Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 02-06-1996 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 6,1996 - 7:00 P.M. -. Members Present: . 3. . Dick Frie, Richard Carlson, Dick Martie, Jon Bogart, Rod Dragsten Members absent: Dick Martie Staff: Jeff O'Neill, Gary Anderson, Steve Grittman, Wanda Kraemer 1. Call to order. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dick Frie. 2. Consideration of approvine- minutes of the re~ar meetine- held January 2, 1996. Chairman Frie corrected the spelling of Brian Stumfp's name. COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 2, 1996. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARLSON. Consideration of items to the a~enda. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Adminitrator, reported that AI Poach had replied to the letter sent regarding zoning violations. He was in the process of moving his buisness out of the residential area to a business district in Big Lake. The buisness site he is moving to must get clearance from the owner to allow Poach to sublease the site. There will be an update at the next meeting. 4. Citizens comments. none 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a variance reQJlest which would allow fi.llin~ of wetlands in the scenic river shoreland district. Applicant, City of Monticello----- WITHDRAWN. 6. Public Hearing--Consideration of a conditional use permit which would allow expansion of a government utility building and structures in a PZM zone. Applicant, City of Monticello. John Simola, Public Works Director, explained that at the last meeting the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit allowing expansion of the wastewater treatment plant site plan. Since that time additional land to the east of the site has been purchased which will allow a redesign of the facility, resulting in Page 1 . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 short-and long-term cost savings to the City. Due to the fact that additional property had to be acquired and due to the fact that significant site design changes would result, it is necessary that the wastewater treatment plant again go through the conditional use permitting process. The purchase of this property will result in the facility being recessed into the hill which will reduce the visual impact of the facility as seen from CSAH 75. The extra land will also allow the facility to be constructed closer to the road to result in a greater setback distance from the river. After additional review, it was found by HDR that the project can be constructed without placement offill material in the wetland; therefore, a variance to allow filling of the wetland is not necessary. There will be some destruction of timber but the area close to the river will remain untouched. But the area close to the river will remain untouched. The area will be re-forested with pine trees. The pine trees will be wrapped around the back and along the main driveway. The storm water will go down the natural run off on Hart Blvd. Bob Peplin, HDR, explained to the Commissioners the view from Hart Blvd of the headworks building and the tanks. The whole area will be surrounded by a security fence. Jeff O'Neill inquired if the fence would block the pathway in that area. . Simola stated that there was ample room between the security fence and the river for the pathway to go through. Chairman Frie opened the public hearing. Paul Theilen, neighbor to the property, inquired how close the tanks would be to his property. Simola stated it would be about 200 feet and there will be a security fence between the building and the trees. The entire site will be secured. Paul Theilen then inquired if the area to the west could be constructed first and the portion next to his house at a later date. Simola answered Theilen that the boundaries need to be established and it is possible that in the future the tanks will be smaller and the impact on the wetland would be less. The site is also being built on the hill for the fill that is needed and the side benefit of the gravity for sludge. Chairman Frie closed the public hearing. . Chairman Frie stated that he wanted the distance from the river to the nearest facility in the minutes and that the pathway would be left in that area. Simola replied that the distance would be 200 feet to Theilen's house. There will be Page 2 .-. . . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 a large area available for pathway. The pathway could be winding through the woods all along the river. Commissioner Carlson stated that this will be a connection between Mississippi Drive and Hart Blvd. Paul Thielen added that this area would be the perfect place for a pathway because of all the wildlife to watch. Chairman Frie suggested Paul Theilen contact J eft' O'Neill and the attend the next park meeting to talk about the pathway through this area. Frie stated that it would be a great bird watching area and should be pursued. Commissioner Bogart stated that he would like to see a low berm along Hart Blvd. as additional aesthetic and buffering. Simola answered that there is a seven foot berm in the the plans now. Bogart stated a seven foot berm with trees on would be better. RICHARD CARLSON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHICH WOULD ALLOW EXPANSION OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IN A PZM ZONE BASED ON THE FINDINGS THAT THE FACILITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA, AND THE SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING IS DESIGNED TO PRESERVE TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING PROPERTY; THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY; THE EXPANSION WILL NOT HAVE AN APPRECIABLE NEGATIVE EFFECT TO THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST (BONDHUS); SCREENING AND BUFFER YARD TECHNIQUES WILL BE EMPLOYED TO LIMIT THE IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST; ODOR CONTROL EFFORTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED INTO THE PLANS. IN ADDITION, THE SITE PLAN AS PROPOSED WILL RESULT IN MUCH OF THE FACILITY BEING RECESSED INTO THE SIDE HILL, THEREBY RESULTING IN LESS OF AN IMPACT ON THE VIEW OF THE FACILITY FROM THE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE FACILITY IS CONSISTENT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ITEMS REQUIRED BY CODE. A. CONFORMITY WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD IS MAINTAINED AND REQUIRED SETBACKS AND CITED REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. B. ADEQUATE SCREENING FROM NEIGHBORING USES AND LANDSCAPING AS PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 3, SECTION 2, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. Page 3 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 22 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE ARE CONSIDERED AND SATISFACTORILY MET. D. THE FACILITY MUST HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO A COUNTY OR CITY STATE AID HIGHWAY. C. 2. INSTALLATION OF ODOR CONTROL MEASURES NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN OR REDUCE THE CURRENT PROBLEM. 3. NO TREE CLEARCU'ITING TO OCCUR WITHIN 50 FT OF THE RIVER'S EDGE. 4. CITY BUFFER YEAR REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET ON THE HOGLUND SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THE TOP SIDE OF THE BANK TO MEET THE BUFFER YARD FOR AN INSTITUTIONAL/MUL TI-F AMIL Y BOUNDARY'; THE LOWER VALLEY SIDE TO BUFFER INSTITUTIONAL USE/SINGLE FAMILY. 5. A BERM INSTALLED ALONG HART BLVD. IF FEASIBLE. 7. ~:;~u~::nl1--Consideration of a vari~nc.e re<lllest which would w:1ow o t of a home on a corner lot WIthIn the 20-ft setback reQ)llrement. Applicant, Cook Construction, Inc. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that Kevin Cook, of Cook Construction, was requesting the City to grant a 15-ft variance to the requirement that homes be set back 20 ft from the side lot line. The plans for extending Meadow Oak Lane to the Briar Oakes Development were dropped, and instead it was determined that a simple pedestrian path would be extended to connect the two subdivisions in place of the roadway. Kevin Cook requests that a variance be granted to the side yard setback on the pathway side of he property. It is his view that the 20-ft setback is not necessary at this corner because there will never be a roadway extended to the west at this locations. He notes that the 5-ft setback as proposed allow for sufficient separation between the buildings and the property line and results in a 35-ft separation between the building line and the center of the pathway. According to City pathway easements standards, we have required at least a total easement width of 30 ft. Which results in a minimum of 15 ft on either side of the path. Under this scenario, the setback distance from the center of the line of the path to the home will amount to 35 ft. Kevin Cook, Cook Construction, added that the reason he did not go through the vacation or variance process was because of a time factor when getting the project started. Cook didn't realize there was a 60 ft road right-of-way instead of the 30 ft usually required for pathway easements. If a variance can be granted then this will also allow the houses being built on Lots 5, 6, and 7, which are all 65 ft wide, be shifted for more room. Page 4 '. . . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 O'Neill stated that if an 8 ft variance is granted it would meet Cook's needs but there would still be wasted land in this area. The City does not need a 60 ft easement for a pathway. Cook stated nine feet were needed or else the garage will need to be made smaller. Chairman Frie opened the public hearing. Chairman Frie stated that he has not heard any hardship to justify a variance, would it be better to replat the subdivision? Commissioner Bogart recommended that Cook Construction would request a vacation of the roadway easement. There is not an hardship but this is a unique situation because the roadway that was changed. Commissioner Carlson inquired as to how this will effect the other lots. Does the City have a 60 ft easement throughout the whole area? O'Neill explained that this is the only lot that will be affected. The Lot 1, Block 4 is owned by the City and is a pond area, and the lots across Red Oak Lane the homes face Meadow Lane and that roadway is in. Cook added that nicer homes could be build on the lots if the variance was allowed. COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE VACATION OF THE NORTH 15 FEET OF MEADOW LANE AND THE NORTH 7 FEET OF THE UTILITY EASEMENT ON LOT 8 BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE SITUATION OF THIS LOT. SECONDED BY ROD DRAGSTEN. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Public Hearin~ -- Consideration of a conditional use permit which would allow open and outside stora~er and a driveway and stall aisle conditional use permit in an 1-1 (light industrial) zone. Applicant, Pipeline supply/Kant-Sin~ Partnership. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the Planning Commission is asked to consider recommending approval for two conditional use permits relating to development of a wholesale pipe supply company in an 1-1 zone. This company provides pipe to retailers for resale and provides pipe directly to contractors. The site is located across from Custom Canopy in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Fallon Avenue and Dundas Road. The total land area occupied by the site amounts to 2 acres. Of this amount, about 1 acre is dedicated to outside storage. The storage area will be surround by a 6-ft. Opaque cyclone fence. Slats will be installed in a basket-weave fashion to assure full opacity. Staff has been informed that the materials will not be stacked higher than the height of the fence. This site Page 5 Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 -. is unique in that the area used for outside storage is adjacent to a proposed staging area for project pick-up. In the past, the City has required that any area commonly used by the public must be paved. Under the proposed site plan, a relatively large staging area designated as a product pick-up location would be covered with a heavy granular material. The developer notes that this material is preferred because it can stand-up to the weight and turning movements of trucks using the space, whereas a bituminous surface will not stand-up. Pipeline expects up to ten customers per day to pick up products at this location. In checking with the City Engineer, he agrees with the developer that it is not uncommon to allow gravel surfacing in this type of storage yard. It is likely, however, that bituminous would stand up better to tight-tuming movements necessary for the semi-trailer deliveries. A gravel surface will require regular maintenance even ifit is a crushed material. It is likely that there would not be a significant cost saving between a bituminous surface and the proposed gravel surface; however, if there is limited public access to the storage yard, the impact would be mostly intemal to their operations. . Curt Christopherson, Pipeline Supply/Kant-Sing Partnership, stated that the larger rock is going to be from the fence to the loading area. The general public will enter through the front door or the main entrance. In the loading area there will only be contractors that have "checked in" through the main entrance. The trucks using this area are heavy and it best to go with crushed concrete because it will last longer. Chairman Frie opened the public hearing. Chairman Bogart abstained from the discussion because it was prepared by his office, John Oliver. Commissioner Frie stated that in the past the City has required that areas used by the public be paved. O'Neill stated that this situation is semi-retail. At what point does the loading area become public space? Can we make a judgement call and not create a precedence? Chairman Frie added that if the bituminous does not stand up and we circumvent the paving because it is not used by the general public other than an occasional sale. Curt Christopherson, added that bituminous has been tried at other locations owned by Pipeline and has not worked. The other storage and loading areas has to be changed to crushed concrete. . COMMISSIONER CARLSON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING OUTSIDE STORAGE. MOTION IS BASED ON THE Page 6 . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED PLAN IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH OUTSIDE STORAGE CONDITIONS AS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE. IN ADDITION, THE CYCLONE SCREENING FENCE MUST UTILIZE SLATS IN A MANNER THAT ACHIEVES 90% OPACITY. SECONDED BY ROD DRAGSTEN. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bogart abstained. COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE A STALL AISLE AND DRIVEWAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: THE FENCE AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE STORAGE AREA SHOULD BE SET BACK FAR ENOUGH TO AVOID TRUCK PARKING ON THE STREET WHILE THE FENCE GATE IS BEING OPENED; THE DEVELOPER WILL INSTALL THE HEAVY GRANULAR BASE IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ENGINEER CRUSHED CONCRETE IN THE OUTSIDE STORAGE/LOADING AREA. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARLSON. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bogart abstained. 9. Public Hearin~--Consideration of a conditional use permit which would allow expansion of an office buildin~ in a PZM zone. Applicant, Ruff Auto. Steve Grittman, City Planner, reported that Ruff Auto Parts, Inc. Is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing office facility located within the PZM, Mixed Performance Zone. The Ruff Auto Parts operation (auto salvage yard and office) is a legally non-conforming use with the PZM District which has been in existence in its current location for many years. The owners wish to add a second story onto the existing single level office building. Prior to Ruff Auto Parts formal application for Conditional Use Permit approval, City staff met with the applicant to discuss expansion options. Technical interpretations to the Zoning Ordinance considers the existing office building and auto salvage operation one in the same, the first being the central control and management point for the later which share the same site and are physically integrated. Given the legal non-conforming status of the business, the Zoning Ordinance would not allow expansion of any aspect of the auto salvage operation if strictly applied. Section 3-1 states that "non-conforming uses shall not be enlarged or expanded, but many be continued at the size and manner of operation". Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, stated that from staff's viewpoint what we've seen in the past is this a positive use in the community but what we are trying to do is be creative so this business works with the City as a team to bring everything up to speed. If the applicant would like to schedule a meeting to discuss the possibility of a planned unit development many of the non-conforming issues could be addressed. John Simola, Public Works Director, stated that he would like to see the City come up with a way to make this an allowable use. Ruff Auto Parts is an asset to the community. Page 7 . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 Ronny Ruff, Ruff Auto Parts partner, stated that the business has been in Monticello for 49 years and for the last 20 they've had run-ins with the City. We've tried to have our site rezoned to industrial. It has been the consensus that if we are not allowed to expand we'll soon be gone. We take in oil, crush cars, take in batteries, many things that are good for the City. If we are not allowed to put up another building we can never expand. If the City will let the business expand we could talk in the future about the pun. Brian Stumpf, employee of Ruff Auto, stated that Chuck (partner at Ruff Auto) was out of town but he did want to tie in any conditions to this permit. He did not want to discuss the issues at this time and will withdraw the application if any conditions are attached. Laura Rolland, neighbor, stated that she did not want nothing more on the property because it already had lowered her property value. Brian Stumfp explained to Laura Rolland that the office will not be higher than any other buildings and the location of the office cannot be seen from her property. Laura Rolland was confused as to where the location was and after the explanation had no more questions. . Commissioner Carlson asked why there could not be discussion now. Every time there is an expansion the Planning Commission address all the issues. It would not be fair to allow Ruffs to expand without conditions being required when Simonsons, NSP, and a number of other businesses in town were required to meeting the zoning requirements when they expanded. I have no objections from Elm Street but 6th Street has become a major corridor and there needs to be screemng. Chairman Frie stated that over the years there has been a 300% turn around in the appearance of the site but there still seems to be a very defensive attitude from all that has happened in the past. Commissioner Carlson added that is makes sense to have dialogue rather than stating that there is no interest and that it where it stops. From a City standpoint you do not treat one business or resident different from another. Brian Stumpf replied that we are not asking to expand the boundaries and the building expansion will not even be seen from the street. Commissioner Carlson asked Brian Stumfp if he could see any benefit to the landscaping that was required by NSP or Simonsons? . Brian Stumfp replied he could see the benefit of landscaping but that would depend on the site. Page 8 . . 10. . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 Ronny Ruff stated that when Chuck gets back we'll talk a bout what we should do. Is the building application still ok are do the new regulations apply? Gary Anderson, Building Official, as long as your application has been submitted the new regulations will not apply. Chairman Frie inquired if this item should be tabled until Ruffs could sit down with City staff and establish the next step. Commissioner Bogart stated that he did not have any problem with the addition but it disturbs me that there is this take it or leave it option. He thought the City was leaning over backwards with spot zoning and Ruffs could have a win/win situation. Bogart added that he was not on the Planning Commission 20 years ago but this is a chance to make things right. We always try to work with business. In a PUD there is an underlining zoning blanket, you start from scratch, staff is ready to work with you and there is a good chance for this to work. Brian Stumpf added that Chuck may want to discuss this option but that would need to wait until he could be asked. JON BOGART MADE A MOTION TO TABLE THE CUP FOR EXPANSION TO THE NEXT MEETING, TO ALLOW RUFF AUTO PARTS TIME TO EXPLORE THE PUD CONCEPT. SECONDED BY RICHARD CARLSON. Motion passed unanimously. Review Highway 25/Chelsea Road Corridor Study. Jefl'O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained that some months ago, the City Council authorized completion of a transportation study of Highway 25/Chelsea Road corridor. The purpose of the study was to identify alternatives for relieving congestion at the intersection of Oakwood Drive/Highway 25 and for the purpose of identifying frontage road alignments and future stop light locations. This information would be used to develop an official transportation plan which would legally allow the City to block development where appropriate and acquired properties needed for right-of-alignments. There are three road alignment options to the study. The purpose of the Planning Commission discussion will be to review the alignments presented in the the report and make a recommendation to the City Council as to the proper alignment. The Highway 25/Chelsea Road Corridor Study was mailed to the Planning Commissioner directly from OSM. The Commissioners did not have ample time to review the study before the meeting and suggested it be on the next agenda, allowing more time for review. Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 11. Review sketch plan of 18-acre retail/commercial site. Applicant Bob Abel. . A sketch plan outlining a commercial subdivision and associated road alignment for a an 18-acre parcel formerly owned by Stuart Hoglund has been present to City by Bob Able for review. As discussed in the previous agenda item, the plat proposes the extension of Chelsea Road along the boundary between Silver Fox Plat and Abel's property. A cul-de-sac would be extended southerly from Chelsea Road allowing access to interior lots. Eight commercial lots would be created under the plan. The cul-de-sac would not be constructed until sale of the interior lots is imminent. This alignment is preferred by the developer because it provides the highest degree of flexibility for development of the land. Under this alignment the cul-de-sac could be vacated in the event a larger single user is interested in the site. Under Option #2 of the transportation plan, the Chelsea Road alignment that would swing Chelsea Road south through the interior of the site, the option of selling the property to a larger single uses is lots. O'N eill explained that Bob Able was looking for direction from the Planning Commission to continue with his plat. Bob Abel, developer, stated that he was willing to work with whichever road alignment was decided on but he could not continue with his plat until this item was decided. He did prefer Option 2 because it gave him the most flexibility work with. . The Planning Commissioners discussed the three options but had not had ample time to review the study. COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM AND FOR BOB ABLE TO CONTINUE DIALOGUE WITH CITY AND THE ENGINEER. SECONDED BY RICHARD CARLSON. Motion passed unanimously. 12. ~::': updates to the comprehensive plan. Consideration of callinl[ for public . fl on adoption of the comprehensive plan. Discuss development of a 1-5 year work plan. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the Planning Commissioners will need to put together a work plan for the April joint meeting. At this meeting, the Planning Commission, HRA, and Parks Commission will review the work plans of all the committees. Would the Planning Commissioners prefer to compile the list at a regular meeting or call a special meeting? After discussion, it was decided to call a special meeting would be scheduled after the adoption of the comprehensive plan to develop a 1-5 year work plan for the Planning Commission. . COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC Page 10 .... . Planning Commission Minutes - 02/06/96 HEARING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SECONDED BY ROD DRAGSTEN. Motion passed unanimously. 13. Review Mississippi River Crossing Study. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the Mississippi River Crossing Study had determined six possible bridge site. Monticello was in this study but has been taken out of the possibilities. The crossing at Enfield is still on the list. Should the Planning Commission send a recommendation that supports the Enfield choice? COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO HAVE STAFF FOLLOW UP WITH A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ENFEILD FOR THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER CROSSING. SECONDED BY CHAIRMAN FRIE. Motion passed unanimously. 14. COMMISSIONER BOGART MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARLSON. Respectfully submitted, {;~ J(~ Wanda Kraemer Development Services Technician . Page 11