Planning Commission Agenda Packet 01-03-1995WN
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 3, 1995 - 7 p.m.
Members: Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson, Richard Martie, Brian Stumpf
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held October 4, 1994.
3. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held December 6, 1994.
4. Public Hearing --Consideration of a 2 -ft variance to the 10 -ft side yard
setback, which would allow expansion of an existing garage. Applicant,
Paul IUein.
5. Public Hearing—Consideration of a conditional use permit allowing the
development of a 48 -unit 3 -story senior housing project. Location: Adjacent
and east of Monticello -Big Lake Hospital District Clinic building on Hart
Boulevard. Applicant, Monticello Senior Housing Alliance.
6. Public Hearing--0onaideration of a conditional use permit allowing the
development of a joint parking facility shared by Monticello -Big Lake
Community Hospital District and the proposed senior housing facility.
Applicant, Monticello Senior Housing Alliance and Monticello -Big Lake
Community Hospital District.
7. Update on statue of development of buffer/screen regulations (Steve
Grittman report.).
8. Adjournment.
Pet.. 8ie.,�_ Haa4 •�
S040.0c - 0.,.440 fie ./. ie�t •
.Ne. %.-6 13id1
a•
MINUTES
REGULAR MEEE NG-MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, December 6, 1894 - 7 p.m.
Members Present Cindy Lemm, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson, and
Brian Stumpf
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill, Wanda Kraemer
Meeting was called to order by Chairperson Cindy Lemm at 7 p.m.
A motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Martie to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting held November 1, 1994. The motion
carried unenimoudy with Richard Carlson absent.
j'ublic Hearine-Considerayon of a zonine amegdment which would rezone the
Eleanor Malone property from R-2 (sinvle land tvfq family residential) to PS
(public and semi-uublic uses). Anulicant. Eleanor Malone/St. Henrv's Church.
JeffO'NeiU, Assistant Administrator, explained briefly that a new request was
brought forward from a previous request to rezone 30 acres of the Gladys
Hoglund property from 1-1 (light industrial) to PS (public and semi-public uses)
in conjunction with the relocation and expansion of the St. Henry's Catholic
Church. Under the previous rezoning the St. Henry's Catholic Church would
intend to use the Malone property for church uses they would have to get a
separate conditional use permit for church use in the currently zoned R-2
(single and two family residential) zoning.
Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing. There being no input from the
public, she then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for comment
from the Planning Commission members.
A motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Brian Stumpf to amend
the zoning ordinance based on the finding that the proposed nmendment is
consistent with the geography of the area, consistent with the character of the
area and will not result in a depreciation of adjoining land values, there is a
demonstroted need for the use, and the use is consistent with the
comprehensive plan. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 1 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 12094
Ppblic Hearin-Consideratior,3_of amendment to Section :0 fEl of the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance regulating sites by alloveirw pne nremiae
identificatipn wall si¢n oer strget frontage and one oremise identification in c n
sign. nlicant. Arrow Sign Comnanv.
Jeff O Ner71, Assistant Administrator, explained Arrow Sign Company's
request, on behalf of Larson's Coast to Coast Store, to be allowed an additional
business wall identification sign placed on the wall in addition to the existing
one sign. One wall business identification sign and one pylon business
identification sign are currently allowed by the ordinance. The proposed
ordinance amendment would allow one business identification sign per street
frontage in addition to one pylon business identification sign.
Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing. Al Lesson, owner of Larson's
Coast to Coast Store, requested to have one additional business identification
sign on the east wall of his existing building. People traveling west on West
4th Street, unless they know that is where the Coast to Coast Store is, would
have trouble recognizing where the location of his Coast to Coast store is.
There being no further input from the public, Cindy Lemm then closed the
public hearing.
Discussion amongst the Planning Commission members were in driving around
town they saw no problem with an additional business identification sign on
a wall with one per street frontage in addition to the one pylon business
identification sign. Businesses with fronts and backs that abut a public right-
of-way should have business identification signs to recognize where there
building is when traveling on public right-of-ways which serve their
businesses.
There being no fiuther discussion for the Planning Commission members, a
motion was made by Brian Stumpf and seconded by Richard Martie to approve
the ordinance amendment to Section 3-9 [E) of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance regulating signs by allowing one premise identification sign per
street frontage and one premise identification pylon sign. Total sign area for
all wall signs together to be limited to the sign area allowed under the formula
for calculating the wall sign on the front of the structure. The motion carried
unanimously.
Planning Commission members interviewed the sir applicants that submitted
applications. The applicants each received about 15 minutes to discuss and
answer Questions which were submitted to be naked of each of the applicants.
Member applicants were as follows: Steve Andrews, Rod Drageten, Dick Frie,
Earl Smith, Jerry Wells and Robert Grieman. Following the member
Page 2 9
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/6194
applicants interview, the Planning Commission members, by written vote,
submitted their recommendation to the City Council for their review. Votes
were as follows: Steven Andrews, 1; Rodney Dragsten, 2; Dick Frie, 2; Earl
Smith, 1; Jerry Wells, 1; Robert Griemen, 3.
Public Hearin --Consideration of a simple subdivision allowine subdivision of
the Tom Brennan nronerty. Applicant. Tom Brennan.
Jeff ONeill, Assistant Administrator, explained the Brennan's request of how
their property would be subdivided into two parcels. Brennan's propose the
new property line be placed along the alignment line previous approved by the
City Council as the proposed alignment of West 7th Street, between Minnesota
Street and Elm Street. The simple subdivision as proposed will require the
City obtain a 12 -foot easement around the perimeter of the proposed simple
subdivided parcel.
Chairperson Cindy Lemm opened the public hearing. There being no
comments or questions from the Brennan's or the public, she then closed the
public hearing.
There being no discussion amongst the Planning Commission members, a
motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Richard Martie to
approve the simple subdivision of the Tom Brennan property located just north
of I-94 between Minnesota and Elm Streets. The motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of adonting a resolution plans of the River Mill Bite develonment,
is congistgnt with the comoreileneive Ulan for the City. Consideration to adopt
a resolution finding the modified redevelopment plan for the redevelopment
per, q1 and, tax increment financing (TIF) plan for TIF district Nos. 1-1
through 1-18, located within the redevelopment proiect 01. to be consistent
with the comprehensive plan for the City.
Jeff ONeill, Assistant Administrator, explained that in order to approve and
adopt a TIF plan for TIF District Nos. 1.18, the Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project 01 Plan must be modified for enlargement of the
geographic area to include the 72 acres of the Kreutbauer property. Minnesota
Statutes state the Planning Commission shall review the plans and give
written findings, resolution, on the resolution that the modified TIF and
redevelopment project plane are consistent with the Monticello comprehensive
plan. ONeill noted that a very similar finding was made when the Planning
Commission approved the toning map amendments and preliminary plat a few
months ago. Therefore, approval of this resolution would be consistent with
the previous decisions.
There being no input tram the Planning Commission members, a motion was
made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Carlson to approve the
Page 3 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/6/94
resolution finding a modified redevelopment plan for redevelopment project #1
and TIF plans for TIF District Nos. 1-18, located within the redevelopment
project #1, to be consistent with the comprehensive plan for the city. Motion
carried unanimously.
Prior to going on to agenda item #8, the Assistant Administrator explained the
concept plan which was submitted with the agenda in relationship to the
parcel which is part of the Gillard Avenue/Meadow Oak storm sewer project.
The owners agree to sell land to the City to allow for storm sewer pipe
construction. They submitted a list of nine conditions they would like to be
considered prior to selling the parcel of land to the City. They are as follows:
1) Annexation of the entire parcel into the city.
2) Preliminary plat approval per sketch plan.
3) Right to drain into storm sewer without an assessment or hookup fee for
storm sewer.
4) Plat takes swamp in lieu of park/park dedication fees.
5) Right of automatic renewal of the preliminary plat without fees, costs,
or further appearance.
6) Relocation of high ground from park/outlet to Lots 3,4,5 and'6, Block 2,
as directed at City expense.
7) If fenced, screened by City with pines.
8) Right to relocate storage barn on Lot 1, Block 1.
9) Written development agreement submitted by City for review by owner's
counsel.
Discussion amongst the Planning Commission members were the following:
1) The parcel is in the township, when does it become annexed to the city?
2) What happens with the adjoining parcel to the northeast?
3) Plan as submitted in concept looks fine, but there are no dimensions or
any other information to bring it as far along for a preliminary plat
approval.
Planning Commission members were supportive of the City purchasing the
property in concept but needed fluther review prior to getting to a preliminary
plat review.
Adiournment. A motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Jon
Bogart to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gary Anderson, Zoning Administrator �\
Page 4 / Q J
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/3/95
Rpl�Lc Hparina—C99sider4tiog of a 2 -foot yadanpe to the lafoot side
Yard setbaclL syhigh would allow ezgM on of an ezisdng_g rig&,
Auullcant Paul Klein. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Paul Klein is requesting a variance to the minimum 10 -ft side yard setback
requirement, that being a 2 -ft variance request to allow construction of a
garage addition to the west of the existing garage. The existing garage is
already 370 aq ft with dimensions of 22' x 16'8". To construct this addition, a
10 -ft minimum width is needed to allow room for a 9' x 7' overhead door. On
the enclosed site plan, please note there is a 20 -ft distance from the proposed
garage addition to the nearest structure on the property immediately west of
the existing residence.
As you will note on the site plan, there is a proposed addition to the rear of the
existing garage along with his request for the variance on the garage to the
west of his existing garage. Klein has failed to show a reason for hardship
other than that a 10 -ft wide garage addition is necessary to accommodate the
garage door for the 10 -ft addition. This clearly is not a reason for any
hardship demonstrated in this side yard setback variance request.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Approve a 2 -ft variance to the 10 -ft side yard setback, which would
allow expansion of an existing garage as proposed. A motion to approve
should note the unique hardship which justifies the variance.
Deny a 2 -ft variance to the 10 -ft side yard setback, which would allow
expansion of an existing garage.
This motion should be based on a finding that the property owner can
achieve reasonable and full use of his property without a variance, there
is no unique circumstance or hardship that would justify the variance,
and granting the variance would set a precedent that would impair the
intent of the ordinance.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 02. Klein's request 1br an addition to the
existing garage has merit from the functionability of his existing 16 -ft garage
with a 10 -ft garage addition. To utilize the garage addition, a 10 -ft width is
needed to axommodate an overhead garage door. However, Klein has failed
Planning Commission Agenda • 1/3!95
to demonstrate a hardship other than the width that is needed to accommodate
an overhead garage door. His request is not a demonstrated hardship for this
side yard setback variance request.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed variance request; Copy of the site plan for
the variance request.
i
Consideration of a 2' variance to the
10' sideyard setback variance request
which would allow expansion of an existing
garage.
APPLICANT: Paul Klein
p44o_
=L74Cnq
1{Ou2�_
Wit,• -
loo.00•
a Aedttow 4
q=0•
mac- 1%OtO' _1
•
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/3/95
Public Hearing—Consideration of a conditional use permit allowinalhe
development of a 4&unit S-gto;v senior houQing prof &L Location:
Adi nt anij east of MoniLicello-Bia Lake HospiW District Clinic
building on Hart Boulevard. Applicant. Monticello Senior Housin¢
Alliance. AND
Public Hearina—Consideration of a ponditionej Vsq permit allowing the
development of a ioini parking f to lity shared W MonjiceD¢BiaLake
Community_Hospital DistrlcEand the VMPosed senigr houeinghwility,
Applicant. Monticello Senior Housing Alliance and Monticello-Bist Lake
CCmmunity Hospital Dietrich (J.OJ
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public hearing and consider
its recommendation regarding two conditional use permit requests associated
with construction of the proposed Mississippi Shores senior housing
development. Mississippi Shores is a 48 -unit congregate care senior housing
facility to be located east of the Hospital District clinic sites. Senior housing
facilities are allowed as a conditional use in the PZM zone. In addition to the
request for the conditional use permit allowing the senior housing facility,
there is a companion request for a conditional use permit allowing shared
parking and drive access with the clinic site. The design of the facility calls
for an entrance to an underground garage via the clinic driveway. The
conditional use permit is required for the two sites to be integrated in this
manner.
Following is a brief site plan review followed by alternative actions, which
include a list of conditions that are outlined by ordinance and additional
conditions that the Planning Commission may wish to apply.
The 2 -acre site is located directly east of the existing clinic facility and
encompasses two platted lots and unvacated portion of the River Street right-
of-way. The site design and associated parking layout utilizes the clinic
driveway, The river extends along the northern boundary of the property.
Extending through the northern side of the site is the River Street right-of-
way, which was platted many years ago but never developed for roadway
purposes. Tho pathway plan adopted by the City currently calls for River
Street to becomo a location for a pathway that will someday be extended from
River Street to Mississippi Drive. To the east of the site is a home formerly
owned by Joe Stoltus and recently purchased by John Bondhus. Farther to the
east is the Bondhus office complex and the wastewater treatment plant. The
presence of the wastewater treatment plant and periodic odors that impact the
area represent some potential for incompatibility between uses. Tho Planning
Commission should carefWly weigh the risk associated with allowing
development of the congregate care senior housing facility at this location due
to this tactor. The consensus among the HRA, the Hospital Board of Directors,
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/3/95
and the Senior Housing Alliance is that although it is demonstrated that odor
problems do occur in the area, the frequency of the problem is linked to fairly
unique atmosphere conditions that occur only a few days per year. The view
has been that although during certain days there may be a problem, for the
most part odors are not a problem. In light of the periodic problem that does
exist, the architect has been asked by City staff to design the air intake system
to include an air filtration mechanism that will bring fresh air into the
hallways and general use areas of the building. In addition, the individual
wall air conditioners serving each unit will also have an air filtration system
that is designed to mitigate odor problems.
To the south of this site is Hart Boulevard and Highway 75. The site meets
ordinance requirements with regard to street access design and location.
The structure itself will be three stories high, not counting the underground
garage parking area. According to the zoning ordinance, any structures higher
than two stories require a conditional use permit. Therefore, the motion to
approve this must include this notation. The proposed structure will be
completely sprinklered, and the City fire department has a ladder truck which
can reach to any window in the facility. Therefore, it appears reasonable to
approve the conditional use permit as requested to allow the 3 -story structure.
PARSING
The site plan meets and exceeds parking requirements for senior housing. The
ordinance states that senior citizen housing requires reservation of an area
equal to one parking space per unit. It also notes that initial development is,
however, required only one-half of a space per unit, and said number of spaces
can continue until such time as the City Council considers a need for
additional parking spaces has been demonstrated. Under the plan as
proposed, tho site will contain 1S parking spaces in the front of the building
and another 33 spaces that are underground for a total of 51 spaces, which is
3 spaces in excess of the paring minimum. Please note that any future
conversion of the site from senior housing to multi -family would require
development of an additional 48 parking stalls, 12 of which would need to be
enclosed. Conversion from senior housing to multifamily would require City
permission via a conditional use permit process.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
DECISION I
1. Motion to recommend approval of a conditional use permit allowing
development of a 3 -dory senior housing facility contingent on the
following conditions being mot:
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/3195
Conditions Reauired by Ordinance:
1) Not more than 10% of the occupants may be persons 60 years of
age or under (spouses of a person over 60 years of age or
caretakers, etc.).
2) Except for caretaker units, occupancy shall be limited to man and
wife, blood relatives, or a single man or single woman.
3) To continue to qualify for the senior citizen housing classification,
the owner or agent shall annually file with the City
Administrator or the Building Inspector a certified copy of a
monthly resume of occupants of such a multiple dwelling, listing
the number of tenants by age and clearly identifying and setting
forth the relationship of occupants 60 years of age or under to
qualified tenants or to the building.
4) One off-street loading space in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 6, of this ordinance is installed.
5) Elevator service is provided to each floor level.
6) Usable open space as defined in Chapter 2, Section 2, of this
ordinance, at a minimum, is equal to 20% of the gross lot an .
7) The site of the main entrance of the principal use is served or is
located within 400 R of regular transit service.
8) The situ of the main entrance of the principal use is within 400 ft
of commercial shopping development or adequate provision for
access to such facilities is provided.
Additional Conditions:
9) An air filtration system will be developed that will serve common
areas within the building and will serve individual apartments
meeting the design requirements of the City Engineer.
Thia motion to approve the conditional use permit could be based on the
finding that the development of the facility at the location as proposed
is consistent with the geography and character of the area, consistent
with the comprehensive plan, will not result in depreciation of property
values, and there is a demonstrated need for the use. Attached are
excerpts fiom the comprehensive plan that relate to housing
development. Although it is a general goal to develop this type of
facility closer to commercial areas, the site as proposed is close to
medical facilities and has access to the Heartland Express bus service,
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/3/95
which provides door-to-door service to any location within the city.
Therefore, it does not appear to be a problem that the facility is located
away from commercial areas.
In terms of the demonstrated need for the use, the HRA conducted a
housing survey that clearly demonstrated the need for this type of
housing.
Planning Commission may wish to pay particular attention to condition
#2, which is outlined by ordinance. I am concerned that this condition
is unenforceable and may need to be deleted.
Finally, the site plan as proposed is consistent with the general plan for
the Hospital District site development as outlined in the Hospital
District Planning Study completed in August 1993.
Motion to deny approval of conditional use permit allowing senior
housing at this location.
Planning Commission should select this alternative if it is found that
the site as proposed is not deemed to be consistent with the geography
and character of the area or consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Perhaps an argument could be made that the development of a 3 -story
structure along the Mississippi River is not consistent with the
character of the Mississippi River corridor; however, it should be noted
that the structure as proposed does meet the requirements of the wild
and scenic section of the zoning ordinance. Therefore, this reasoning
does not appear to be sufficient grounds for denial based on this
reasoning. As another option for a finding to deny, the Planning
Commission could find that the housing development as proposed is not
consistent with the area due to the presence of the wastewater
treatment plant and associated odors. Introduction of a housing facility
at this location would result in long-term conflicts between the facility
and the present and/or expanded wastewater treatment plant. Efforts
to mitigate odors through filtering systems are not considered sufficient
to guarantee habitability of the housing facility.
DECISION III
Motion to approve conditional use permit allowing shared parking
subject to the following conditions:
a! A properly drawn legal instrument executed by the parties
concerned for joint use of the off-street parking facilities, duly
approved as to form and manner of execution by the City
Attorney, shall be filed with the City Administrator and recorded
with the County Recorder. Due to the fact that the joint facility
Planning Commission Agenda - W95
does not include a shared parking arrangement, only shared
access, all that is needed to comply with the ordinance governing
joint use of parking areas is a document outlining the agreements
with regard to the use of the common areas. This alternative
should be selected if the Planning Commission is comfortable that
the design of the parking lots for both facilities is compatible.
Motion to deny a conditional use permit allowing shared parking.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION;
Staff recommends approval of both conditional use permits with the conditions
and findings as noted. It is our view that, although the location of the facility
is not ideal due to proximity to the wastewater treatment plant, we trust from
input received by the Hospital District, the architect, and the Senior Alliance
that measures can be taken to adequately filter air when necessary. The
Hospital District, HRA, and Senior Alliance have been notified of the potential
for expansion of the wastewater treatment plant at this location and are aware
of the long-term problems and risks associated with odor control in the area.
It is currently their view that the short, and long-term problem is manageable
and will not result in the need for extraordinary and costly measures by the
City to control odors. It is our hope that this position will not change once the
facility is developed and operational because the cost to significantly upgrade
odor control with the plant expansion amounts to approximately $1.2 million.
Excerpt from comprehensive plan; Site plan; 1893 Hospital District Planning
Study.
10. New forms of family structure, such as (,I M f
- Single parents R ", 5
7't �
- Same Sex Couples
- Growing Elderly Class
will continue to increase and must be addressed with respect to
housing needs.
11. The following trends can be anticipated for the future private
economy of the county.
- Expanding and changing housing base
- Less dependence upon the agricultural economy (decreasing
number of farms but larger farm acreages)
- Expanding employment opportunities
- Increasing family income
- Increasing numbers of women in the labor force
- Increasing proportion of residents commuting outside the
area to places of employment
l
' - Service industries should continue to increase in total
numbers and dollar sales
i - Continued industrial growth
- Continued manufacturing trade expansion
12. Anticipated population growth and changes in the private economy
will result in the corresponding changes in the public eaonomyr
- Continued rise in assessed valuation
- Continued rise in cost and expenditures for public services
- Nor• emphasis upon financial as well as physical planning
- Growing need for changes in the tax structure and sources
Of revenue
- possibility of higher per capita public service costs
- Additional full-time public employees
COKKUNITY DEVELOPMEN'r GOALS
ror the Comprehensive plan to validly function, it must be basad on
an understanding of the aspirations held by the citizens for their
-37-
G
community. The community goals are preferences as tot (1) the
general type of community that future physical development should
help produces and (2) the character and location of the major
physical elements forming the urban environment.
Before the Comprehensive Plan can be carried into effect, these
community goals must be stated clearly and general agreement on them
must be reached. Otherwise, the plan cannot be conceived of as the
community's policy concerning physical development. Investigating
community attitudes and formulating a publicly acceptable statement
of broad community goals is a basic part of the planning process. A
*goal* is a desired objective to be reached.
1b develop and emphasize Monticello as a community that can
offer the advantages of being near a metropolitan area for the
enjoyment of major cultural, sports, and business assets and yet
be completely and distinctly separate from the metropolitan area
and its suburbs.
1b encourage steady, careful growth by maintaining reasonably
high standards.
ib utilize the inherent advantages of the community in teres of
location, existing population, school system, available land,
*to., to gain the best possible advantage from these assets so
as to develop a reputation as a community combining all the
desirable elements for living in Minnesota.
To develop the City according to an officially adopted
Comprehensive Plan for land use, transportation, and community
facilities. While the plan should not be inflexible, neither
should it be amended indiscriminantly.
1b develop urban land uses according to a set of uniform
standards applicable to the City. Such standards should govern
land use, public improvements, health conditions, safety
features, aesthetic considerations, and other elements of the
urban environment for purposes of safequardIna the public
health, safety, convenience, and general welfare.
To maintain a public image which associates Monticello with
excellence in planning, design, and structural quality.
To coordinate local plans with those of the school district,
adjacent and nearby communities, and others, is essential to the
well-being of local residents.
1b develop a sound and broad tax base for the City and the
school district is essential in order to provide revenue for
adequate public facilities and services without creating undue
burdens upon property owners.
Tb base all development decisions upon compliance with the City
Plan, appropriate planning methods and procedures, and
development standards that help to assure the best possible
results within the realm of economic and legal feasibility.
10. To make major public expenditures according to a capital
improvements program and budget which establishes priority
schedules for five or six years in advance based on projections
of need and estimated revenues.
11. To encourage suitable housing in good living environments for
people of all ages, incomes, and racial and ethnic groups
throughout Monticello.
12. To allow development of new housing only where it is in harmony
with the natural environment and where adequate services and
facilities are available.
13. To eliminate all instances of housing blight (dilapidation, pori
maintenance, etc.) as rapidly as possible.
14. To concentrate commercial enterprises into relatively compact
and well-planned areas by discouraging *spot" and *strip'
business development.
15. To encourage the development of a strong industrial employment
base so that persons can live and work in Monticello.
16. To develop high quality industrial areas which are free from
nuisance characteristics such as noise, smoke, odors,
vibrations, glare, dust, and other objectionable features.
17. To purchase recreation sites for long-range needs at an early
date in order that proper sites can be obtained before urban
development or land costa render acquisition hopeless.
18. To develop public utilities and services that are well planned
and cost-effective for present and future needs at the lowest
possible operating and maintenance costs.
19. To evaluate present and future traffic flow volumes in order to
develop various land use strategies to prevent congestion on th
public streets.
20. To protect residential areas by channeling major traffic volume
onto a relatively few major streets.
C@w1UHITY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
A *policy' is an official course of action adopted either
legislatively or administratively and followed by local government in
striving to attain the desired community goals. The following policy
statements ace suggested foe the City of Monticello.
1. The Comprehensive Plan is considered to be a flexible guide to
decision making rather than an inflexible blueprint for
development. The Plan will be continually reviewed and amended
as necessary in the light of changing conditions and needs
consistent with the aspirations of the citizens. Any proposed
amendment of the Plan, however, must be equal to or an
improvement over prior plane.
2. Broad citizen interest and participation in the planning process
will be encouraged.
3. The principle of representative government will be maintained in
the local neighborhood sentiment but will not be the sole factor
considered in evaluating development proposals. Sound planning
principles based upon factual evidence will be the primary
consideration.
6. The function of the Planning Commission shall be ton maintain
the City Plan; make recommendations on development proposals
(private and public)I serve to provide the general public with
information necessary to intelligent decision makingi consider
aesthetic as well as dollar costs and valuesi and serve in an
advisory capacity to the City Council.
!. Urban development guides and controls shall be efficiently and
properly administered by City staff and/or consultants.
6. Any proposed change in zoning, subdivision practice, or other
development, but which is not consistent with the City Plan,
shall not be considered until there has been an amendment to
that Plan, said amendment to be reviewed and noted by the
Planning Commission.
1. All land uses should be located so as to relate properly to
surrounding land uses and the general land use pattern of the
urban area. In general, similar type land uses should be
grouped to serve as functional unite.
6. The guiding factor in land use control should be the
consideration of density. Such standards are to be incorporated
in the zoning regulations and govern dwelling units permitted
per acre; traffic generation elements, and the like. The
control of density is the key factor in planning for utilities,
streets, and other facilities which have a relationship between
capacity and demand.
-10-
5r�
GENERAL ROUSING POLICIES
In Monticello, urban planning should be designed to promote high
standards for residential development and help to assure the best
possible living environment.
1. The Planning Commission, in coordination with the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority, will be advocates for reform of land
use controls, increased housing funding, governmental and
legislative changes, and in general, act to increase public
awareness of housing problems and solutions. The Commission
will evaluate the City's regulatory codes and ordinances to
insure that these regulations provide maximum opportunity to
develop a range of housing types at various income levels and
permit utilization of innovative site development and
construction techniques.
2. Attempts will be made to develop and implement affirmative
programs for open housing. Open housing to housing that is
available to all persons without regard to race, creed, color,
sex, or ethnic background.
,2. New housing areas shall be provided utilities as they expand
toward the perimeter of the City.
6. Residential uses should be permitted to mix with commercial or
industrial uses unless it can be demonstrated that the
residential and non-ceeidential uses will be in conflict.
S. Developments shall be designed to respect the natural features
of the site to the maximum extent feasible.
6. Development proposals will be evaluated with respect to their
potential effect upon adjacent and nearby developments and their
effect upon the public welfare of the City and adjacent
communities.
7. Developments must be developed according to well conceived plans
that tend to unify and relate to each others developments that
are a hodge-podge and ill-conceived will be disapproved.
6. Within the OAA, a density of 10,000 to 12,000 square feet of lot
area per dwelling unit will be promoted in the areas of utility
service contiguous to the present city and in those areas where
central utility service construction is contemplated within five
years.
9. Although anticipated densities in areas capable of utility
service within five years may be designed at 10,000 to 12,000
square feet of lot area per dwelling unit, building permits
shall not be issued for a density of more than one dwelling unit
per 2.5 acres with on-site sewer systems based upon percolation
taste.
-4 -
10, The existing density requirement (land area per dwelling units)
as outlined in the zoning ordinance shall be continually
reviewed to determine their appropriateness for adoption to
changing times and conditions.
11. Appropriate urban renewal measures will be taken to assure
maintenance of the existing housing supply in good to excellent
condition. Suitable standards for structure and yard
maintenance will be developed and enforced to help assure
maintenance of residential neighborhoods in a sound condition.
12. Ali types of housing will be permitted including apartment
structures, townhouses, and others, provided each is properly
located according to the Comprehensive Plan, the site plans and
structural quality (materials, workmanship, and design) are in
accordance with the highest feasible standards, and each to in
conformance with the provisions of the coning ordinance.
13. Where provisions for sanitary sewer are not contemplated in the
near future (within five years), the dendzty shall not exceed
one dwelling unit per forty acres. She actual lots size per
unit, however, may be as small as 2.S acres subject to the
provision of an approved individual on-site sewage system based
upon percolation tests.
Single Family Housina Policies
1. Home occupations will be permitted provided such activities are
conducted in a manner which assumes that evidence of ouch
occupation is not present.
2. Single family housing should not be allowed individual access
major thoroughfares but will orient toward minor residential
streets.
Multiple Family Housinq Policies
1. Multiple Family Dwellings are recognised as being a worthwhile
addition to the urban environment and tax base under conditions
as established in the Comprehensive Plan and by zoning,
subdivision, and other codes and ordinances.
However, the Planning Caamisaion will look with disfavor upon
projects with design features that are considered inappropria
such as architectural designs that are incompatible with
existing and proposed developments and unimaginative site
designs.
2. Multiple Dwelling projects shall be encouraged to develop as
*Planned trite• with specific plans submitted for structures,
architectural design, landscaping, circulation, open space.
recreation facilities, and any other features that soy be
proposed.
ni
n
n
re
:8
to,
3. Multiple dwelling projects should not cause the number of
existing and/or approved public and private dwelling units in
the community to exceed forty-five percent (431) of the existing
single family building sites located within the City of
Monticello.
4. Aesthetic considerations such as the architectural style and
general appearance of any proposed multiple dwelling project
will be a major consideration but will not be the sole
justification for approval or denial of any proposed apartment
building.
S. The Planning Commission will recommend denial of any proposed
multiple dwelling project that falls within any of the following
conditions:
a. There is factual evidence to indicate that there will be a
definite and significant depreciation of property values or
detriment to single family residential living in the
surrounding area directly attributable to the proposed
multiple dwelling structures.
b. 'there is tactual evidence to indicate a potential hazard to
the public safety or health that would not be present it
the land were to be utilized for any other permitted lend
use.
C. The proposed multiple dwelling project is of such poor
quality and/or design that there is reason to believe that
vacancies may be extensive in the future due to competition
from more properly designed projects and ouch poor quality
in structure and/or design will eventually lead to urban
blight in the form of dilapidation, health hazards, tire,
and safety hazards, and other threats to the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
S. Multiple family dwelling developments shall access only to
collectors or thoroughfares to prevent an excess amount of
vehicular traffic on minor residential streets.
7. where multiple family dwelling projects serve as a 'butter'
between single family homes and non-cesidential uses, on-site
butters or other design elements shall be considered as a pert
of the project to ensure a quality living environment for future
residents of the project.
S. Multiple family dwelling projects will not be allowed to
constitute a 'spot zone*. M example of such a spot sone to a
single apartment structure located Immediately adjacent to
single Emily homes and completely surrounded by single family
dwellings.
9. Multiple family dwellings should be located in close proximity
to public open space such as parka, playgrounds, schools, and
similar uses. In lieu of this, the multiple dwelling project
should include adequate open recreational space on the site.
-46-
0
ft
10. Sites located along the Mississippi that are suitable in sire
and configuration should be evaluated and if tend to conform
with the Comprehensive Plan, considered for the development of
multiple dwellings.
11. Apartments should not be converted to tovnhounes or condominiums
unless they meet all of the specific requirements of the coning
ordinance as it relates to townhouse and condominium development
Residential Open Space Development Policies
Residential Open Space Development (ROSD) are becoming a common
method of combining several housing types at varying densities.
Integrated into these projects may be minor amounts of
non-residential development. The framework for these developments is
privately, group owned open spaces.
1. Encourage ROSD under conditional use or planned unit development
h procedures.
Z. When open space within an ROSD corresponds to open spaces in the
Comprehensive Plan, such land should be made available for
public use.
3. Privately held open space within an ROSD must be protected from
future non -open space use through legal agreement between the
owners and the City.
4. It shall be the policy of the City not to acquire small open
space areas within ROSD* which do riot conform to the open specs
requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.
S. Maintenance of private group open spaces in an ROSD shall be the
responsibility of a homeowners association in each ROSO. If the
homeowners association defaults on open space maintenance, the
City may order such maintenance and assess the benefited
properties.
PLANNING COB041 BION UPDATE
December 80, 1994
Comprehensive Plan Undate. (J.OJ
This proposal will be submitted to the City Council at a special meeting during
the week of January 9, 1995. Please review and comment.
L
JrNNorthwest Associated Consultants, Inc.
C URBAN PLANNING• O B S I O N • MARK ! T RESEARCH
29 December 1994
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
Assistant City Administrator
P.O. Boa 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: Monticello - Comprehensive Plan Update
FELE NO: 191.09
Dear Jeff:
'Ibis letter is intended to serve as a proposed outline, budget, and scope of work for an update
of Monticello's Comprehensive Plan. As a part of this scope, we have made some assumptions
as to the your staffs ability to assist with a part of the data collection, preserving as much of
the City's planning budget for professional services such as meeting direction and analysis. The
Comprehensive Plan is designed to be what it says - a plan which addresses nearly every City
function.
Particularly important in the project's scope must be a study of the interrelationships and
coordination of the various services which the City provides. For example, the plan must
provide guidance for the City's activities in economic development, land use planting, and
infrastructure development so as to assure that the policies ars consistent and efficient. Where
the City acts without this coordination, the services provided to the community fail to satisfy all
of the objectives they ars intended to. Moreover, where a conflict occur,, but the plan provides
inadequate correlation of services, the City's decision -makes no longer have solid policy
guidance to resolve the conflict. lbese scenarios result in unnecessary costs and consumption
of resources.
In order to provide a sufficient level of attention, and to assure that the plan is irideed
'comprehensive', the issues which the plan addresses, and the impacts of the various policies
proposed must be analyzed in detail. 7be following work plan envisions this attention to detail.
Although many people think of the Land Use Plan when discussing the Comprehensive Plan, the
Goals and policies are much more its essence. It is not possible to foresee every development
which will come to Monticello over the next twenty or thirty years. 7be Plan gives guidance
to the Planning Commission, City Council, and staff through its establishment of consistent
objectives which all development must meet. When an unforeseen project does arise, its
propriety can be measured by its furtherance of the City's Goals, Objectives, and Policies.
Goals which are not sufficiently specific do not help the City's decision making process, a
particularly important factor when the mapped plans are out of date.
5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, WIN 55416 • (612) 595.9636•Fax. 595.9837
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
Page Two
In the following paragraphs, I have provided a summary of what the Comprehensive Plan does
for a City, especially one which is thorough and current. After this section, a generalized scope
identifies the approximate number of consultant hours which might be expected for purposes of
developing a project budget.
WHAT TIM COIPREMMM PIAN Is ALL ABOUT:
Idendfla9 the LMM in the Community (What is this comnuariry about?)
What problems, and what strengths, does the community have:
sin attracting new growth?
sin providing public services to its residents?
sin tatting care of its existing development?
sin providing private (e.g. commercial) services to its residents?
sin dealing with other units of government?
sin communicating with its residents?
sin communicating with its commercial/industrial operations?
Sometimes, these issues are physical infrastructure related, sometimes they aro administrative
in nature, and at other times, they are economics related. The primary purpose of this phase
of Comprehensive Planning is to know where the community is on the growth and development
Map.
Claritlm Development Goals (What kinds of things are important to us a communiry?)
For instance, does the community want to:
egrow fast?
*grow slowly?
estop growth?
•grow, in only a certain land use?
•grow in a certain direction?
•say no to growth which is outside of its general objective?
•increase its services to certain (or all) groups?
*provide certain services as a City?
*require new development to provide its own services?
•require new development to pay for all of its own services?
She bottom line pr}ctioal?
edream a little?
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
Page Three
Given that the issues process tells what the community is like at a point in time, what does the
community want to be litre in the future? Sometimes these relate to efficiency of service
delivery, but often they relate to the services that should be delivered in the first place.
Everybody wants to do things efficiently, but that's merely the answer to the question of how
to do things. The real questions are what do we want to do, and what do we want to be like?
Provides an Analysts of Newry Projects (What the comtnwtuy mart do to get from
where it is to where it %aw to be)
For instance, what are the pros and cons of the City:
•planning certain areas for certain land uses?
•modifying its annexation agreements?
•flrnding a certain public works project?
•providing sewer and water to a new development?
•developing a more extensive pedestrian trails system?
Orefusing a rezoning request?
•altering its public improvement standards?
•seeking a grunt for a certain project?
•spending City tax dollars on a redevelopment project?
For every project, there will be pros and cons, costs for projects done and opportunity costs for
projects foregone. The Comprehensive Plan must set up a framework for analyzing both Imp
scale City endeavors, and smaller scale private activities. Extensive staff, board, and Council
gridlock should be able to be avoided, even for those projects which are unanticipated. the
question which can always be asked is how well does a proposal further the goals the community
established in its planning process? The follow-up question keeps the Comprehensive Plan fresh:
Have the City's goals changed?
One concern which consistently appears in the Comprehensive Planning process is what to do
about proposals brought before the Plan is complete? Occasionally, for Very Big Issues, it may
be necessary to place a moratorium and study the proposal as a part of the Comprehensive Platt
process. More often, a community will analyze the proposal in the context of the planning dove
to date. Such projects am no worse off than those that came half a year earlier. 1be City has
to evaluate the pros and cons in relation to its goals, and make a decision.
The longer the delay in establishing the new plan, however. the more lithely that projects will
occur which ate either at odds with the cornmunity's goals, or at least misdirected. '!be
Importance of the Planning process is not diminished. though, because there are always now
projects coming up. The central component of a good plan is its flexibility. Not flexibility in
setting standards, but rather in addressing varied issues and projects not thought of by the City
when it did the planning in the first place.
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
Page Four
Finally, one of the greatest gains in a Comprehensive Plan is the new appreciation for the value
of the plan. Seeing where the decisions come from is an illuminating process for many of those
involved. It is often difficult for new planning commissioners and Council members to abide
by a Pian which is no longer relevant (even when the plan's recommendations might be valid).
The process becomes the validation for many of those involved.
SCOPE OF WORK
Tactic and Inventory
The Tactics stage of wort would be designed to identity those services which the
community believes the City delivers well, and ant so well. Individual meetings
with staloeholders in the community's growth would be one way of developing a
list of Comprehensive Planning issues which must be addressed in one way or
another. This wort is not intended to be a scientific survey of opinion, but rather
is designed to elicit issues. To a large extent, recent development activities and
staff wort have gone a significant way toward providing a framework for this
discuss=. The more complete the list of issues, the more targeted the planning
wort can be.
Inventory is a process of identifying the anent state of the City, both physically
and socio -demographically. The Inventory tells the community where it is at a
point in time. This data becomes the baseline for further Comprehensive Plan
study, and helps to identify issues on which the analytical portions of the Plan
depend. This budget programs a significant amount of raw data collection into
the process by City staff.
Contulmer Suf'Hours Required- Senior Staff - 45
Support Staff - 60
Clerical - ZQ
125
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
Page Five
Policy Planning
As noted in the previous discussion, Policy Planning is the heart of the
Comprehensive Plan. It forms the conceptual basis for the City's growth and
development decisions for several years. The community's values are stated in
the Policy Plan, which are then reflected in the later stages of planning work,
such as the Zoning Ordinance and other programs and implementation steps. The
Policy Plan in Monticello's current Comprehensive Plan is sound, but lacks
specificity to the current issues facing the community. The process, beginning
with the Tactics work, is designed to build community values into the planning
process, which yields a much greater confidence in their validity.
Consultant W Hours Required: Senior Staff - 35
Support Staff - 15
Clerical - 10
60
Development Fnintework
The Development Framework bridges the gap between the existing conditions
identified in the Inventory, and a community which looks like the one envisioned
in the Goals and Policies. The precise elements of the Development Framework
can not be known at the beginning of the process, since the Tactics work
identifies issues to which the Development Framework responds. However,
based on previous discussion, the Monticello Plan would be expected to inchide
the Land Use Plan, incorporation of the existing Transportation and Sanitary
Sewer Plans, and Urban Growth Management element (including annexation
proposals and urban service arra delineation), an element addressing Housing and
Housing choice in the community, a Regional Impact Analysis element
(evaluating the impacts of growth in the Wright County area, the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area, and the St. Cloud area), and a Community Facilities element
(including the empletion of the City's Parks and Tmils/Pathway plaits). Other
elements would be addressed as they are raised throughout the process. Whereas
the Inventory sets out the raw data of current conditions, the Development
Framework provides analysis and program formulation.
Consultant Staff Hours Required: , Senior Staff - 80
Support Staff - 80
Clerical - 21
185
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
14 Page Six
fntpIrmentadon
The Implementation phase translates the elements of the Development Framework
into practical reality by establishing concrete steps which the City needs to take
in order to enact the Policies of the new Comprehensive Plan. This stage of
work will include an identification of ..,.........] work tasks, and a
prioritization of the tasks for purposes of budgeting. The Implementation stage
puts the Plan into action, making it more than a theoretical planning exercise.
Consultant Stgf'Hours Required: Senior Staff - 20
Support Staff - 25
Clerical - 19
55
In summary, the total hours projected for the Comprehensive Plan Update are as follows:
StgB'Hours Summary: Senior Staff - 180 hrs. ® f70/hr. = $12,600
Support Staff - 180 hrs. ® $45/hr. = $ 8,100
Clerical - 65 bra. ® 525/hr. _ $ 1-625
TOTAL $22,325
This cost includes printing and copying of all necessary draft materials. However, it excludes
the cost of final draft printing. This cost will vary depending upon the length of the document,
use of color in the project development, mul number of copies requested. A separate estimate
of final priming can be developed at your request. Further, this cost excludes the cost of
meeting attendance. Meetings would be billed under our current contractual agreement. It is
estimated that approximately ten public meetings will be necessary throughout the
Comprehensive Plan process, including public hearings and neighborhood meetings.
This project would be completed on a time and materials basis, with the Total figure
representing a 'not to exceed' amount. All expenses, including travel, communications, and
athero aro included in this estimate.
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
Page Seven
I would be happy to discuss this project and our work program fiuther at your convenience. I
planning on suanding the special meeting of the City Council to review the project. We at
Northwest am deeply appreciative of the opportunity to serve the City of Monticello, and we
look forward to continuing that relationship with this project.
Cordially,
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
Stephen W. Orlttman
Vice President