Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 10-02-2001 . . . Members: Absent: Staff: MINlJTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday - October 2, 2001 7:00 P.M. Dick hie, Robbie Smith, Roy Popilek. Richard Carlson and Rod Dragsten Council Liaison Clint Herbst Jeff O'NeilL Fred Patch, John Glomski and Steve Grittman I. Call to order. 2. Chair Frie called the meeting to order at 7 PM. Approval of 111inutes of the regular meeting held September 4. 200 I. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROY POPIU.:K AND SECONDED HY RJCIIARD CARLSON TO APPROVE TilE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEI.:TING OF SEPTEMBER 4. 2001. Motion carried unanimously. Approval or the minutes of the special meeting workshop held September 18. 2001. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN AND SECONDED HY RlCllARD CARLSON TO APPROVE TilE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING WORKSI lOP HELD SEPTEMBER 1 g. 2001. Motion carried unanill1ously. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. Rod Dragsten asked staff to review the Groveland Addition original plat regarding the number oflots the Planning Commission approved. O'Neill stated that he was quite certain this plat was presented to the Planning Commission with all lots and he would verify this. Chair Frie asked if Dragsten could get this information at the end of the meeting. 4. Citizens comments. None. -1- . . . Planning COll1l1lission Minutes - 10/02/0 I 5. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a Concept Plan for a Residential Planned Unit Developll1ent in a PZM Zoning District. Applicant: Silver Creek Development. Jeff O'Neill, Deputy City Administrator, reported that the city received a letter from the property owner stating that they would like this item continued for another 60 days and in turn waive their rights to the 60 day rule. Silver Creek Development has withdrawn at this time and the property owner is seeking another potential developer and will redesign the plans for a portion of the project. Chair Frie opencd the public hearing. With no response, the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROY POPILEK TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NOVEMI3ER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED TilE MOTION. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Public Ilearing, - Consideration of a request for a variance to the 30 foot front yard setback requirements to allow construction of a one-stalll.!<lrage onto existinl! two~stall garage. Applicant: Scott Hml1ilton John GJoll1ski. City Planner Intern. advised that Scott Hamilton of 6516 Osprey Court has applied for a variance to allow construction of an 11 x 22 f(10t. one stall garage, advising that the rear corner of this garage would extend 2 feet into the 30 foot front yard setback required in the R-l district. leaving 28 feet from the garage corner to the property line. The total area outside of the setback minimum would equal approximately 2 to 3 sq. ft. Mr. Hamilton's property fronts on two public streets. According to the zoning ordinance. the front yard setback shall be located at the boundary abutting a public street ROW having the least width. This places the 30 foot front yard setback on River forest Dr. rather than Osprey Cl. The house actually faccs Osprey Ct so thc garage side of the house is considered the front yard. The ordinancc also states that when a lot is a corner lot with two public street ROWs fronting it the side yard setback shall be 20 feet from the lot line abutting the street ROW. Glomski advised that across the street from the applicant there is a house with side and front yard designations switched which means that resident's garage could come within 20 feet of River Forest Dr. The applicant is aware that thcre is an alternate option which would be to angle the garage from 9 ft. out to 11 ft. in order to stay within the front yard setback. Glomski stated that staff has no rccommendation on thi s item as there are good reasons fi.x ei ther action. Chair Frie opened the public hearing and hearing no response, the public hearing was closed. Chair Frie asked if the City received any response from neighbors who reeeived public hearing notices and it was stated that there had he en no response. The applicant -2- . . . Plann ing COI1lI1l ission Minutes - 10/02/0 I stated that he had spoken to his ncighbors and that they were not opposed. Chair frie asked the applicant why he did not choose the other option which required no variance and Hamilton stated it was due to aesthetics. It was noted that the size of the proposed garage is II x 22 which is the same depth as the existing garage. Popilek noted that thcre was no good place for a storage shed on this property so he was in favor of the variance request which he felt would be a good use of the property. Dragsten also felt it would make sense to grant the variance. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE IRREGULARITY OF TIlE SHAPE OF Tl-JE LOT AND TI IE ORJ ENTATION OF TI IE HOUSE I lAVE IMPEDED THE HOMEOWNER. PROVIDING TI IE HARDSI liP NEEDED FOR APPROV AL OF THE VARIANCE. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried unanimously. L Consideration of a Concept Stage Planned Unit Development for a 30 Unit Townhouse Proiect in an R-2 Zoning District. Applicant: Front Porch Associates. Steve Grittman. City Planncr. provided the statlreport noting that Mike Cyr of Front Porch Associates had applied for approval of a Concept Stage PUD consisting of 15 two- unit buildings (a total of 30 dwelling units) on 4.3 acres of land. This parcel includes 2.65 acres belonging to Ron Ruff. 1.4 acres or llnbllilt City street right-of-way, and a standard single family lot. The project relies on the City's vacation and sale of its right- of-way interests, consisting of 7th Street and Vine Strect. The Vine Street right-of-way adjoins the west side of the project area, ancl the ]lh Street right-of-way splits the private property into north and south parts. The project proposal would consolidate the various parcels and strcet rights-of-way, replauing it to accommodate the townhouse project. The design relies on an internal private street that would access 6th Street just east of thc current Vine Strcet intcrsection, loop south through the site, then curve west to an intersection with Minnesota Street. Groups of four units are designed to share an internal driveway that accesses the private street. However, six of the units have individual private driveways that front dircctly onto the public streets, four to the north and two to the east. Grittman advised the Planning Commission that there were ten issues raised by this proposal. He also advised the residents in attcndance that the City allows some lenience with PUDs, and that this may include increased density but that the City would expect to get a bettcr quality design as a bencfit for flexibility of setbacks and building placements. Also, Grittman explained to the residents thc different stages of the pun process which includes three steps and they were adviscd that they would receive another notiec t()r thc dcvelopmcnt stage public hearing. " -j- . Planning COllllllission Minutcs - 10/02/01 Grittman adviscd that staff is comfortable with approval of this concept stage but that they would see significant changes in the layout when it gets to the development stage. Grittman also added that this project would have to be platted in order for it to proceed. At development stage the Planning Commission would see the preliminary plat. O'Neill added that there is also a street vacation process that will go through the City Council, and that these residents would be notified of that public hearing as well. Popilek asked what would happen with this proposal if the street vacation was not approved by the City Council. or if just one street and not the other. and Grittman noted that the project would have to be re-submitted with a new design. If7th Street is retained as a public street it will have to be renamed as well. Future]lh Street is still heing extended, making a connection between Minncsota Street and Elm Street. Grittman advised that the discussion points raised in the statTreport should he addressed to provide guidance to the developer as plans are prepared for the next stages of approval. Fred Patch. Building OfficiaL added that with this concept plan there would be some building code issues as it would require building separations. . Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Fran DuBay. 614 Minnesota Street, asked if there was consideration to putting in a cul-de-sac as there is a signilicant amount or increased trafnc coming through on 6th Street and he felt this project could add a considerable amount more tranic to this area. Griltlnan stated that stafr s idea was to extend the street through. and eventually through Ruff Auto to Elm Street. lie also noted the future extension ofTh Street to Elm which would pull the traffic down to the more major streets. Grittman added that from a traffic standpoint the solution may be for more access through this area. O'Neill added that the City Council has looked in the past at developing this road and the need to look at it with types of uses such as commercial, but now it seems to be superceding that and there seems to be an interest by the Council to get it done in the next two years. Chair Frie asked the residents living along 6th Street if the traffic pressure is seasonal and they stated that it was not, but that it is consistent. Wes Olson, 524 W. 6th St, also commented about the traffic and that virtually all of the traffic coming off the Freeway, K-Mart and Cub, seems to he using 6th and Minnesota as a short cut. lIe felt this is one of the busiest side roads in Monticello and feels this should be looked into prior to putting in the 71h Street extension. . Jack Tucek, 601 Minnesota Street, added that traffic has gotten worse and feels something needs to be done to address this. Is not opposed to the concept of the neighborhood being upgraded. Asked about the width of Minnesota Street and Grittman added that there is nothing in the ordinance that states a difTerence between boulevards and streets. He believes that Minnesota St. is 100 ft. and not 80 ft. It was noted that this does not impact how to design the width of the streets. Planning Staff has discussed alternative layout options with the applicant. Rather than the specific layout shown on the concept plans, it was recommended that the developer consider a more traditional -4- . Planning Comln ission Minutes - 10/02/0 I urban design, with close street setbacks, larger consolidated common open space, and high-amenity private spaces, including parking facilities. With these changes, the project density and building style could result in a unique, attractive project worthy of the use of the Planned Unit Development flexibility. The developer has expressed an interest in pursuing these ideas, and the building floor plans he is working on appear to fit well with this type of concept. Chair Frie asked thc residents if they had addressed this traffic issue prior to tonight's meeting and they stated they had not. Frie added that this should have been brought up previously. Wes Ilanson stated that they were under the impression that Th Street was going to be put through at an earlier date. I.'rie added that somewhere in the future the Ruff Auto site may be turned into a Residential area and the street may be put through at that time. C)'Neill added that the Mayor has spoken to residents who wish to have the extension of the road at this time as well. John Wehmann, 610 Minnesota Street, stated thc speed is unbelievable on this street as well. Also in the winter with the snow piled up it is very difJicult to even get in and out of the driveways. He stated no problem with the concept plan proposed. . Scott Garvin, 512 and 51 X W. 61h Street. had concerns with traffic and speed as well. Chair Frie stated that staff should report the traffic complaints to the Wright County Sheriffs Department. Brian Hellman, 625 W. 6lh St, felt traffic is as bad on 6lh St. as on Minnesota. There arc only a Cew driveways on Minnesota compared to the many on 6th Street. Clinton Felten, 609 Minnesota Street, asked if there would be any trees to buffer from the project to his home and Grittnlan stated that there would be landscape requirelnents, particularly at the perimeter. but that would be at the next stage. The distance to his lot line would be approx 10 n., actually 20 feet from house to house. LeRoy Miller, 512 Vine St, stated that Vine is also getting more traffic since the development went in on 5th Street. Would personally rather see townhouse proposal like Cyr's versus an apmiment building, stating that he has no problem with Cyr's proposal. Cyr comlnented that traffic was never considered and that he was not aware there was a problem prior to this evening. He did not feel that his proposal would inercase the traffic in a major way. Also, this is a concept plan and he is not opposed to changes. . The public hearing was then closed. Roy Popilek asked what the best way would be Cor these residents to get this issue to the attention of the City Council. O'Neill advised that he would be passing around a note pad for names/addresses to bring to the Council. Frie asked C)'Neill to contact the Shcriff's Dept. on Wednesday to have them consider extra -5- . Planning Commission Minutes - 10/02/01 patrol for this area. Grittman added that stall would be looking for two-way traffic and not a one-way. Popilek advised Cyr that he is concerned with the variance requests and also that they would expect a superior design with a PUD approval, not density alone, adding that he does like the concept plan. Dragsten stated that he agreed with items 6,8,9 and 10 of the issues noted in the stair report and felt that these were good concerns Carlson felt thcre should be more visitor parking due to the density and narrow roadways. Also was concerned with the "Ruff Auto", or west side of the property, and Cyr advised that Ruff was willing to work with him. Cyr also stated they would be moving Ruffs fence as well and that he would perform the work and there will definitely be screening. Carlson added he liked the idea of townhouses in that area. . Smith noted that the Planning Commission will see Inany changes on the development stage plan and that he is confident in Cyr's ability. With the traffic issues Smith felt there has to be ways the City can look at to help alleviate the concerns in that area. Likes the idea oftownhomes in that area as well. Chair Frie asked if the Parks Commission has seen the concept plan and Grittman stated that this would bc a private park area. Frie also added that he fcels this is a positive application, a plus for that area. ^ MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH TO RECOMMEND APPROV AL OF TIlE CONCEPT PUD, BASED ON A FINDING TlIAT THE DENSITY IS REASONABLE IN THE CON'fEXT OF TIlE SURROUNDING LAND USES, AND TH^ l' GENERALL Y. TIlE LAYOUT OF THE PROJECT PROVIDES AN ACCI':PTABLI': BASE TO PROCEED TO THl': NEXT STAGE 0[<" TIlE PLANNED UNIT DEVEL(WMENT PROCESS. 1'1 liS MOTION IS SUBJECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S COMMl':NTS ON LAND USE AND DESIGN, INCLUDING THOSE LISTED IN THE STAF[<" REPORT ROY POPILEK SECONDED TIlE MOTION. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Regarding the Groveland plat information requestcd by Dragsten, O'Ncill stated he would get a copy of the plat to him. 9. Grittman advised that the County Engineer had spoken to the owners of West Side Market stating the County would be interested in obtaining ROW from them for the CSAII 75 improvements and West Side responded that possibly they could work something out with them in return for additional commercial space. It was notcd that West Side had been interested in expanding their facility some years ago but that it did not get support. There has been some discussion regarding the addition of a car wash, pump islands, and retail space. O'Neill added that the Planning Commission had becn supportive of going to a B I zoning in that area which would have given them more office space for low impact uses, but that they rejected the idea of the car wash concept, noting . -6- . . . Planning COlllmission Minutes - 10/02/0] that it was denied at the Council level by a 3 to 2 vote. O'Neill advised that they 111ay want to look at B-1 IT-zoning again. The City wants a larger ROW as well. Grittman stated that he would like to give the County some feedback. It was also stated that it is quite clear that the City and County would have the right to make the improvements as needed but would also have to pay for them. Issue is whether or not they would be willing to trade zoning approvals for ROW improvements without exchanging monies. O'Neill added that the West Side Market pumps are running 24 hours a day and it is specifically stated in their CU P that they have to close down at 11 pm. He stated there has been a complaint in the past and their may be some negative response from the residents in this area due to the operation hours. The Planning Commission discussed that these should be separate issues and were not interested in giving their support. Chair Frie preferred to see a proposal. 1 (). Adjournment. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:45 PM. ADVISING TlfE COMMISSIONERS THAT THE NOVEMBER MEETING WOULD BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY. NOVEMBER 7111. DUE TO ELECTIONS. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried unanimollsly. ~I~- ~~r -7-