Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 02-04-1992 . ~,.. .' . MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 4, 1992 - 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Dan McConnon, Richard Martie, John Bogart, Richard Carlson, Cindy Lemm Members Absent: None Staff Present: Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill, Bret Weiss 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Dan McConnon at 7:07 p.m. 2. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting held December 3, 1991. These minutes were already approved at the January meeting. No action required. 3. Public Hearinq--Consideration of a resolution adopting amendments to the City of Monticello Comprehensive Land Use- Plan in conjunction with the Chelsea Area Land Use study. Mr. Jeff 0' Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained that included in the Planning Commission members' agenda packet was the final report by Northwest Associated Consultants. 0' Neill noted that concerns have been brought up within those by the Industrial Development Committee and the Housing Redevelopment Authority with the development of the north half of the Kline property which is located in the township. These two bodies would like to see this area preserved for industrial development, as the planning study shows this area for medium density residential use. O'Neill noted that a resolution has been drafted in response to this concern. Mr. 0' Neill explained that in a later agenda item, the Planning Commission members will be asked to consider a rezoning request by the Covenant Church for development of a church within the proposed B-2 zoning near the intersection of County Road 118 and Chelsea Road. This proposed rezoning would ask that this piece be rezoned to 5 acres of business campus zoning on the westerly portion of it. The center portion to have the 5 acres PZM (performance zone mixed) zoning to accommodate the church development with the remaining 7 acres to the east being proposed to be left as B-2 (limited business zoning). Mr. Steve Grittman, planner with Northwest Associated Consultants, explained in detail the different aspects of the report, and they are as follows: Page 1 . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 1 . Physical Issues A. Annexation B. Transportation C. Drainageway D. Trail System E. Utility Easement 2. Existing Zoning/Land Use A. School Property B. Heavy Industrial Uses C. Light Industrial Land D. Commercial Land E. Agricultural Open Space F. Residential Planned Unit Development G. The Orderly Annexation Area 3. League Development Plan A. Circulation Plan a. 92nd Street NE Extension (School Boulevard) . b. Frontage Road System c. Termination of Thomas Park Drive d. Fallon Avenue Overpass e. County Road 118/Interstate 94 Interchange 4. Proposed Land Use A. School Property B. Heavy Industrial Land Uses C. Light Industrial Land Uses D. Commercial Land Uses E. Medium/High Density Residential Land Uses F. Single Family Land Uses G. Residential Planned Unit Development H. Special Sites Mr. Bret Weiss, City Engineer, explained to the Planning Commission that a storm water sewer study was done in conjunction with the land use study. The storm water study includes all of the area when its fully developed for the 100- year flood event with a 1% chance of this lOQ-year flood event occurring. . Chairperson Dan McConnon opened the meeting for input from the public. Mr. Duane Schultz, property owner of the Fingerhut lease space building in the Thomas Park Addition, brought up Page 2 . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 concerns regarding changing the zoning from B-2 (limited business) zoning to I-I (light industrial) zoning in the area around his property. Mr. Steve Grittman explained that the proposed change would enlarge the industrial zone into this area and it would also limit the traffic with congestions at the Chelsea Road/East Oakwood Drive intersection. Mr. Shultz countered that the small lots in the Thomas Park development would encourage smaller development with business uses rather than industrial uses, which would require additional land or grouping of lots to accommodate industrial type development. . Mr. Jay Morrell, owner of M & P Transport Company in the Oakwood Industrial Park Addition, explained that industrial I-2 (heavy industrial) zoning is limited as it exists today. Previous planning had called for buffer zones around the heavy industrial zoning, and now we are doing rezoning because of the placement of the new elementary school in its close proximity to the heavy industrial zoning. Mr. Morrell also brought up concerns on the traffic. His company has 35 semi- truck tractors coming in and out of his property every day. Wi th the development of the school plus the residential traffic that would be utilizing the new elementary school, there may be a conflict with increased traffic. His concerns were that traffic should dictate the proposed land use plans. Mr. Jim Haglund, representing the Covenant Church, commented that the proposed location for the church in the existing B-2 zone near the intersection of County Road lIB and Chelsea Road was a much better place for a church than the areas being proposed, the low areas where drainage ponds should take place. Chairperson Dan McConnon then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission members questioned whether the Thomas Park zoning should be changed or if it should be left the way it is. There being no further input from the Planning Commission members, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon Bogart to adopt the resolution accepting the planning report and adopting the report as a comprehensive plan amendment document. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 1992-2. . Page 3 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 5. Public Hearinq--Consideration of establishing a Business Campus zoninq district which provides for establishment of limited liqht industrial business offices, limited liqht manufacturinq, wholesale showrooms, retail uses in an environment which provides a high level of amenities, includinq landscapinq, preservation of natural features, architectural controls, and other features. Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained the proposed business campus district zoning and the uses that would be allowed within this new zoning district. Mr. Steve Grittman, planner with Northwest Associated Consultants, explained that this is a slightly upscale type of zoning. The zoning uses are consistent with the uses allowed in an I-I zoning and would allow for a development complementary to new projects that were constructed, the Remmele and Tapper building projects. This type of zoning would allow development in a campus-like setting. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input from the public. Mr. McConnon then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission. There being no input from the Planning Commission, a motion was made by Cindy Lemm and seconded by Richard Martie to approve the establishment of a business campus zoning district. The Planning Commission finds that establishment of the BC zoning district is consistent with the comprehensive plan amendment. The motion carried unanimously. 4. Public Hearinq--Consideration of approvinq amendments to the zoninq map of Monticello proposed in con1unction with the Chelsea Area Planning Study. Applicant, City of Monticello. Mr. Jeff O' Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained the three areas that were proposed to be rezoned, and they are as follows: A. The Thomas Park Addition rezoned from B-2 (limited business) to 1-1 (light industrial zoning). B. The major portion of land lying east of Fallon Avenue from I-I (light industrial), B-2 (limited business), and B-3 (highway business) to BC (business campus) zoning. The land northwest of the intersection of County Road 118 and Chelsea Road rezoned from B-3 (highway business) to B-2 (limited business). C. Page 4 . .. . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 Chairperson Dan McConnon opened the meeting for input from the public. Duane Schultz, owner of the Fingerhut leased space building, objected to the 1-1 zoning of the Thomas Park Addition in which this building is located. There has been a substantial investment by his firm in this property, and it is taxed accordingly. He fears allowing light industrial zoning into that area could diminish the value of his property. It was noted to him by O'Neill that the site standards for 1-1 and B-2 uses are the same. Mr. Jay Morrell questioned the BC (business campus) zoning uses. It was explained to Mr. Morrell that the business uses are the same as what is in 1-1 zoning only more restrictive archi tectural controls. Morrell stated he had no problem with the proposal. Chairperson Dan Mcconnon closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission members. Concerns were addressed by the Planning Commission members and a suggestion to table the Thomas Park rezoning was made at this time. With no further input from the Planning Commission, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Jon Bogart to approve amendments to the zoning map of Monticello proposed in conjunction with the Chelsea Area Planning study. The motion to adopt the zoning map changes based on the finding that the zoning map amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Planning Commission members would like to have the Thomas Park rezoning area tabled until the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on Tuesday, March 3, 1992. The motion carried unanimously. 6. Public Hearinq--Consideration of request to rezone a l2-acre portion of Auditor's Subdivision, Lot 17, from B-3 (highway business) to a combination of PZM (performance zone mixed - 5 acres) and B-2 (limited business - 7 acres). Applicant, Evangelical Covenant Church. Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained the Covenant Church's request at the suggestion of the City Council to come up with some additional land to increase the land area to be purchased and also to push the proposed church facility and the rezoning farther east along Chelsea Road. O'Neill explained that the proposed zoning, which was rezoned from B-3 (highway business) to B-2 (limited business) zoning Page 5 .~~'L -- , ~~ ""'-- . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 in a previous agenda item, deals with a total of approximately 17 acres of land. The zoning as proposed by the Covenant Church would encompass the westerly most portion of the 5 acres to become rezoned to BC (business campus) zoning, the center 5 acres to be rezoned from B-2 (limited business) to PZM (performance zone mixed) zoning to accommodate the church development, and the remaining easterly 7 acres to be left as B-2 zoning. Mr. Steve Gri ttman explained that if the rezoning was to occur, it would be as presented by the Covenant Church, and it would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input from the public. . Mr. Jim Haglund, Covenant Church Development Coordinator, showed the Planning Commission a copy of the proposed zoning for the land development of the easterly 12 acres of land. Wi thin this development he showed a 5-acre piece for PZM zoning to accommodate the church facility, and the remaining easterly 7 acres would be subdivided into four lots consisting of over one acre per piece, with a road coming in to service the church from this proposed subdivision to create the B-2 lots. Pastor Mick scott explained that a church facility is appropriate in this type of zone, as it meets the church needs, it moved back with the location far enough from County Road 118, and as their plan shows would accommodate four lots to be developed as B-2 zoning. Chairperson Dan McConnon then closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission. Mr. Bret Weiss, City Engineer, explained that MN/DOT may be interested in an exit ramp at County Road 118. He indicated that there are funds available for highway development. There was discussion among Planning Commission members with some feeling that it definitely wasn't an appropriate use of the existing B-2 zoning for the location of a church facility and that there are other areas within the community that have the proper zoning to accommodate a church facility. A couple of Planning Commission members felt that this might be an appropriate use for the development of a church if this site were further removed from the intersection of County Road 118 and Chelsea Road. . Page 6 . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 Therefore, a motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Richard Carlson to deny the proposed zoning request based on previous following findings: 1. Commercial uses displaced by the church cannot be relocated without encroaching on residential areas. 2. Development of a church imbedded between commercial and industrial uses is not desirable. 3. The best use for the property is for commercial use because of the proximity to the freeway and due to its separation from residential uses. 4. The B-3 property remaining at the corner (7 acres) after the rezoning is insufficient to satisfy long-term demand for commercial land in the area. 5. The need for the rezoning has not been sufficiently demonstrated, as other land is available for this type of use. . The motion carried. Voting in favor: Richard Martie, Richard Carlson, and Jon Bogart. Voting against: Dan McConnon and Cindy Lemm. 7. Public Hearinq--Consideration of a variance request to allow construction of a buildinq addition within the rear and side yard setback requirements. Applicant, Michael and Kathleen Froslie. Mr. Jeff 0' Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained the Froslies' request to be allowed to construct a building addition within 15 feet of the rear yard setback and to within 1 foot of the side yard setback requirement. The building when constructed in the early 1980's was allowed to be built within 15 feet of the rear property line. Chairperson Dan McConnon opened the meeting for input from the public. Kathleen Froslie indicated she would like to extend up to the side property line with the construction of the building addition and come forward to allow the construction of her building addition. She felt that it would be an appropriate use, and that there wouldn't be any problem with building the addition within the side yard setback, as there is only a dumpster there and would not interrupt any part of garbage pick up in the Dairy Queen dumpster area. . Page 7 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 Chairperson Dan McConnon closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission. There being no further input from the Planning Commission members, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Cindy Lemm to approve the variance request to allow a building addition to be constructed within IS feet of the rear yard of the property and to deny the variance request to allow the building addition to be constructed within 0 feet of the side yard property line. Reason for approval of the variance was that the building when constructed in the early 1980' s was already allowed to be constructed within 15 feet of the rear property line; therefore, to make the building addition come within the minimum setback requirement now would be too much of a burden, and it would look out of place with the development of the proposed addition. Reason for denial of the side yard variance is that there would not be sufficient room to accommodate movement between the dumpster area and the proposed building addition. It would not allow sufficient room to accommodate grading of the property from the building addition to the side property line and to accommodate drainage around the building. No hardship had been demonstrated. The motion carried unanimously. 8. Public Hearinq--Consideration of adoptinq an ordinance amendment to Section 12-2 of the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance which would allow a convenience store to operate as a permitted use in a B-2 zone. Applicant, City of Monticello. Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained to the Planning Commission and the public that when the City Council approved the zoning ordinance amendment change to allow a convenience store in a B-1 zone as a conditional use, it inadvertently eliminated the permitted uses in a B-1 zone which state that the permitted uses in a B-1 zone are also permitted in a B-2 zone. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input from the public. There being no input from the public, Chairperson Dan McConnon then closed the public hearing. There being no further comments from the Planning Commission members, a motion was made by Cindy Lemm and seconded by Dan McConnon to adopt the amendment to section 12-2 of the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance which would allow a convenience store to operate as a permitted use in a B-2 zone. Approval Page 8 . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 of the ordinance amendment is based on the finding that it was not the Monticello City Council's intent to eliminate the convenience store from the B-2 zone. Motion carried unanimously. 9. Review Cardinal Hills Development Sketch Plan. Mr. Jeff 0' Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained the proposed sketch plan review of the Cardinal Hills residential development. Mr. 0' Neill explained to the Planning Commission members the City Staff's concerns with the review. They are as follows: 1. Park Land Development. The total acreage of the plat is 109.09 acres of which 10% of the land area is to be dedicated to park land development. This would amount to approximately 11 acres of land for park land dedication. The developers are proposing a small portion of land for park land development. They are asking for consideration of land to be used for proposed ponding areas be also considered as park land dedication. 2. With the layout of the development along the proposed new street to the north of this development, that being School Boulevard, we still end up with some lots that are double fronting. . 3. The proposed ponding areas that are being created caused concerns on who is to maintain them because the lot lines go straight through them. Are they going to be allowed to store things within the ponding areas if the water level is low, how are these things to be addressed. 4. The other concern was the cul-de-sacs as laid out. Could they possibly be eliminated in their entirety, as existing cul-de-sacs in the City of Monticello are very expensive to maintain, primarily in the snow removal season. Chairperson Dan McConnon then opened the meeting for input from the public. Mr. Steve Grittman, consulting planner with Northwest Consul tants , commented on the development of cul-de-sacs wi thin the proposed sketch plan. Cul-de-sacs are used as part of development to accommodate additional sometimes larger lots. With the accommodation of cul-de-sacs within a proposed development, it does break up the usual layout of streets being platted in a typical rectangular development. The . Page 9 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 2/4/92 development of cul-de-sacs is very expensive for the public works department to maintain, especially in the snow removal season. Cul-de-sac development within a residential subdivision plat, if approved, may be determined by the City Council that their design may outweigh the increased costs for public works maintenance. There being no further input from the public, Chairperson Dan McConnon closed the public hearing and opened the meeting for input from the Planning Commission members. The Planning Commission members commented that the cul-de-sac development might be needed to accommodate larger lots for possible upscale housing within this development with no guarantees from the developer that this may occur. The cul- de-sacs presented are minimal in size and in total numbers they have proposed within this plat. Park land dedication should occur wi thin the area that is proposed with possibly an increased area within this proposed site to eliminate the number of lots with the back yards or side yards abutting this park land. Road development around the park should occur on at least two sides as minimum, if possible, three sides of the park land development should be surrounded by street access. Consideration of additional park land dedication be considered on the east portion of this plat as further phases get developed, smaller areas be developed as this special use type park development. Planning Commission members expressed their comments and asked the developers to incorporate those comments into their preliminary plat proposal. 10. It was the consensus of the five Planning Commission members to set the next date of the Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, March 3, 1992, 7:00 p.m. 11. Meeting adjourned at 10:01 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ga;t;.~~ Zoning Administrator Page 10