Planning Commission Minutes 11-05-1991
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, November 5, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Richard Carlson, Cindy Lemm, Richard Martie,
Jon Bogart.
Members Absent:
Dan McConnon
Acting Chair:
Cindy Lemm
Staff Present:
Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill.
1.
The meeting was called to order by the Acting Chairperson,
Cindy Lemm, at 7:03 p.m.
A motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Jon Bogart
to approve the minutes of the special meeting held
september 19, 1991. Motion carried unanimously with Dan
McConnon absent.
Motion was also made by Richard Martie and seconded by Jon
Bogart to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held
october 1, 1991. Motion carried unanimously with Dan McConnon
absent and Richard Carlson abstaining.
2.
.
3.
requlations
uses as a
conditional
Acting Chair, Cindy Lemm, opened the public hearing.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill reviewed the background
of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. 0' Neill explained
the City council's recommendation to have City staff review
the possibility of eliminating the convenience store and
laundromat as allowable uses in a B-1 zone and allowing them
only as conditional uses in a B-1 zone. He also stated that
he had talked to our consulting planner and received the
information that was submitted with the Planning commission's
agenda regarding formal conditions that would be attached to
allowing a convenience store or laundromat as a conditional
use in a B-1 (neighborhood business) zone.
.
O'Neill indicated to the Planning commission members that
since the agenda was delivered, he had met with the
developers, Matt Holker and Tom Holthaus. The developers
asked if additional gas pumps or fuel tanks would be allowed
Page 1
.
Planning commission Minutes - 11/5/91
in a a-1 zone. O'Neill indicated that it would not be allowed
in a B-1 zone, as motor fuel stations are not allowed in the
a-1 zone. O'Neill noted that the owners had requested that
the Planning Commission members table the request and
reschedule it for their next regular meeting.
Questions asked by the public were as follows:
1. Would the existing motor fuel tanks still be
allowed in this a-1 (neighborhood business) zone.
2. Concerns were addressed against exchanging any type
of use of the existing property/wests ide Market
convenience store.
3. If this property was rezoned to a-1 (neighborhOod
business), what would stop other adjacent areas or
nearby property from being rezoned to a-1.
4. Are there any limitations as to the hours of
operation of this convenience store.
5.
If expansion were allowed, it would create more
traffic; therefore, there would also be the
possibility of additional people loitering at the
convenience store facility.
.
6. The neighbors have to keep coming back again and
again with different requests from the applicants.
7. This is not the appropriate place for a convenience
store when existing convenience stores are in the
proper zoning and other properly-zoned land is
available for a convenience store.
8. Since the owner is new, what limitations were
placed on them when they received initial approval
for a convenience store at this location.
9. The rezoning request as requested is definitely
spot zoning.
Acting Chair, Cindy Lemm, then closed the public hearing and
asked for comments from the Planning Commission members.
.
Page 2
.
.
.
Planning commission Minutes - 11/5/91
Planning commission members comments were as follows:
1. If the rezoning was approved and all conditions
were met under the proposed conditional use
request, realistically there would be no reason for
denial.
2. Asked how soon the owners are anticipating an
enlargement of the motor fuel dispensing plan.
3. With increased traffic congestion on Hwy 25 and
Otter Creek Road, would an enlargement of this
facility create additional traffic on other streets
in neighborhOods near the convenience store.
4. Members were concerned that the applicants are
coming back again and again with additional
requests for further development on this site.
5. Further development for rezoning on this site.
Acting Chair, Cindy Lemm, then closed the Planning Commission
comment section and asked for a motion.
A motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Martie
to deny the ordinance amendment modifying the B-1
(neighborhood commercial) zoning district regulations by
eliminating convenience store and laundromat uses as permitted
uses and instead allowing said uses as conditional uses in a
B-1 zone. Motion carried unamiously with Dan McConnon absent.
Reason for denial:
a. spot zoning created by the rezoning of this
parcel.
b. Additional traffic and congestion on the
existing highway and neighborhood streets that
surround the property.
c. The increased activity at this establishment
if expansion was allowed to occur would tend
to depreciate adjoining land values.
page 3
.
.
.
Planning commission Minutes - 11/5/91
Additional comments submitted with this motion by Planning
Commission members were:
4. spot zoning--definitely an example of spot zoning.
5. Concerned with the Monticello Elementary School
located acrosS the street from this facility.
4. Public Hearinq--Consideration of a request to rezone the
easterly 9.7 acres of Auditors Subdivision, Lot 17, from B-3
hi hwa business to a combination of PZM ( erformance zone
mixed and B-2 limited business. A licant Evan elical
Covenant Church.
Acting Chairperson, Cindy Lemm, opened the public hearing.
Assistant Administrator 0' Neill, reviewed the Evangelical
Covenant Church's rezoning request. O'Neill indicated that
the original 16-acre parcel was to be divided into two
parcels, with the Evangelical Covenant Church taking the
easterly portion of this parcel as published for the last
regularly-scheduled Monticello Planning Commission meeting.
Within this public hearing, you will note that the existing
16-acre parcel is to be divided into three separate parcels,
with the church proposing to take the center section of this
subdivision where approximately 5.84 acres would be rezoned to
PZM (performance zone mixed). The easterly 4.7 acres of this
parcel would remain B-2 zoning. The westerly 5.2 acres is
proposed to be rezoned to a new zoning designation, the
business campus zoning designation.
Mr. Jim Haglund, representative for the Evangelical Covenant
Church, explained that this proposal represents a compromise.
Instead of being on the corner, under this new plan the church
is relocated to the center of this unplatted tract of land
allowing for commercial development on the easterly portion
and industrial development on the westerly portion of this
parcel. Without going into the same detail that was given at
the previouS public hearing, Mr. Haglund wanted to emphasize
that this was a positive site for church development because
of other activities that use church facilities such as
meetings or services.
Page 4
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/5/91
Mr. Haglund went on to elaborate that the church uses are
compatible with commercial businesses located on either side
of it. Mr. Mick scott (Pastor) of the Evangelical covenant
Church asked Planning commission members to consider a
favorable rezoning for this parcel of land for development of
a new church facility at this location.
Acting Chairperson, Cindy Lemm, thean closed the public
hearing and opened the meeting for comments from the Planning
Commission members.
Comments from the Planning Commission members were as follows:
1. This is not the appropriate location for a church
facility in the middle of a potential commercial
area.
2. Asked if other sites were considered that had the
appropriate zoning of R-1 (single family
residential) and PZM (performance zone mixed).
3.
Local churches are already located in R-l zoning
areas. The highest and best use of the property
would be commercial use in the future.
.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made by
Richard Martie and seconded by Jon Bogart to deny the rezoning
request to rezone the easterly 9.7 acres of Auditors
Subdivision, Lot 17, from B-3 (highway business) to a
combination of PZM (performance zone mixed) and B-2 (limited
business) . Motion carried unamiously with Dan McConnon
absent. Reason for denial:
1. Commercial uses displaced by the church cannot be
relocated nearby without encroachment 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 proximity to the freeway and due to its
separation from residential uses.
4.
The B- 3
acres)
satisfy
area.
property remaining at the corner (4.7
after the rezoning is insufficient to
long-term demand for commercial land in the
.
page 5
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/5/91
.
5.
The need for rezoning has not been sufficiently
demonstrated, as other land is available for this
type of use.
5. Public Hearin --consideration of recommendin a roval of
preliminary plat of the East View residential subdivision.
Applicants, Dean Hoqlund and Ken Schwartz.
Acting Chairperson
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the
request for preliminary plat review of the
residential subdivision. O'Neill highlighted the
changes that were made to the plat as follows:
applicants'
East View
upgrades or
1. A set of restrictive covenants has been prepared for this
residential development.
2.
The overall grading plan has been developed for the area;
but due to the steepness of the slopes and the density of
the trees in the four-lot portion of the subdivision,
each lot will be graded sometime after the building
permit is issued prior to occupancy to correspond to the
overall grading plan.
.
3. No public right-of-ways will be developed for this site,
as Lots 1 and 2 have direct accesS off of Gillard Avenue,
and Lots 3 and 4 have shared easement accesS allowing a
common driveway access to County Road 39.
4. Park Development. The Parks Commission met on the
proposed park dedication and recommended that this be
discussed with the Department of Natural Resources to see
if they would be interested in purchasing this land for
park development. And it should be the goal of the City
to sell the parcel to the DNR, with funds obtained from
the sale to be used for future development of a
neighborhood city park.
Concerns brought up by the public were as follows:
1. Even though it is not the best parcel of land for
development of a city park, the whole area should be
considered park land dedication with no additional money
provided for park dedication fees.
2.
A question was raised regarding the park land dedication
for this proposed project, as it was already paid to the
township when the lot was purchased.
.
Page 6
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/5/91
3.
A question was raised that the proposed park land does
not meet the intent of usable park land to meet the park
land dedication requirement and felt that this land
should not be considered as park land dedication, but it
should be designated as an outlot; therefore, the city
should receive money in lieu of this land for park land
dedication.
Acting Chairperson, Cindy Lemm, then closed the public hearing
and opened the meeting for input from the Planning commission
members.
The Planning Commission felt that some sort of a value should
be established for this land that is proposed for park land
dedication. They felt this is not the appropriate place for
a passive/active park development; and even though Tyler East
did not have to pay for any park land dedication, there is
land available and suitable in the Norell or Krautbauer
property for an area park should those properties ever
develop.
Much discussion centered around the park land dedication and
whether or not to accept this land as the park dedication or
to accept cash and what dollar amount in lieu of land.
.
A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Richard
Martie to approve the preliminary plat of the East View
residential subdivision subject to the following conditions:
1. county surveyor approval of the final plat.
2. Prior to City signatures on the final plat, the City must
be provided a 100-foot easement area across Lot A for
storm water drainage purposes as described on the
preliminary plat.
3. In conjunction with the final platting, the developer
must prepare and record an access agreement document
affecting Lots 3 and 4.
4. Restrictive covenants must be recorded at the time of
final platting.
5.
Park Dedication Requirement. The City shall accept as
park dedication a warranty deed to Outlot B along with a
letter of credit in the amount of $3,500. The City shall
make its best effort to sell Outlot B. In the event the
selling price is less than $7,000, the City of Monticello
will draw from the letter of credit an amount equal to
.
page 7
.
.
.
Planning commission Minutes - 11/5/91
one-half of the difference between the selling price of
the land and the cash requirement of $7,000. In the
event the selling price is equal to $7,000, the City
shall return the $3,500 letter of credit to the
developer. The city and developer shall evenly divide
revenue obtained in the sale of Outlot B that exceeds
$7,000. The City shall be solely responsible for
determining the terms of sale of Outlot B.
In the event the sale of outlot B does not occur prior to
expiration of the letter of credit, the city, at its
discretion, may draw the full amount of the letter of
credit or the City may request that the letter of credit
be renewed. In the event the developer fails to renew
the letter of credit as requested, the developer will be
in default under its obligations, and the city shall be
entitled to draw against said letter of credit for its
entire stated amount.
Motion carried unanimously with Dan McConnon absent.
6.
Acting Chairperson, Cindy Lemm, opened the public hearing.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the applicants'
rezoning request. The R-1 zoning would accommodate single
family homes on four lots, and the portion zoned R-2, also
known as Outlot A, would allow for development of up to eight
townhouses per lot. If this was subdivided with the total
land area in Outlot A, it could allow development of 18 to 22
total townhouses.
In reviewing the comprehensive plan, there appears to be no
reason why R-2 (single and two- family residential) zoning
development should not be allowed in this area. Although the
R-2 zoning in relationship to the adjoining R-1 zoning would
allow for a higher density, it does not appear that it will
have a direct impact on the adjoining R-1 zone.
There be no further input from the public, Acting Chairperson,
Cindy Lemm, then closed the public hearing and opened the
meeting for input from the Planning Commission members.
Page 8
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/5/91
Questions from the Planning commission members dealt with the
development of the townhouses on Outlot A. It was explained
to the Planning Commission members that even though Outlot A
consists of sufficient land area to accommodate 18-22 total
townhouse units, the most that would be allowed if this was
replatted into blocks and lots would be eight townhouses per
block.
There be no further input from the Planning Commission
members, a motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by
Richard Carlson to approve the request to rezone a 7-acre
parcel described as part of Lot 2, Section 18, Township 121,
Range 24, Wright County, Minnesota, from AO (agricultural)
zoning to R-1 (single family) and R-2 (single and two-family)
zoning. Motion carried unanimously with Dan McConnon absent.
Reason for approval: Approval is based on the finding that
the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan, is
consistent with the geography and character of the adjoining
land uses, and the need has been sufficiently demonstrated.
Additional Information Items
1.
Consideration of a request to rezone Lot 1, Block 4, River
Terrace, also known as West Side Market, from R-1 (single
family residential) zoning designation to B-1 (neighborhood
business). Applicants, Tom Holthaus and Matt Ho1ker. council
action: Council requests that a public hearing be held to
eliminate convenience stores and laundromats as allowable uses
in a B-1 zone and make them conditional uses in a B-1 zone.
.
2. Consideration of a request to rezone a 9-acre portion of
Auditors Subdivision, Lot 17, from B-3 (highway business)
zoning designation to PZM (performance zone mixed), which
would allow development of a church. Applicant, Evangelical
Covenant Church/Jim Haglund. council action: No action
required, as the request did not come before them.
3. Consideration of a request to amend Section 3-2 B 5 of the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance by replacing the phrase "in the
R-1 (single family residential) and the R-2 (single and two-
family) district" with the phrase "in all residential zoning
districts. " Council action: Approved as per Planning
Commission recommendation.
4.
Consideration of a preliminary plat of a 7-acre parcel
described as part of Lot 2, Section 18, Township 121,
Range 24, wright County Minnesota. Applicants, Dean Hoglund
and Ken Schwartz. Council action: No action required, as the
request did not come before them.
.
Page 9
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/5/91
5.
Consideration of a request to rezone a 7-acre parcel described
as part of Lot 2, Section 18, Township 121, Range 24, Wright
County Minnesota, from AD ( agricultural) zoning to R-1
(single family residential) and R-2 ( single and two-family
residential) zoning. Applicants, Dean Hoglund and Ken
Schwartz. Council action: No action required, as the request
did not come before them.
6.
consideration of calling a public hearing regarding amendment
to the zoning ordinance map and establishment of a BC
(business campus) district. Council action: No action
required, as the request did not come before them.
7.
Set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning
Commission meeting for Tuesday, December 3, 1991, at 7:00 p.m.
Consensus of the four Planning Commission members present was
to set this as the date for the next regularly scheduled
meeting.
8.
Adjournment. A motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded
by Jon Bogart to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned
at 10:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ~AA&J
Ga An erson
Zoning Administrator
Page 10