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance
with Chapter 13, Section 4, of this ordinance.
16. Sale of products other than those specifically
mentioned in Chapter 13, Section 4, be subject to a
conditional use permit and be in compliance with
Chapter 13, Section 4 [F], of this ordinance.
17. All conditions pertaining to a specific site are
subject to change when the Council, upon
investigation in relation to a formal request,
finds that the general welfare and public
betterment can be served as well or better by
modifying the conditions.
16. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
(D) New and used automobile/light truck sales and display
provided that:
1. The enclosed principal use (sales and display
office) is a minimum of 4,500 square feet,
excluding the area used for mechanical repair and
reconditioning.
2. Outside sales and display areas are fenced or
screened from view of neighboring residential uses
KONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 13/y_
s
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2/96
In conjunction with the conversion of the old Pitt Funeral Home to an office
building, Steve Conroy requests a conditional use permit which would allow
development of a sign with more than three business names. This sign is
necessary because the new office use will likely result in multiple tenants at
the site. The location of the sign is at the location of the pre-existing sign.
The sign as proposed has been reviewed by City staff and meets code
requirements. A copy of the sign plan is attached for your review.
In a related matter, City staff has been working with Steve Conroy on
development of a longer-term parking plan for the site. The current level of
parking and parking lot design is adequate to support a fair amount of
activity in the structure; however, as the intensity of the use of the facility
grows, it is likely that additional parking will be needed. Steve Conroy
understands that when 3/4 of the building is occupied, he will likely need to
expand his parking. At such time, he will probably be coming to the
Planning Commission to ask for variances to construct the additional parking
without curb and gutter. The variances will assist him in construction of a
facility that matches the present conditions. This is for information only. No
action by the Planning Commission is requested on this topic at this time.
R. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve the conditional use permit which would allow three
or more business signs on a commercial building.
This motion could be based on the finding that the pylon sign proposed
is consistent with city code. The sign system meets all city
requirements; therefore, the request should be approved.
Motion to deny the conditional use permit which would allow three or
more business signs on a commercial building.
Planning Commission Agenda - 4W6
STAFF RPV.OMMFNDATTON:
Staff recommends alternative N. Due to the fact that the sign system meets
city code requirements, the conditional use permit should be epproved.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of sign plan.
m
0
N
a
n
m
m
• 1
++ 4e
l '
a
S.
tlogls*
Planning Commission Agenda - 412196
Lenny Haberman, operator of Lenny and Jim's Bait Shop, and Dean
Rasmussen, owner of the Glass Hut property, request permission to allow
Haberman to sell up to 6 boats which would be displayed outside of the
structure. The existing structure currently houses Glass Hut operations and
is being subdivided internally to house both the Glass Hut and Lenny's Bait
Shop. The request also includes permission to have outside storage.
The site as it is currently operated is a lawful, nonconforming use. The
parking lot, landscaping, and outside storage arrangement currently are in
violation of the city code. However, due to the fact that nonconforming
aspects of the site were established before the development of the code, they
are "grandfathered -in.' As with every other nonconforming site, when there
is a request to intensify the use, such as in this case where the request is to
allow outside sales of boats, the various nonconforming aspects of the site
need to brought up to code. It was noted earlier nonconforming aspects
include absence of bituminous paving, no curb and gutter, no landscaping,
and the outside storage to the rear of the structure is currently unscreened.
In the past, the City has always required that the property owners obtain
conditional use permits prior to establishing outside sales areas. For
example, Hoglund Transportation was required to obtain a conditional use
permit which would allow the We of approximately 8 vehicles at a small lot
on the Oakwood side of the property. Under the conditional use permit they
were required to pave the sales area, install curb, and plant trees. Similarly,
General Rental was required to pave the area that they use for display of
goods for rent.
The precedent that may haunt us somewhat is the fact that the RV Center
expanded their outside sales area far beyond the limits originally intended
under the original conditional use permit. This was done without City
permission, and the City may need to take some action to require that RV
Center update their conditional use permit accordingly.
Under the plan as prepared, the owners request that they be allowed to
establish their outside sales area with the goal of completing the site plan
improvements, as identified, over time. Planning Commission is asked to
review the request for the conditional use permits and determine to what
extent it would allow to phase in the improvements to the site. Obviously,
improvements as proposed will be relatively expensive which, from a
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2M
business standpoint, may be difficult to justify based on the revenue that can
come in on the site from the development of a small outside sales facility.
However, if the improvements are allowed to be phased in over time, it may
make sense, from a business standpoint, to begin the operation of the sales
lot and then put away funds over time to complete the site improvements.
This plan in theory makes sense; however, from a practical standpoint, it
may be difficult for the City to enforce the completion of improvements.
The site plan as presented is very rough and does not provide sufficient
information on which to develop a phase plan. Information deficiencies are
as follows.
The site plan shows no detail relating to the Glass Hut access to State
Highway 25. Parking spaces are not identified and curb and gutter is not
delineated. Even though the Glass Hut side of the building is not expanding,
it still is subject to the requirement that nonconforming aspects of the site be
updated when use of the property intensifies.
The drive area leading to the parking on the north side of the building is not
identified. The plan needs to be updated to show where the access point is
and identify the drive aisle leading to the parking. There is also no curbing
identified on this side of the property. Finally, the plan does not show the
location of the outside sales area. It is anticipated that it will be somewhere
in the vicinity of the parking lot stalls noted as 9, 10, 11, and 12. 1 have a
hunch, however, that they may want to place the bosts directly in front of the
building on the grassy area.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve conditional use permits allowing outside storage
and outside sales subject to completion of a plan for phasing in all
improvements required by code which include:
a. Bituminous paving and parking improvements including curb
and gutter.
b. Installation of landscaping.
C. Installation of a screening fence around the perimeter of the
storage area.
d. Development of a plan for completing improvements over time to
extend no longer than _ years.
Under this altemative, the property owner would be allowed to
proceed with outside sales on site and would be operating under a long
term plan negotiated by the Planning Comnmisdon for completion of
the improvements noted above. Perhaps during discussion, you can
identify a timeline for completion of the improvements. This
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2196
alternative could be selected based on the finding that the proposed
use is consistent with the character and nature of the B-3 zoning
district and the neighborhood in general. Establishing a phase plan
for completion of improvements as required over time could ultimately
result in a site that is in conformance with city codes.
Motion to table approval of conditional use permits allowing outside
storage and outside sales.
This alternative should be selected if the Planning Commission does
not feel that the information provided is sufficient to make a decision.
Please note that according to state law, the Planning Commission can
only table an item just so long before a decision has to made: otherwise
the request that is made is automatically approved. Given the time
frames allotted to us under state law, a decision on this item must be
made at the next Planning Commission meeting and then sent directly
to Council for decision.
Motion to deny approval of conditional use permits allowing outside
storage and outside sales. There is no requirement that the City allow
a phased -in approach for completion of required improvements. If the
Planning Commission is concerned that site improvements will not be
made over time because enforcement of the requirements will not
occur, then Planning Commission can deny the approval based on the
finding that the phased approach for completion of the improvements
is not acceptable.
Motion to approve conditional use permits allowing outside storage
and outside sales subject to completion of all site improvements prior
to establishment of the outside sales area.
Under this alternative, Planning Commission would support the
development of the facility as proposed. However, all necessary site
improvements as required must be made at the outset and would not
be allowed to be phased in. Under this alternative, it is likely that the
applicant will withdraw the request because of the financial impact of
the requirement to completely update the site prior to establishing a 6 -
bay sales lot.
Staff recommends that this item be tabled due to inadequacy of the site plan.
However, we would support approval if the applicant and Planning
Commission are able to detail various aspects of the site plan during the
meeting. Perhaps it would be possible to approve the conditional use permits
subject to completion of the site plan that meets city code requirements.
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2/96
Staff is somewhat supportive of alternative #I due to the fact that it is
relatively expensive to install the site improvements as requested, and
perhaps it is worth the risk to allow the site sales lot without first requiring
all improvements to be done. On the other hand, allowing the development
to proceed without first requiring the installation of improvements eliminates
much of the leverage that we have to get the improvments done in the fust
place. At a minimum, if Planning Commission is of a mind to approve the
conditional use permits under a phased concept, the first phase should
include construction of a relatively large portion of the parking area. Also,
the first phase should include screening of all outside storage areas.
Copy of site plan; copy of excerpts from Monticello Zoning Ordinance.
N
SITE PLAN
FOR
t
THE GLASS HUT
N 89'0539' E 260.13
6
+ir
6�
r
-
1 wrwn •••••• RM
V
04
y ,rSIM
N Bd'f0'a,' r 89.36
I
0
11
S. Does not take up parking space as required for
conformity to this ordinance.
6. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
V_ [F) Open or outdoor service, sale, and rental as a principal
2f` or accessory use and including sales in or from
motorized vehicles, trailers, or wagons provided that:
1. Outside services, sales and equipment rental
connected with the principal uses is limited to
thirty (30) percent of the gross floor area of the
principal use. This percentage may be increased as
a condition of the conditional use permit.
2. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from
view of neighboring residential uses or abutting
"R" district in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (G), of this ordinance.
3. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that
the light source •shall not be visible from the
public right-of-way or from neighboring residences
and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (H), of this ordinance.
4. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust.
S. Does not take up parking space as required for
conformity to this ordinance.
6. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
(G) Accessory, enclosed retail, rental, or service activity
other than that allowed as a permitted use or
conditional use within this section provided that:
1. Such use is allowed as a permitted use in a "B-1"
or "B-2" district.
2. Such use does not constitute more than thirty (30)
percent of the lot area and not more than fifty
(90) percent of the gross floor area of the
principal use.
3. Adequate off-street parking and off-street loading
In compliance with the requirements of Chapter 3,
Sections S and 6, of this ordinance is provided.
4. All signing and informational or visual
communication devices shall be in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 9, of this ordinance.
NONTICEU.O ZONING ORDINANCE 13/7
or an abutting "R" district in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 2 (GJ, of this ordinance.
3. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that
the light source shall not be visible from the
public right-of-way or from neighboring residences,
and shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 [H], of this ordinance.
4. The outside sales and display area shall be hard
surfaced.
5. The outside sales and display area does not utilize
parking spaces which are required for conformance
with this ordinance.
6. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of
conflict with through traffic movement, shall
comply with Chapter 3, Section 5, of this
ordinance, and shall be subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
7. There is a minimum lot area of twenty-two thousand
five hundred (22,500) square feet and minimum lot
dimensions of one hundred fifty (150) feet by one
hundred thirty (130) feet.
S. A drainage system subject to the approval of the
City Engineer shall be installed.
9. All signing shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 9, of this ordinance.
10. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
(EJ Open and outdoor storage as a principal or accessory use
provided thatt
1. The area is fenced and screened from view of
neighboring residential uses or if abutting an "R"
district in compliance with Chapter 3,
r 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.
4. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that
the light source shall not be visible from the
sight -of -way or from neighboring residences and
shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (H), of this ordinance.
HONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 13/6
Planning Commission Agenda - 4/2196
•1 I 1 =7 I I 1 .,1 r. . 1l1 Y.: 11
T 1 111 1 7 Y 1 1 •1 1 :J'J 1
EMO 11 1 1 7 Y 1 1 •1• I N
A RFFFRENCF ANII BA .KGRO fNil;
This agenda item represents what could be the final step for the Planning
Commission in the process of updating the comprehensive plan. As you
know, since February of 1995, the Planning Commission, with input from
various individuals, city commissions and organizations, has been working
toward an update of our comprehensive plan. The input came in the form of
individual interviews with community leaders, neighborhood discussions,
and through general discussion at Planning Commission, HRA, and City
Council levels.
Planning Commission should be pleased to know that the City Council spent
considerable time reviewing the document which consisted of 2 separate work
sessions. At a recent meeting, Council authorized submittal of the
comprehensive plan to the public via the public hearing process.
Steve Grittman and I reviewed the draft of the comprehensive plan at a
recent township meeting and requested the township's comments. Based on
the discussion, it appears that the townhip was comfortable with the
comprehensive plan as prepared. I have not received any formal comments
regarding the comprehensive plan from the township officials.
Finally, at the regular meeting of the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board
(MOAA), the group will be reviewing the comprehensive plan. This meeting
falls on the day after the public hearing; therefore, any comments from the
MOAA will go directly to the City Council.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS;
Motion to adopt update to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan based
on the finding that the comprehensive plan as prepared is consistent
with the goals and policies supporting future development of the City
of Monticello and authorize submittal of the draft document to the City
Council for review and consideration of adoption.
Planning Commission may wish to have this item brought back to the
group if any members of the MOAA object to any aspect of the plan.
The MOAA is made up of Pat Sawatzke, Franklin Dean, and Brad
Fylo. Support of the plan by this group is very important to the long
term implementation of the comprehensivo plan because this group
Planning Commission Agenda - 412/96
makes zoning decisions in the township areas around the perimeter of
the community. We want to make sure that the MOAA accepts the
plans for land use so that we can be assured that zoning decisions will
be consistent with the comprehensive plan. In the event, members of
the MOAA object to land use patterns projected for the perimeter of
the community, the item should probably brought back to the Planning
Commission for further review. At this point in time, I do not suspect
that the MOAA will have any objections to the plan as prepared.
However, we should probably leave our options open to review the
document with the MOAA prior to submittal to City Council in the
event there are conflicts.
Motion to deny approval of update to the Monticello Comprehensive
Plan.
3. Motion to table approval of update to the Monticello Comprehensive
Plan. Planning Commission may wish to table approval of the
document until the input is received from the Orderly Annexation
Board. If Planning Commission selects this alternative, then final
adoption of the document would not occur until the May meeting of the
Planning Commission.
y V;l U 1,4tuh, 1:4017A W
Stall recommends alternative N1 with the condition as noted. I think it is
important that the MOAA provides full support of the document prior to its
submittal to the City Council. If the MOAA has concerns regarding the plan,
then its membership should meet with the Planning Commission to discuss
said issues.
PLEASE BRING YOUR COPY OF THE COMPMBNSWE PLAN TO THE
MEETING.