The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Agenda - 11/06/2023AGENDA REGULAR MEETING – PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, November 6, 2023 – 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: Chair Paul Konsor, Vice Chair Andrew Tapper, Teri Lehner, Eric Hagen, Melissa Robeck Council Liaison: Councilmember Charlotte Gabler Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman, Ron Hackenmueller, Hayden Stensgard 1. General Business A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Consideration of Additional Agenda Items D. Approval of Agenda E. Approval of Meeting Minutes • Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes – October 3, 2023 • Regular Meeting Minutes—October 3, 2023 F. Citizen Comment 2. Public Hearings A. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello City Code, Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, Sections 153.012 – Definitions and 153.042 – Common District Requirements to allow certain encroachments into the required front yard for single- and two-family residences, and including definitions or other regulations necessary to define and limit the intent or application of the proposed amendment. Applicant: Jonanthan & Nancy Parker 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration of Adopting Resolution PC -2023-36, Finding the Proposed Acquisition of Certain Land by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Consistent with the City of Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan (Comprehensive Plan). B. Consideration of Planning Commission Resignation and Interview Meeting 4. Other Business A. Community Development Director's Report S. Adjournment MINUTES JOINT MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Tuesday, October 3, 2023 — 4:30 p.m. Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: Chair Paul Konsor, Vice Chair Andrew Tapper, Teri Lehner Commissioners Absent: Eric Hagen, Melissa Robeck Councilmembers Present: Mayor Lloyd Hilgart, Charlotte Gabler, Tracy Hinz Councilmembers Absent: Sam Murdoff, Lee Martie Staff Present: Rachel Leonard, Angela Schumann, Matt Leonard, Steve Grittman, Ron Hackenmueller, Hayden Stensgard 1. Call to Order Planning Commission Chair Paul Konsorjoint workshop of the Monticello Planning Commission and City Council to order at 4:30 p.m. A quorum of both the Planning Commission and City Council were present. 2. Concept Stage Planned Unit Development Proposal for a New Municipal Public Works Facility. PIDs: 213-100-151400, 213-100-153100 Applicant: City of Monticello Community Development Director Angela Schumann mentioned that this was a concept Planned Unit Development review meeting aimed at providing helpful and constructive feedback to the development team that presents the concept. Notices were sent out for this meeting to the surrounding area, where the development is proposed. Ms. Schumann noted that the meeting did not involve a public hearing, but if time allows, residents present may address the group. City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission, City Council and the public. The proposed Public Works facility is to be located along School Boulevard on about 12 acres, west of the Jefferson Commons commercial area. The site plans reviewed with this concept meeting included a roughly 91,000 square foot building layout, with about 67,000 square feet for maintenance, storage, and vehicle parking area and 24,000 square feet of office space and things alike. The site has split land use designations as described within the City's Comprehensive Plan guidance, which are Mixed Neighborhood and Mixed - Density Residential. The two parcels do not currently have a City zoning district, as part of the land use process will require annexing the parcels within to the City. The goals set forth in this concept PUD review of the proposed new public works facility and location are to provide the following: provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City Council; provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a requirement for extensive engineering and other plans; provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design and review. Mayor Hilgart asked for clarification on the extension of Redford Lane to the southwest. Ms. Schumann clarified that the westerly entrance to the public works site is from a southerly extension of Redford Lane. This will be a public street which is intended to be extended further from the proposed site into the remaining vacant area with development. The proposed southerly Redford Lane extension is offset from where Redford Lane currently meets School Boulevard to the north. Mr. Konsor asked if there was a way to see what the proposed outlot would look like. Public Works Director/City Engineer Matt Leonard displayed an aerial image of the overall site and noted that the remaining area that can be further developed is roughly 50 acres. Ms. Schumann also noted that the vacant land to the north of School Boulevard that is included within the easterly parcel, will need to remain vacant due to the retention pond and the overhead powerline easements. Mayor Hilgart asked if there was any stormwater that would be created with this concept that can flow north to that existing pond. Madeline Peters, of Oertel Architects, said that there is roughly 6 acres within the proposed project area that could be diverted north to that existing pond. Anrew Tapper pointed out that to the south of the proposed location is a manufactured home park, but that there is opportunity for expansion to the southwest once that time comes. Mr. Leonard clarified that it is not intended for expansion to be in that area either, as the outlot created with platting the property would be available for private development. Mayor Hilgart asked if there would be any portion of the facility that would be located on the City -owned property to the east of the area of discussion. Andrew Cooper, of Oertel Architects, clarified that no portion of the current site plan proposed would be on that property to the east, and further stated that there is a large grove of trees located on that property line that would be utilized as a buffer. Though there is the possibility that when needed, the public works site could expand easterly towards the water tower along School Boulevard. Mayor Hilgart asked what the reasoning is for starting on the west side and expanding east, rather than the other way around. Mr. Cooper stated that the large grove of trees to the east would require a substantial amount of investment to replace, in order to maintain compliance with the City's zoning ordinance. Additionally, utilizing the existing vegetation there for a buffer will help the City save money on the initial landscape and screening requirements. Mr. Grittman added that starting the development more towards the west adds value to that outlot parcel for development, as it would then have access to street frontage. Mayor Hilgart also added that it will be beneficial to set that east land aside for expansion, in case the outlot is developed into housing and there is no room to grow west, that land to the east will be available for expansion purposes. Mayor Hilgart asked if there will be significant buffering to the south for the residential neighborhood that abuts the proposed site. Mr. Cooper confirmed, and further stated that there is a required 50 -foot minimum setback for yards adjacent to residential zoning districts. On the architecture and design of the building, Mr. Cooper pointed out that the walls of the building are likely to be a pre -cast concrete style, and the office area of the facility will be designed in two stories. Mayor Hilgart asked if a finish on the exterior concrete walls like what is at the Monticello Fire Station could be utilized for this facility. Mr. Cooper confirmed and said there are a number of options and styles that could be used to enhance the concrete exterior walls. Mayor Hilgart further stated that he would be interested in design and color scheme cohesiveness between the City's building around town, and would be interested in seeing this building look similar to the exterior of the Monticello Fire Station. Councilmember Charlotte Gabler asked what the base zoning district would be for the Planned Unit Development. Ms. Schumann clarified that the land use designation for this site would be amended to Public and Institutional (PI), and the zoning district would likely reflect that of the R-3, or R-4 residential districts. City Administrator Rachel Leonard clarified that the purpose of the color scheme in this concept is to complement the Monticello Community Center. Councilmember Gabler agreed, but also said that accents of colors found on the fire station would also be of interest to her. Mr. Leonard said that the details being discussed at this meeting will be further clarified and resolved on a construction manager is hired to review specifics. Councilmember Gabler asked whether they could add windows to the top portion of the vehicle storage area to break up the wall, visually, and allow for some natural lighting in those areas. Mr. Cooper said that is certainly something they can incorporate into the design. Councilmember Gabler asked if it is intended to have a "green" roof, that supports energy efficiency, in other areas of the site. Mr. Cooper said that skylights will be planned to be incorporated into the project, particularly in the office space. A green roof has not been discussed, but the roof is planned to be as energy efficient as possible, related to controlling heating and cooling of the building. Mr. Leonard also mentioned that the architects are looking at capabilities of utilizing solar energy on the proposed facilities buildings. Councilmember Tracy Hinz said that it will be important to have enough information provided to City officials and staff to provide those answers to why do we need to build this facility, when the community asks. Mr. Tapper agreed, and said that understanding what we have currently, and why we need this added space in the future, will be important for that conversation. No action was taken on the item. 3. Adjournment By consensus, the meeting was adjourned at 5:44 p.m. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING – PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, October 3, 2023 – 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: Chair Paul Konsor, Vice Chair Andrew Tapper, Teri Lehner, Melissa Robeck Commissioners Absent: Eric Hagen Council Liaison Present: Councilmember Charlotte Gabler Staff Present: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman, Ron Hackenmueller, Hayden Stensgard 1. General Business A. Call to Order Chair Paul Konsor called the regular meeting of the Monticello Planning Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. B. Roll Call Mr. Konsor called the roll. C. Consideration of Additional Agenda Items None D. Approval of Agenda TERI LEHNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 3, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA. MELISSA ROBECK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. E. ADDroval of Meetine Minutes • Regular Meeting Minutes—September 5, 2023 ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 5, 2023 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES. MELISSA ROBECK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. F. Citizen Comment None 2. Public Hearings A. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Structures Exceeding 1,200 Square Feet in the R-2, Single & Two -Family Residential District. Applicant: Linn D. Jenson City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. For the two-family home located at 212 Kevin Longley Drive, the applicant is requesting to expand the existing attached garage area for one of the two units. The total amount of accessory structure space existing and proposed would exceed 1,200 square feet, which required the applicant to receive a conditional use permit. The proposed addition is 20'x20', and the site garage expansion would not exceed a total of 1,500 square feet, eliminating the need for a variance request. Staff's recommendation of the item was for approval, and Mr. Grittman detailed the conditions of approval as found in Exhibit Z of the agenda item. Andrew Tapper asked for clarification that the proposed addition would be attached to the home. Mr. Grittman stated that the applicants had informed staff that it would be attached, and that there would be no internal access to the garage. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-28 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 1,200 SQUARE FEET ON AN R-2, SINGLE AND TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z AND BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. TERI LEHNER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. B. Consideration of a Reauest for Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Structures Exceeding 1,200 Square Feet in the R-1, Single -Family Residential District. Applicant: Chip Bauer Construction, Inc. City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. For the single-family home located at 2471 Eastwood Lane, the applicant is requesting an addition to the attached garage that would exceed 1,200 square feet of total garage space. The proposed addition would not exceed 1,500 square feet in total. Staff's recommendation of the item was for approval, and Mr. Grittman detailed the conditions of that approval found in Exhibit Z of the agenda item. Melissa Robeck stated that it was her intention to abstain from the vote on this item. Mr. Konsor asked if there was planned to be any living space, including bonus room above the proposed garage addition within the proposed addition. Mr. Grittman deferred to the applicant to answer that question. Mr. Tapper asked for clarification on the expansion of the driveway on site. Mr. Grittman noted that the applicants could expand the driveway if desired, staff wanted to make the note that there are standards that need to be followed with that, including an application for a driveway permit. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Chip Bauer, Applicant, stated that there is no living space planned with the proposed addition, the area above the ceiling would be cold storage. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. TERI LEHNER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-29 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 1,200 SQUARE FEET ON AN R-1, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z AND BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. ANDREW TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 3-0, COMMISSIONER ROBECK ABSTAINING FROM THE VOTE. C. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello City Code, Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, including Section 153.067 — Off -Street Parking, related to Parking Area Surfacing Materials; Section 153.068 — Off -Street Loading Spaces, related to Surfacing Materials; Section 153.070 — Building Materials, related to 1-2, Heavy Industrial District Building Materials and Finishing Standards; Section 153.092 — Accessory Use Standards, related to Accessory Use Outdoor Storage Standards. Applicant: Tim Flander/Big Bear Holdings, LLC. City Planner Steve Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. The applicant is requesting various amendments to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, mainly related to building and site design standards within the 1-2, Heavy Industrial District. These amendments were related to exterior building finish, surfacing material of both loading areas, outdoor storage areas, and parking areas, and increasing the amount of outdoor storage allowed within the 1-2 District. Staff's recommendation was for denial of the proposed amendments, as they were found to be inconsistent with the goals and direction defined in the City comprehensive plan (Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan). Mr. Tapper addressed the applicant referencing the building style of an adjacent property and asked if that building was currently conforming with the City's Zoning Ordinance standards. Community Development Director Angela Schumann said no, and clarified that the existing building in question was built to conform with prior zoning standards. Councilmember Charlotte Gabler referenced the discussion when the recent industrial building design standard amendments were approved, and that staff and City officials worked hard to draft to comfortable language for proceeding within these districts. On the question of additional outdoor storage, concerns were raised and discussed by the City's Industrial & Economic Development Committee (IEDC), and that group was comfortable establishing this limitation. Teri Lehner discussed the difficulty in recommending approval for the proposed amendments, as they would not only affect the development of the applicant's site, but also entire districts as applicable. Mr. Konsor asked for clarification on where within the City would these proposed amendments be applied to. Mr. Grittman clarified that the majority of the changes would apply to land zoned 1-2, Heavy Industrial District, with the exception of the parking area surfacing amendment, that would apply to all zoning districts. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Applicant Tim Flander, 9450 Nason Court, Otsego, MN 55330, addressed the Planning Commission. Mr. Flander said that the requests were partially related to the limited availability of site within the Oakwood Industrial Park, and the existing site designs of surrounding properties, as there are sites recently developed that no longer comply with the current ordinance standards. Mr. Flander mentioned that it was not his intention to change the code itself, but rather requesting flexibility from these standards for the development of his site. Regarding the concern of maximum opportunity tax base as directed by the City's comprehensive plan, the cost saving these flexibilities would provide, would allow an immediate addition of building space on site following the initial development. Mr. Tapper asked the applicant to clarify whether it was his intention to amend the Zoning Ordinance in its entirety, rather than having his requests apply to only his property. Mr. Flander stated that it was not his intention to have these changes be reflected across the City of Monticello. Ms. Schumann clarified that the applicant does have the opportunity to request variances from these standards, or pursue the Planned Unit Development option. A variance request would require the applicant to demonstrate some sort of practical difficulty related to developing the site within the current zoning standards. Mr. Tapper asked if the Planned Unit Development route seemed like a relevant path, given the applicant's current requests. Mr. Grittman clarified that it could be a possibility, though typically a request for flexibility from standards by way of a PUD usually is accompanied with enhancements of some sorts elsewhere on a given site. Mr. Tapper then stated that it would be best to proceed with denial of these proposed ordinance text amendments and allow the applicant to pursue these requests through a different type of Land Use application. Mr. Grittman stated that when the applicant brought forth their goals for developing the site in such a way, staff reviewed these alternative options (variance or PUD applications) and found that it would be unlikely for staff to justify approving a request as such, given that practical difficulties on an undeveloped site are difficult to determine. Regardless of the way the vacant site is to be developed, the City's policies, as well as the goals and direction established within the comprehensive plan still apply. Mr. Grittman stated it would be beneficial for the applicant to have an understanding at this meeting of the likelihood of one of those alternative routes being successful in getting approved. Mr. Tapper agreed and further stated that the likelihood of all the applicant's requests being approved in some form was unlikely, some would be worth further discussion. Ms. Schumann noted that the City does have financial assistance programs related to site development and that Economic Development Manager at the City would be willing to explore those opportunities with the applicant. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-30 RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, BASED ON FINDINGS IN THE RESOLUTION AND ANY ADDITIONAL FINDINGS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. TERI LEHNER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. D. Consideration of a Reauest for a Conditional Use Permit for Cross/Joint Parki Easement in the Riverfront Sub -District of the Central Community District (CCD). Applicant: City of Monticello Ms. Schumann provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. In connection with the downtown streetscape improvements, the Planning Commission was asked to consider a second CUP for a cross/joint parking easement on Block 51, directly west of the Block 52 redevelopment project. The need for the easement is because one of the sites controls access to where the proposed six additional spaces will be located. It was noted that with the execution of the cross/joint parking easement, these newly established parking spaces will be open for public use. Mr. Konsor asked if the signs to be installed on site to denote public parking will also include exclusive parking for businesses in the area. Ms. Schumann clarified that the only parking exceptions in this area would be related to ensuring the residential tenants of these buildings have overnight access to parking there. Mr. Tapper asked if the smaller shed on site is proposed to go away, while the larger garage is expected to stay. Ms. Schumann confirmed. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Erika Fisher, 109 Walnut Street, Monticello, MN 55362, noted that there is no concern regarding people walking on the grass of her property and that the proposed parking area will benefit customer access to her business, as well as provide her residential tenant and more secure parking situation within the vicinity. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-31 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CROSS/JOINT PARKING WITHIN BLOCK 51, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z AND BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. TERI LEHNER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 7-0. E. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello Citv Code. Title XV: Land Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, Section 153.012 — Definitions, as related to Public Building and Uses and Including Community Event Center. Applicant: City of Monticello Mr. Grittman provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. This item stemmed from a discussion of being able to better utilize the Monticello Community Center's commercial kitchen for private use. The proposed use of the commercial kitchens does not fall outside the existing uses within the community center currently, but it was decided that with this use becoming active, it is in the City's interests to establish a definition for "Community Center' within the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Robeck asked if this was essentially a way to establish a definition for the use, and allow better utilization of areas of the Monticello Community Center. Mr. Grittman confirmed. Mr. Tapper asked about how renting the space will be managed. Ms. Schumann clarified that the Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission will be overseeing the renting of the various spaces. Mr. Konsor asked if the list of example uses is too exclusive and over -limits the utilization of these spaces. Mr. Grittman clarified that keeping the inclusion area of the definition broad to things such as "public assembly", rather than listing out specifics within that use, allows enough flexibility, but at the same time, it's important to be somewhat limiting so that every use does not have the opportunity to rent community center space. Councilmember Gabler asked if places like the proposed new public works facility that has a large meeting space would fall within this definition, to allow for renting out of that space. Ms. Schumann stated that specific to the proposed public works facility, the property would be zoned Planned Unit Development, so within that established zoning district, this could be addressed there. Mr. Tapper asked if the list of example uses are exclusive for Community Centers, and whether it should read, "may include the following" to allow for flexibility in the types of uses in those spaces. Mr. Grittman noted that is a revision to this definition that will be revised prior to adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-32 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR DEFINITIONS RELATING TO PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND USES BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION WITH THE ADDITION OF "MAY INCLUDE" AS NOTED. TERI LEHNER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. F. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello Citv Code. Title XV: Land Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, Section 153.060 — Landscaping and Screening, for Standards Relating to Native Landscapes. Applicant: City of Monticello Ms. Schumann provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. The proposed ordinance amendment would address the recently adopted law at the state level, allowing managed natural landscapes on residential properties. The current City ordinance on natural landscapes allows them only within commercial, industrial, and civic zoning districts. For residents who are interested in converting some or all their lawn into a managed native landscape, they will be required to submit a plan to the Community Development Department, to verify code and statutory requirements. Staff's recommendation was for approval of this agenda item. Councilmember Gabler asked if the approval of a proposed landscape plan would be by way of a permit. Per the recent statute, Ms. Schumann said that the City will not be approving these through a permitting process and that a neighbor's permission cannot be required. She further clarified that natural landscapes cannot be overgrown turf grass. Submission of a plan to the City is required prior to installing the landscape. Education has already begun from City Staff to the public. Ms. Lehner asked if there is potential for signage on City -maintained native landscapes explaining what it is. Ms. Schumann said yes, and that the Parks & Recreation Director recommended using signage to allow for these landscapes to be recognizable as people walk or drive by them. Mr. Tapper asked if the City is anticipating a need for residents to burn their natural landscapes to maintain its health. Ms. Schumann said no, and that is why a meeting with staff prior to preparation and installation will be important to steer away from plantings that require a burn. Mr. Konsor opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Mr. Konsor closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. PAUL KONSOR MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION PC -2023-33 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO MONTICELLO CITY CODE, TITLE XV: LAND USAGE, CHAPTER 153: ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 153.060 — LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING, FOR STANDARDS RELATING TO NATIVE LANDSCAPES, INCLUDING DEFINITIONS, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. TERI LEHNER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. 3. Regular Agenda A. Tabled— Consideration of a Request for Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 150 -unit Multi-Familv Residential Building in the B - Highway Business District and Rezoning from B-3, Highway Business District to Great River PUD District. Applicant: Briggs Companies Mr. Grittman provided an overview of the tabled agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. Originally an agenda item at the Planning Commission's September regular meeting, at the time staff believed there was not enough information related to the development itself to proceed. At that September meeting, the proposed plat, Great River 2nd Addition, was recommended for approval and had since been approved by the City Council. Since then, the applicants have revised their submitted material and supplied enough information for the Planning Commission to review and consider in October. The 150 -unit multi -family building would be constructed on the southeast corner of 71h Street East and Elm Street in two phases. Included in the proposed development is a set of detached garages of various sizes, to accommodate tenants that would need more storage space as necessary. Staff's recommendation on this item was for approval, and Mr. Grittman detailed the conditions of approval found in Exhibit Z of the agenda item. Mr. Tapper asked for clarification on whether there would be a commercial aspect to the development, as one of the example pictures provided by the applicant shows retail space on the first level. Mr. Grittman clarified that the image provided was merely an example of what the exterior of the building would look like, and that there are no plans for commercial space within this proposal. Mr. Grittman clarified that the applicant had submitted revised plans prior to the meeting, staff had not reviewed them, but they are anticipated to address the comments of the October staff report. Mr. Konsor asked how snow removal will work on this site. Mr. Grittman said that there are areas on site for piling snow, and it should not require parking space area. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-26 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, GREAT RIVER 2ND ADDITION, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF EXHIBIT Z. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-27 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AND REZONING FROM B-3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS TO THE GREAT RIVER PUD DISTRICT FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, GREAT RIVER 2ND ADDITION, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z. PAUL KONSOR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. B. Consideration of Adootine Resolution PC -2023-34. Findine the Proposed Acquisition of Certain Land bV the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Consistent with the City of Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan (Comprehensive Plan). Ms. Schumann provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. The property is .25 acres located at the northeast corner of Highway 25 and 3rd Street East near downtown. The EDA's purchase of this property continues the efforts of eventually redeveloping Block 34, the block just south of Walgreens. The redevelopment of Block 34 is specifically identified in the Downtown Small Area Plan, which was adopted as part of the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. The property is currently occupied by a commercial building and a business tenant that will move its operation off the property if the EDA purchases it. ANDREW TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION PC -2023-24 FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND, LOT 1, BLOCK 34, ORIGINAL PLAT OF MONTICELLO, PID 155010034010, BY THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF MONTICELLO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN). TERI LEHNER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. 4. Other Business A. Planning Commission Terms Ms. Schumann provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. This item was originally brought forth by Commission Chair Paul Konsor and knowing that he would be absent for some meetings early in 2024. It was Mr. Konsor's wish for the Planning Commission to weigh that information and decide what the best way to proceed. The options discussed had included finding a replacement or retaining his appointment on the Planning Commission. Mr. Konsor reiterated that he wanted the rest of Planning Commission to be aware of his scheduling situation, and for them to make an impartial decision on the future of his role with the commission. After discussion, it was the Planning Commission's interest to keep Mr. Konsor on the Commission, but consider appointment of a new chairperson next January. No action was taken on this agenda item. B. Community Development Director's Report Ms. Schumann provided an overview of the agenda item to the Planning Commission and the public. No action was taken on this agenda item. 5. Adjournment TERI LEHNER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE OCTOBER 3, 2023 REGULAR MEETING OF THE MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION. ANDREW TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4-0. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:37 P.M. Planning Commission Agenda — 11/06/2023 2A. Public Hearing - Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello City Code, Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, Sections 153.012 — Definitions and 153.042 — Common District Reauirements to allow certain encroachments into the reauired front vard for sinele and/or two-familv residences. and includi definitions or other regulations necessary to define and limit the intent or application of the proposed amendment. Applicant: Nancy and Jonathan Parker. Prepared by: Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Stephen Grittman, City Planner11/06/2023 Commission action): 11/27/2023 Additional Analysis by: Community Development Director, Community & Economic Development Coordinator ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Decision 1: Consideration of a request for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance establishing an allowable and limited encroachment into the front yard setback for single - and two-family homes. 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC -2023-35 recommending approval of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance creating an allowance for a limited encroachment into the front yard setback for single- and two-family homes, subject to the conditions in Exhibit Z and based on findings in said resolution. 2. Motion to deny the adoption of Resolution No. PC -2023-35 recommending denial of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. PC -2023-35. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Property: Legal Description: NA PID #: NA Planning Case Number: 2023-40 Request(s): Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance creating an allowance for a limited encroachment into the front yard setback for single- and two-family homes, specifically related to open -sided and covered entry porches and similar structures of a specific size and encroachment. Planning Commission Agenda — 11/06/2023 Deadline for Decision: December 9, 2023 (60 -day deadline) February 7, 2024 (120 -day deadline) Land Use Designation: Low -Density Residential Zoning Designation: Single- and Two -Family Residential Homes (various districts) Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: NA Current Site Uses: NA Surrounding Land Uses: North: NA East: NA South: NA West: NA Project Description: The applicants propose an amendment to the City's Zoning Ordinance that would provide for the construction of a covered porch or stoop area on the front of their current single-family home. The structure was built to meet the required front -yard setback of 30 feet at the time of its original construction. As built, the home follows the front setback line closely, with little or no articulation or change. Currently, the front entry opens directly into livable space, a common architectural design for homes of that period. Adding architectural features such as a covered porch would either not be possible under current regulations, or would require consideration of a variance, which due to the "uniqueness" requirement for variance review, is unlikely to prevail. As such, the applicants have requested a change to the zoning regulations to accommodate a modest encroachment for such porch extensions into the required front yard. ANALYSIS Zoning. The Zoning Ordinance sets out specific building setback requirements for each zoning district. The ordinance also allows for several structures that are either not subject to those 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 11/06/2023 setbacks, or permitted to encroach into the required setback area. The following section identifies those allowances: Section 152.042, Subd. (D)(2) Allowable Encroachments (a) The following features may encroach into required yards: 1. Fences and walls that meet the standards in § 153.062, may encroach into a required yard, but shall be subject to corner visibility requirements, and shall not be placed within public rights-of-way, conservation easements unless specifically permitted by the easement. 2. Walkways, patios, ramps, stairs, paved areas, and other accessory structures less than 30 inches above grade, and all landscape plantings are exempted from yard requirements except as may be specifically required by this chapter, but are subject to corner visibility requirements, and shall not be placed within conservation easements unless specifically permitted by the easement. 3. In rear and side yards: recreational and laundry drying equipment, arbors and trellises, balconies, decks, and air conditioning subject to the following conditions: a. Setback requirements of environmental protection districts shall remain applicable. b. A side yard setback of six feet shall be maintained. c. A setback of 20 feet shall be maintained from property lines abutting public rights-of-way. d. A rear yard setback of six feet shall be maintained. e. No encroachment shall be permitted within an existing or required easement. 4. Appurtenances: a. Appurtenances are permitted to encroach into a required front or rear yard setback up to six feet. b. Appurtenances are permitted to encroach into a required side yard setback up to three feet. c. Railings on landing places or porches extending into a required side yard shall not exceed three feet, six inches in height. d. Appurtenances shall not be located within existing or required easements. As written, the code creates an exception for several low or at -grade structures and features. For many of these structures, the setback encroachment is in the side or rear yard. Front yard exceptions tend to be landscape features (such as fences or arbors, or at -grade features such as Planning Commission Agenda — 11/06/2023 patios, decks, and sidewalks. In the front yard, a property owner may construct railings for an open porch/deck, or other similar structures. However, attached covered structures are considered a part of the principal building, per the Zoning Ordinance's definition of "Building" as follows: BUILDING. A structure with a roof, intended for shelter, housing, business, or enclosure. The applicants propose to add a covered ("roofed") area over the front entry of their home. As discussed above, the home style creates no useful area in the front of the home to accommodate use of the porch during inclement weather, nor protection for the interior of the home when the front entrance is opened. Staff agrees that the addition would be a suitable improvement, both in utility of the home and front entrance area (indoors and out), and in architectural enhancement. In considering the request in terms of an ordinance amendment, staff would further support the accommodation of such improvements for single- and two-family residential homes. The suggested features would further the City's interest in promoting improvements to, and reinvestment in, the City's existing housing stock. The Monticello 2040 Plan offers specific support for the amendment: "Adopt zoning regulations that allow for a wider diversity of housing types, identify character defining features and encourage a center of focus for each neighborhood." and "Pursue neighborhood conservation approaches that promote appropriate housing rehabilitation and new construction responsive to Monticello's traditional neighborhood character and visual diversity." Therefore, a proposed amendment adding an additional permitted encroachment to the section of the City Code listed above is proposed as follows: 5. In the front yard, open, covered (roofed) porches over a front entrance attached to a single- or two-family residential principal building shall be allowed to encroach into the required front yard setback with the following requirements: a. Total encroachment into the required setback may be up to a distance of six (6) feet; b. Total encroachment area may be no more than seventy-two (72) square feet; c. The encroachment space may include perimeter walls that are no more than 40% of the height between the principal entrance floor elevation and the lowest point on the proposed roof and/or ceiling above it. The remaining vertical space must remain open, without enclosure of any material, with the exception of any structurally required posts; d. Encroachment into drainage and utility easements shall not be permitted; 4 Planning Commission Agenda — 11/06/2023 e. The building materials for the porch shall be consistent with the principal structure; f. No more than one such covered porch encroachment shall be permitted for each dwelling unit. (i) For each single-family home, a maximum of one such covered porch under this section shall be Dermitted to encroach into the reauired front vard. (ii) For each two-family home, a maximum of two such covered porches shall be permitted when over separate exterior entrances leading to the interior of individual residential units. The six-foot encroachment allowance would match the existing "appurtenance" encroachment of six feet into the front yard, which would then allow a property owner to cover an existing front stoop. The proposed 72 square foot area allows for the width of the covered porch to be 12 feet, a common building dimension, and further allows the gable height to create a prominent architectural feature, and to be consistent with the existing or proposed roof pitches on the principal structure. The proposed text refers to "open" porches, and defines open as being no more than 40% of the height from the finished floor elevation at the front entry to the lowest point of the roof or ceiling covering the porch. In a typical 8 -foot height dimension from entry to ceiling, a low wall could enclose the porch area up to about 39 inches, leaving an open space of at least 57 inches. The purpose of this provision is to accommodate an interest in creating an edge to the front porch but limit the conversion of these spaces to enclosed floor area. The allowance for the encroachment is intended to enhance the open space in the front with some weather protection, not to merely decrease the building setback for finished floor area. While the front yard setback requirements are in place to create usable open space for these residential properties, the space that would be covered by this encroachment is often covered with stairs and stoops, sidewalks, or open decks and patio spaces. As such, the addition of an open cover is unlikely to impact green space quantities on most parcels. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends Alternative 1, approval of a resolution recommending adoption of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment for open front porch encroachments over front entryways in the front yard of single and two-family dwellings. The proposed amendment supports investment in existing housing stock within the community and the addition of features which add character to individual housing and neighborhoods. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution PC -2023-35 B. Ordinance No. XXX 5 Planning Commission Agenda — 11/06/2023 C. Applicant Narrative D. Applicant Plans CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-35 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO PERMITTED FRONT YARD SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS FOR SINGLE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS WHEREAS, the City of Monticello includes housing of a long history architectural variety and construction; and WHEREAS, the zoning regulations applicable to single and two-family dwellings can limit variation and enhancement of certain architectural styles; and WHEREAS, the City encourages improvement and reinvestment in its residential housing stock; and WHEREAS, certain such investments facilitate more effective and efficient use of existing homes, and more architectural creativity for both existing and new dwellings and the larger neighborhood; and WHEREAS, allowing for the construction of open front porches that encroach into the front yard accommodates reinvestment without compromising the open character of front yard spaces; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 6th, 2023 on the application and the applicant City of Monticello and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1. The zoning amendment provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan by allowing and encouraging reinvestment and character in its residential housing stock. The proposed amendment makes no other changes to the nature of uses that would otherwise exist in residential neighborhoods. The change in zoning language will accommodate reasonable and efficient maintenance of existing or new dwellings. 4. The change in language will have no expected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 5. The private reinvestment can have the effect of enhancing architectural character, diversity, and creativity in residential neighborhoods. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-35 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approves the zoning amendment to accommodate the encroachment of open porches in the required front yard setback areas as defined in the proposed ordinance. ADOPTED this 61h day of November, 2023, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION IA ATTEST: Paul Konsor, Chair Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 2 ORDINANCE NO.8XX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MONTICELLO CITY CODE XV, CHAPTER 153, MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTIONS 153.042 (D)(2) RELATED TO FRONT YARD SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. § 153.042 is hereby amended to add the following: 5. In the front yard, open, covered (roofed) porches over a front entrance attached to a single- or two-family residential principal building shall be allowed to encroach into the required front yard setback with the following requirements: a. Total encroachment into the required setback may be up to a distance of six (6) eet• b. Total encroachment area may be no more than seventy-two (72) square feet, c. The encroachment space may include perimeter walls that are no more than 40% of the height between the principal entrance floor elevation and the lowest point on the Proposed roof and/or ceiling above it. The remaining vertical space must remain open, without enclosure of any material, with the exception of any structurally required posts; d. Encroachment into drainage and utility easements shall not be permitted, e. The building materials for the porch shall be consistent with the principal structure; No more than one such covered aorch encroachment shall be permitted for each dwelling unit. (i) For each single-family home, a maximum of one such covered porch under this section shall be permitted to encroach into the required front yard. (ii) For each two-family home, a maximum of two such covered porches shall be permitted when over separate exterior entrances leading to the interior of individual residential units. SECTION 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title XV, Chapter 153, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. The ordinance in its entirety and map shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance and map are available online and at Monticello City Hal ATTEST: Rachel Leonard, Administrator AYES: NAYS: Lloyd Hilgart, Mayor W Jonathan and Nancy Parker 130 Kampa Circle Monticello, MN 55362 Land Use Text Amendment Application Narrative The modification requested would provide for an amendment to the land use zoning text that would allow for the addition of a small porch at the entry to the single-family residence at 130 Kampa Circle. City staff suggested that applying for a text amendment would be a better option than applying for a variance. A request for variance, most likely, could not be approved. Reasons for the requested change include: 1. Increased weather protection for the building at the front entry 2. Personal weather protection at the front entry 3. Increased curb appeal contributing to the appearance of the residence and the community. 4. A weather protected space from which to enjoy the local community and its environment. The changes are generally supported by the Monticello Comprehensive Plan in the sections on "Sustainability" and "Sense of Place." The proposed Text Amendment also contributes to the resilience of a stable community within the City of Monticello. *VERIFY FINISH SELECTIONS w/ OWNER* AMEN. ' — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I I I I SHAKES 1T- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I III II III III II III I I III � II III III � II III LLL = = JJ ILL = = = JJI NEW DOWNSPOUT (LOCATION PER ROOFING CONTRACTOR) I I FRONT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 12 / / 12 ASPHALT SHINGLES 6 i ' / \ ` J 6 12 12 6 6 ALUMN. SOFFIT&FASCIA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2x6 BAND BD. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - / - - - - - - - III// III II VIII VIII >I III i�__ _ _� �/_ - - �_ -JAI II 1<L = J I II VIII VIII II I� �I �_____= =�1 - - LL-yJ LL = - = JJ LL -JJ � r _ � _ -TI � = � - - - - - - - - - - - -- -it/ - - - - - - -- :J - MATCH EXST. HEEL HGT. (VERIFY IN FIELD) EAVE OVERHANG = 24" ROOF PLAN GABLE OVERHANG = 12" SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" LEFT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ARCTEK DESIGN LLC 4376 MIDWAY ROAD HERMANTOWN MINNESOTA 55811 PHONE: (715) 494-9668 ARCTEKDESIGN @OUTLOOK.COM APPROVED: CHECKED BY: SCALE:As Noted DRAWN BY: MSS 9/11/2023 Arctek Design LLC owns all rights, including, but not limited to, copyrights of the blueprints or floor plans created under this agreement. Arctek Design licenses the blueprint or floor plan to the customer for purposes of constructing the structure depicted in the blueprint or floor plan. Although every effort has been made in preparing these plans for accuracy, the customer must verify accuracy & be responsible for the same.The customer shall not duplicate, distribute to the public, or display this blueprint or floor plan. This floor plan or blueprint is not a work made for hire as defined under 17 U.S.C. section § 101. V.j► 8k 130 KAMPA CIRCLE MONTICELLO MINNESOTA 55362 PAGE: Al — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I I I I SHAKES 1T- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I III II III III II III I I III � II III III � II III LLL = = JJ ILL = = = JJI NEW DOWNSPOUT (LOCATION PER ROOFING CONTRACTOR) I I FRONT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 12 / / 12 ASPHALT SHINGLES 6 i ' / \ ` J 6 12 12 6 6 ALUMN. SOFFIT&FASCIA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2x6 BAND BD. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - / - - - - - - - III// III II VIII VIII >I III i�__ _ _� �/_ - - �_ -JAI II 1<L = J I II VIII VIII II I� �I �_____= =�1 - - LL-yJ LL = - = JJ LL -JJ � r _ � _ -TI � = � - - - - - - - - - - - -- -it/ - - - - - - -- :J - MATCH EXST. HEEL HGT. (VERIFY IN FIELD) EAVE OVERHANG = 24" ROOF PLAN GABLE OVERHANG = 12" SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" LEFT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ARCTEK DESIGN LLC 4376 MIDWAY ROAD HERMANTOWN MINNESOTA 55811 PHONE: (715) 494-9668 ARCTEKDESIGN @OUTLOOK.COM APPROVED: CHECKED BY: SCALE:As Noted DRAWN BY: MSS 9/11/2023 Arctek Design LLC owns all rights, including, but not limited to, copyrights of the blueprints or floor plans created under this agreement. Arctek Design licenses the blueprint or floor plan to the customer for purposes of constructing the structure depicted in the blueprint or floor plan. Although every effort has been made in preparing these plans for accuracy, the customer must verify accuracy & be responsible for the same.The customer shall not duplicate, distribute to the public, or display this blueprint or floor plan. This floor plan or blueprint is not a work made for hire as defined under 17 U.S.C. section § 101. V.j► 8k 130 KAMPA CIRCLE MONTICELLO MINNESOTA 55362 PAGE: Al GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ROOF ASSEMBLY ITEMS: * MIN. 1" AIR FLOW PASSAGE TO BE MAINTAINED @ ALL ROOF EDGES FOR A MIN. OF 4'-0" FROM OUTSIDE OF EXTERIOR WALL. INSTALL CHUTES AS REQ'D. * (2) ROLLS ICE&WATER SHIELD @ ALL ROOF EDGES. * SOFFIT VENTILATION 1/150 OR REDUCED TO 1/300 PROVIDED 50%-80% OF VENTED AREA IS PROVIDED W/ VENTILATORS LOCATED IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THE SPACE BEING VENTED (min. of 36" above eave or cornice) W/ BALANCE OF THE REQ'D VENTILATORS IN THE EAVES OR CORNICE DECK CONSTRUCTION NOTES: * CALL BEFORE YOU DIG TO LOCATE UTILITIES PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION OR DIGGING. * FOOTINGS: CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY REQ'D FOOTING SIZE PER SITE CONDITIONS. * TREATED WOOD: ALL WOODEN MEMBERS TO BE TREATED OR ROT RESISTANT WOODS SUCH AS CEDAR OR REDWOOD. * POSTS: POSTS SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED TO FOOTINGS TO PREVENT MOVEMENT. 6" POSTS MAY BE NOTCHED TO SEAT 2 PILE BEAM CONSTRUCTION. * BEAMS: SPLICES AND/OR END JOINTS ARE TO BE MADE OVER POSTS. BEAMS THAT ARE BOLTED TO POSTS ARE TO HAVE AT LEAST (2) 1/2"dia. BOLTS STAGGERED ON EACH POST. * LEDGER BOARDS: HOUSE/DECK LEDGER BOARD TO BE ATTACHED W/ 5/16" LAG SCREWS TO A SOLID WOOD MATERIAL, SUCH AS SOLID RIM BOARD, OR PLATES. INSULATED RIM JOIST, WALL SHEATHING AND I -JOISTS CANNOT ACCEPT LAG BOLTS AND MUST HAVE DIMENSIONAL LUMBER INSTALLED AT ALL BOLT LOCATIONS, OR A SELF-SUPPORTING DECK MUST BE CONSTRUCTED. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN HOUSE/DECK MUST BE WATERPROOF. CONTINUOUS FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE OVER TOP OF LEDGER BOARD TO BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT ANY WATER FROM ENTERING. * DECK TENSION/LATERAL LOAD: DECK TENSION/LATERAL LOAD CONNECTOR W/ 15001bs CAPACITY (2) LOCATIONS MIN. (OR) (4) 750* SIMPSON DTT1Z CONNECTIONS. VERIFY W/ LOCAL CODE REQUIREMENTS. * STAIRS: 36" MIN. WIDTH. 10" MIN. TREAD. 7.75" MAX. RISER. OPEN RISERS NOT PERMITTED, PROVIDED THAT THE OPENING BETWEEN TREADS DOES NOT ALLOW A 4"dia. SPHERE TO PASS THROUGH. THE GREATEST RISER HGT. SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8". ALL TREAD RUNS ARE TO BE EQUAL DIMENSION. * STAIR HANDRAILS: CONTINUOUS GRASPABLE HANDRAILS ARE REQUIRED ON STAIRS W/ 4 OR MORE RISERS. THE ENDS OF THE HANDRAIL SHALL RETURN TO A WALL OR TERMINATE IN NEWEL POSTS OR SAFETY TERMINALS. HANDRAIL SHALL BE 34"-36" ABOVE TREAD NOSING. * DECK GRADUALIST: A DECK AND/OR STAIR THAT IS 30" HIGHER OFF GRADE WILL REQUIRE A 36" MIN. HIGH GUERRILLA. VERTICAL SPINDLES OR A PATTERN OF INTERMEDIATE RAILS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT A 4"dia. SPHERE CANNOT PASS THROUGH. ALL OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTE APPLICATIONS MENTIONED ABOVE ARE TO BE VERIFIED AND MAYBE ALTERED AS DECIDED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUB -CONTRACTORS BUILDING PRACTICES. CERTIAN DIMENSIONS MAY VARY ACCORDING TO MATERIAL USED AND/OR THE CONTRACTOR'S BUILDING METHODS. NOTES: FOUNDATION WALL DIMENSIONS FROM OUTSIDE OF CONIC. EXTERIOR WALL DIMENSIONS FROM OUTSIDE OF SHEATING EXISTING SHOWN AS DASHED DETA I LS: EXST. BASEMENT WALL HGT. = 7'-4" EXST. MAIN FLOOR PLATE HGT. = 8'-1 1/8" EXST. MAIN FLOOR SYSTEM = 9-1/2" I -JOISTS EXST. ROOF PITCH = 6/12 NEW ROOF PITCH = 6/12 1 11 I 0I I ✓ I I ✓ 1 � 1 ✓ I I�I I �1 o1 I /�I /I I/ I/I1/ II 1 I� ✓ EXISTING LAB r 1 1 EXISTING BASEMENT 1 I S G S 1/ I/1 z I 1 w 1 I 1/I V I/JI I�I I.�I V r I/�L--—--—--—--— ——--—--—-------—————————— — — — J�I L— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — L. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — .J .. n EXISTING FOUNDATION PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" r — � I ✓ I 0 I ✓ 1 N /J 1 EXISTING BASEMENT V I z -- I / 1 w V I 1 I�-- —_ —— — — _ — / L � -- 21'-7 1/2" W i i 2-2x12 TRTD. FLASH BEAM — 2x12 TRTD. STRINGERS @12" o.c. — W PROPOSED FOUNDATION PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 10'-0" 16" SONO TUBES 441-0" BELLED TO 20" 22'-0" r — -I r — I/II I✓I I ✓ I I�I V I�I 1 I I EXISTING r S G 1/I I A V r A4 I I 1/I REMOVE EXST. BRICK & ADD TRTD. 2x8 LEDGER BD. ——————— — — — — — J I II/I /— + I I V I I� -------------- L. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — .J i i 2x8 TRTD. JOISTS @16" o.c. I r/1 12'-4 1/2" 22'-0" ARCTEK DESIGN LLC 4376 MIDWAY ROAD HERMANTOWN MINNESOTA 55811 PHONE: (715) 494-9668 ARCTEKDESIGN@OUTLOOK.COM APPROVED: CHECKED BY: SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0" DRAWN BY: MSS 9/11/2023 Arctek Design LLC owns all rights, including, but not limited to, copyrights of the blueprints or floor plans created under this agreement. Arctek Design licenses the blueprint or floor plan to the customer for purposes of constructing the structure depicted in the blueprint or floor plan. Although every effort has been made in preparing these plans for accuracy, the customer must verify accuracy & be responsible for the same.The customer shall not duplicate, distribute to the public, or display this blueprint or floor plan. This floor plan or blueprint is not a work made for hire as defined under 17 U.S.C. section § 101. PARKER 130 KAMPA CIRCLE MONTICELLO MINNESOTA 55362 PAGE: A2 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ROOF ASSEMBLY ITEMS: * MIN. 1" AIR FLOW PASSAGE TO BE MAINTAINED @ ALL ROOF EDGES FOR A MIN. OF 4'-0" FROM OUTSIDE OF EXTERIOR WALL. INSTALL CHUTES AS REQ'D. * (2) ROLLS ICE&WATER SHIELD @ ALL ROOF EDGES. * SOFFIT VENTILATION 1/150 OR REDUCED TO 1/300 PROVIDED 50%-80% OF VENTED AREA IS PROVIDED W/ VENTILATORS LOCATED IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THE SPACE BEING VENTED (min. of 36" above eave or cornice) W/ BALANCE OF THE REQ'D VENTILATORS IN THE EAVES OR CORNICE DECK CONSTRUCTION NOTES: * CALL BEFORE YOU DIG TO LOCATE UTILITIES PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION OR DIGGING. * FOOTINGS: CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY REQ'D FOOTING SIZE PER SITE CONDITIONS. * TREATED WOOD: ALL WOODEN MEMBERS TO BE TREATED OR ROT RESISTANT WOODS SUCH AS CEDAR OR REDWOOD. * POSTS: POSTS SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED TO FOOTINGS TO PREVENT MOVEMENT. 6" POSTS MAY BE NOTCHED TO SEAT 2 PILE BEAM CONSTRUCTION. * BEAMS: SPLICES AND/OR END JOINTS ARE TO BE MADE OVER POSTS. BEAMS THAT ARE BOLTED TO POSTS ARE TO HAVE AT LEAST (2) 1/2"dia. BOLTS STAGGERED ON EACH POST. * LEDGER BOARDS: HOUSE/DECK LEDGER BOARD TO BE ATTACHED W/ 5/16" LAG SCREWS TO A SOLID WOOD MATERIAL, SUCH AS SOLID RIM BOARD, OR PLATES. INSULATED RIM JOIST, WALL SHEATHING AND I -JOISTS CANNOT ACCEPT LAG BOLTS AND MUST HAVE DIMENSIONAL LUMBER INSTALLED AT ALL BOLT LOCATIONS, OR A SELF-SUPPORTING DECK MUST BE CONSTRUCTED. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN HOUSE/DECK MUST BE WATERPROOF. CONTINUOUS FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE OVER TOP OF LEDGER BOARD TO BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT ANY WATER FROM ENTERING. * DECK TENSION/LATERAL LOAD: DECK TENSION/LATERAL LOAD CONNECTOR W/ 1500lbs CAPACITY (2) LOCATIONS MIN. (OR) (4) 750* SIMPSON DTT1Z CONNECTIONS. VERIFY W/ LOCAL CODE REQUIREMENTS. * STAIRS: 36" MIN. WIDTH. 10" MIN. TREAD. 7.75" MAX. RISER. OPEN RISERS NOT PERMITTED, PROVIDED THAT THE OPENING BETWEEN TREADS DOES NOT ALLOW A 4"dia. SPHERE TO PASS THROUGH. THE GREATEST RISER HGT. SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8". ALL TREAD RUNS ARE TO BE EQUAL DIMENSION. * STAIR HANDRAILS: CONTINUOUS GRASPABLE HANDRAILS ARE REQUIRED ON STAIRS W/ 4 OR MORE RISERS. THE ENDS OF THE HANDRAIL SHALL RETURN TO A WALL OR TERMINATE IN NEWEL POSTS OR SAFETY TERMINALS. HANDRAIL SHALL BE 34"-36" ABOVE TREAD NOSING. * DECK GRADUALIST: A DECK AND/OR STAIR THAT IS 30" HIGHER OFF GRADE WILL REQUIRE A 36" MIN. HIGH GUERRILLA. VERTICAL SPINDLES OR A PATTERN OF INTERMEDIATE RAILS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT A 4"dia. SPHERE CANNOT PASS THROUGH. ALL OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTE APPLICATIONS MENTIONED ABOVE ARE TO BE VERIFIED AND MAYBE ALTERED AS DECIDED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUB -CONTRACTORS BUILDING PRACTICES. CERTIAN DIMENSIONS MAY VARY ACCORDING TO MATERIAL USED AND/OR THE CONTRACTOR'S BUILDING METHODS. NOTES: FOUNDATION WALL DIMENSIONS FROM OUTSIDE OF CONC. EXTERIOR WALL DIMENSIONS FROM OUTSIDE OF SHEATING EXISTING SHOWN AS DASHED DETA I LS: EXST. BASEMENT WALL HGT. = 7'-4" EXST. MAIN FLOOR PLATE HGT. = 8'-11/8" EXST. MAIN FLOOR SYSTEM = 9-1/2" I -JOISTS EXST. ROOF PITCH = 6/12 NEW ROOF PITCH = 6/12 I I I I I I I I I L - - U) w 0 z Cn X EXISTING HOUSE II � DIMENSION FROM OUTSIDE OF BRICK I I I C? 00 I I L - MM EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" I I I I I I I I I L - - T1 /T /Z is U) w 0 z Cn X w 21'-7 1/2" EXISTING HOUSE DIMENSION FROM OUTSIDE OF BRICK COMPOSITE DECKING ---- _- ---- ' O b 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL EAVE BEAM (WRAPPEp w/ LPO) 6x6 TRTD. POST (WRAPPED w/ LPO) B21-611 A4ol )SED MAIN FL( SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" R PLAN MM EXISTING PATIO II POCKET BEAM INTO EXST. WALL II � (4" CONC. SLAB) 21'-10" I I I I I I I I LIJ I I ARCTEK DESIGN LLC EXISTING GARAGEz i l 4376 MIDWAY ROAD U I U) I I HERMANTOWN I---------------------------------------- -------, I I - I MINNESOTA I 55811 — — — _j ' I PHONE: (715) 494-9668 I �I O i EXISTING TRUSSES I I I ARCTEKDESIGN@OUTLOOK.COM — —— I /1171TT1 T1/Z 71 APPROVED: I I - - J 22'-0" II II IILIJ EXISTING GARAGE II z A U) A4 lI--------------------------------------w-------; I II II J RE -LOCATE HOSE -BIBS (PER PLUMBER) O EXISTING TRUSSES ALUMN. RAILING ----------- i I ' I 2PLY 9-1/2" 210E LVL EAVE BEAM (1NRAPPED w/ LPO) I F 6x6_SRTD_P0.ST- — — — — — J (WRAPPED w) LPO) B NV12'4 1/2" 22'-0" I I I I I I I I I I I I I J CHECKED BY: SCALE:1/4" = V-0" DRAWN BY: MSS 9/11/2023 Arctek Design LLC owns all rights, including, but not limited to, copyrights of the blueprints or floor plans created under this agreement. Arctek Design licenses the blueprint or floor plan to the customer for purposes of constructing the structure depicted in the blueprint or floor plan. Although every effort has been made in preparing these plans for accuracy, the customer must verify accuracy & be responsible for the same.The customer shall not duplicate, distribute to the public, or display this blueprint or floor plan. This floor plan or blueprint is not a work made for hire as defined under 17 U.S.C. section § 101. V.\h 130 KAMPA CIRCLE MONTICELLO MINNESOTA 55362 PAGE: A3 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ROOF ASSEMBLY ITEMS: * MIN. 1" AIR FLOW PASSAGE TO BE MAINTAINED @ ALL ROOF EDGES FOR A MIN. OF 4'-0" FROM OUTSIDE OF EXTERIOR WALL. INSTALL CHUTES AS REQ'D. * (2) ROLLS ICE&WATER SHIELD @ ALL ROOF EDGES. * SOFFIT VENTILATION 1/150 OR REDUCED TO 1/300 PROVIDED 50%-80% OF VENTED AREA IS PROVIDED W/ VENTILATORS LOCATED IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THE SPACE BEING VENTED (min. of 36" above eave or cornice) W/ BALANCE OF THE REQ'D VENTILATORS IN THE EAVES OR CORNICE DECK CONSTRUCTION NOTES: * CALL BEFORE YOU DIG TO LOCATE UTILITIES PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION OR DIGGING. * FOOTINGS: CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY REQ'D FOOTING SIZE PER SITE CONDITIONS. * TREATED WOOD: ALL WOODEN MEMBERS TO BE TREATED OR ROT RESISTANT WOODS SUCH AS CEDAR OR REDWOOD. * POSTS: POSTS SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED TO FOOTINGS TO PREVENT MOVEMENT. 6" POSTS MAY BE NOTCHED TO SEAT 2 PILE BEAM CONSTRUCTION. * BEAMS: SPLICES AND/OR END JOINTS ARE TO BE MADE OVER POSTS. BEAMS THAT ARE BOLTED TO POSTS ARE TO HAVE AT LEAST (2) 1/2"dia. BOLTS STAGGERED ON EACH POST. * LEDGER BOARDS: HOUSE/DECK LEDGER BOARD TO BE ATTACHED W/ 5/16" LAG SCREWS TO A SOLID WOOD MATERIAL, SUCH AS SOLID RIM BOARD, OR PLATES.INSULATED RIM JOIST, WALL SHEATHING AND I -JOISTS CANNOT ACCEPT LAG BOLTS AND MUST HAVE DIMENSIONAL LUMBER INSTALLED AT ALL BOLT LOCATIONS, OR A SELF-SUPPORTING DECK MUST BE CONSTRUCTED. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN HOUSE/DECK MUST BE WATERPROOF. CONTINUOUS FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE OVER TOP OF LEDGER BOARD TO BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT ANY WATER FROM ENTERING. * DECK TENSION/LATERAL LOAD: DECK TENSION/LATERAL LOAD CONNECTOR W/ 1500lbs CAPACITY (2) LOCATIONS MIN. (OR) (4) 750* SIMPSON DTT1Z CONNECTIONS. VERIFY W/ LOCAL CODE REQUIREMENTS. * STAIRS: 36" MIN. WIDTH. 10" MIN. TREAD. 7.75" MAX. RISER. OPEN RISERS NOT PERMITTED, PROVIDED THAT THE OPENING BETWEEN TREADS DOES NOT ALLOW A 4"dia. SPHERE TO PASS THROUGH. THE GREATEST RISER HGT. SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8". ALL TREAD RUNS ARE TO BE EQUAL DIMENSION. * STAIR HANDRAILS: CONTINUOUS GRASPABLE HANDRAILS ARE REQUIRED ON STAIRS W/ 4 OR MORE RISERS. THE ENDS OF THE HANDRAIL SHALL RETURN TO A WALL OR TERMINATE IN NEWEL POSTS OR SAFETY TERMINALS. HANDRAIL SHALL BE 34"-36" ABOVE TREAD NOSING. * DECK GRADUALIST: A DECK AND/OR STAIR THAT IS 30" HIGHER OFF GRADE WILL REQUIRE A 36" MIN. HIGH GUERRILLA. VERTICAL SPINDLES OR A PATTERN OF INTERMEDIATE RAILS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT A 4"dia. SPHERE CANNOT PASS THROUGH. ALL OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTE APPLICATIONS MENTIONED ABOVE ARE TO BE VERIFIED AND MAYBE ALTERED AS DECIDED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUB -CONTRACTORS BUILDING PRACTICES. CERTIAN DIMENSIONS MAY VARY ACCORDING TO MATERIAL USED AND/OR THE CONTRACTOR'S BUILDING METHODS. FOUNDATION WALL DIMENSIONS FROM OUTSIDE OF CONC. EXTERIOR WALL DIMENSIONS FROM OUTSIDE OF SHEATING EXISTING SHOWN AS DASHED DETA I LS: EXST. BASEMENT WALL HGT. = 7'-4" EXST. MAIN FLOOR PLATE HGT. = 8'-11/8" EXST. MAIN FLOOR SYSTEM = 9-1/2" I -JOISTS EXST. ROOF PITCH = 6/12 NEW ROOF PITCH = 6/12 12 6 7 TOP OF EXST. PLATE _ rt) t)- � j -f POCKET BEAM I6 EXST. WALL I< EXST. IHOUSE K I I� TOP OF EXST. FOOTING — — – -- -- CROSS SECTION SCALE: 1/4" = P-0" TRUSS LAYOUT PER MNFR. ALUMN. SOTTIT .. - - —TOP OF BEAM 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) REMOVE EXST. OVERHANG EXST. HOUSE 6x6 TRTD. POST *NOTES TO MASON* ENDS 4 REMOVE EXST. BRICK @ LEDGER BD. LOCATION C ATTACH & FLASH NEW LEDGER BD. �� i ncis 2 inches INSTALL STEEL LINTEL 1-% imhes` 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL ADD BRICK ABOVE LEDGER (ON LINTEL) BRICK 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL (EXISTING STEEL LINTEL PER MASON N TOP OF EXST. SUBFLOOR- - � OO TOP OF EXST. FOUNDATION = ,--i ---- (WRAPPED w/ LP@) I< EXST. IHOUSE K I I� TOP OF EXST. FOOTING — — – -- -- CROSS SECTION SCALE: 1/4" = P-0" TRUSS LAYOUT PER MNFR. ALUMN. SOTTIT .. - - —TOP OF BEAM 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) REMOVE EXST. OVERHANG TABLE 8507.9-1. PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREM AND BOLTS h DEtk LEDGERS AND BAND dOISTS 12 12 6 6 MATCH EXST. HEEL HGT. TRUSS DESIGN PER MNFR. (VERIFY IN FIELD) TOP OF BEAM JF 6x6 TRTD. POST BOT70M EDGE '14 inch ENDS ROW SPAC016 (WRAPPED w/ LP@) 00 'F inch►:a? 13, nJ 106L` �� i ncis 2 inches I [Fk him` 1-% imhes` 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL M 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL ALUMN. RAILING N EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) � OO 6x6 TRTD. POST _ ,--i J (WRAPPED w/ LP@) 00 O COMPOSITE DECKING I ALUMN. RAILING N J W GUARDRAIL: o0 LL NOT LESS THAN 36" IN HEIGHT WITH PATTERN / SPACING SUCH O? THAT A SPHERE 4" IN DIA. - - TOP OF DECKING , 2x8 TRTD. JOISTS CANNOT PASS THROUGH @16" o.c. o DECKING — _ _ _ TOP OF FOOTING , 2-2x12 TRTD. FLUSH BEAM , 2x12 TRTD. STRINGERS @12" o.c. i i CONCRETE PIER # # # # O ' V-4" - TOP OF FOOTING, --- _ - - BOTTOM OF FOOTING , TABLE 8507.9-1. PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREM AND BOLTS h DEtk LEDGERS AND BAND dOISTS 12 12 6 6 MATCH EXST. HEEL HGT. TRUSS DESIGN PER MNFR. (VERIFY IN FIELD) TOP OF BEAM itK0UY EKID AND EDGE DISTANCES AND SPAC'N6 BETWEEN ROWS JF TQP EDGE BOT70M EDGE '14 inch ENDS ROW SPAC016 1 iLdger" W 'F inch►:a? 13, nJ 106L` �� i ncis 2 inches I [Fk him` 1-% imhes` 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL ALUMN. RAILING 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL N OOOCCC EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) � Ur 6x6 TRTD. POST _ ,--i J (WRAPPED w/ LP@) 00 O Q I ALUMN. RAILING N J W GUARDRAIL: o0 LL NOT LESS THAN 36" IN HEIGHT WITH PATTERN / SPACING SUCH O? THAT A SPHERE 4" IN DIA. COMPOSITE FO CANNOT PASS THROUGH o DECKING o - - TOP OF DECKING, 2x12 TRTD. RIM BD. # # # # x12 TRTD. RIM BD.- - TOP OF FOOTING, --- 2x8 TRTD. JOISTS @16" o.c. o CONCRETE PIERS ,' = ,' -- - BOTTOM OF FOOTING, CROSS SECTION itK0UY EKID AND EDGE DISTANCES AND SPAC'N6 BETWEEN ROWS 2X6 SUB -FASCIA TQP EDGE BOT70M EDGE '14 inch ENDS ROW SPAC016 1 iLdger" ? ttii 1k'si1 'F inch►:a? 13, nJ 106L` �� i ncis 2 inches I [Fk him` 1-% imhes` I -W 31: I in ak. 1, 1,@ MCMWN 43C hOtU pdmll he M3ggglVj frim Ilse MV do the Ixrttimi :ALMS 1W IlmftWWul raw c9 the ikck k4ger ip xomU= 1hzll 111W R W7.4,i.?1[11. h. Miainutm 5 inrlae'a. C- I- rwengineml rim jaims_ dk' ffmarALIM'v's tecumnttrtdaum Sia]( euvm. A lhC tgilslntum 111smu! fitd5 hihi)m rum of lag mY WK cw biALK lu dir WP mitr 01 IhL' k*cr Sho SIC in rL7LYI ner With I nipw kiw.g. 2• MK LEDGER 14 SJ: 1 tint _ 11.4 ittm_ JOIST TO BEAM/ LEDGER CONNECTION (SIMPSON LUS) LAG Rr'-VV OR k1OL7 STAGGER FASTENERS IN 2 RLWrzi. S.5' MIN. rOR 2 X 8* 'DISTANCE SHALL BE PEFMAITTEID TO 6 MIN, FOR 2 X 10 BE REDUCED TO 4.6'[F LAC SCREWS 7.5' MIFF. FOR 2 ?i 12 ,ARE USED OR BOLT SPAC04G IS DEDUCED TO THAT OF LAG SCREWS TO ArFACH 2 X 8 LEDGERS TO 2 X 8 BAND "STS_ W4' MIN_ FIGURE R507.9.1.3(9 ) PLACEY EN T OF LAG SCREIHS AND BOLTS IN LFI)a RS 8" HDG lag screw 'iIIII' with HDC washer or 0WH Timber -Hex HDG screw (shown) nto tap plate, studs, C or header }#9x11/2"SD screws (shown) or (8) 0.148" x 11/2" nails DTT1Z 8" min. thread penetration TENSION TIE (SIMPSON DTT1Z) EXTERIOR SHEATHING EXISTING STUD WALL EXISTING 2x BAND JOIST OR ENGINEERED RIM BOARD J 2" MIN. 1-5/a" MIN_ S' MAX_ ?'ti 2" MIN. FLOOR FRAMING o d o ' .o 0p0 C -.,o C� Q EXISTING . - o C- O FOUNDATION WALL. For SL 1 inch 25.4 Boli, 15# FELT PAPER ICE & WATER SHEILD- 15/32" OSB SHEATHING W/ "H" CLIPS ALUMN. SOFFIT W/ VENTS AS REQ'D DRIP EDGE ALUMN. FASCIA "' 0 2X6 SUB -FASCIA 6x6 TRTD. POST z (WRAPPED w/ LP@) C:) ri 1-4 > ALUMN. RAILING DECK LAG SCREW JOIST HANGER FIGURE R507.9.1.3(2) PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN BAND JOISTS CONC. PIER TO BEAM CONNECTION (SIMPSON PBS) 2x12 TRTD. RIM BD. -ASPHALT SHINGLES ENGINEERED TRUSSES @24" o.c. ALUMN. SOFFIT 2PLY 9-1/2" 2.0E LVL EAVE BEAM (WRAPPED w/ LP@) COMPOSITE DECKING 2x8 TRTD. JOISTS @12" o.c. CONCRETE PIER WALL SECTION MINIMUMr SINGLE PLIC BEAM NOT TO SCALE MINIMUM � ULTIP'LE-PLY BEAM SL (2)112 -DIAMETER - THROU'GH-BOLTS OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT CONNECTOR POST -NOTCH FOR FULL -BEAM BEARING BEAM SPLICE ItE. H11Z Installation TRUSS TO BEAM CONNECTION (SIMPSON H11Z) ARCTEK DESIGN LLC 4376 MIDWAY ROAD HERMANTOWN MINNESOTA 55811 PHONE: (715) 494-9668 ARCTEKDESIGN @OUTLOOK.COM APPROVED: CHECKED BY: r9/1DRjAWN ALE:As Noted BY: MSS 1/2023 Arctek Design LLC owns all rights, including, but not limited to, copyrights of the blueprints or floor plans created under this agreement. Arctek Design licenses the blueprint or floor plan to the customer for purposes of constructing the structure depicted in the blueprint or floor plan. Although every effort has been made in preparing these plans for accuracy, the customer must verify accuracy & be responsible for the same.The customer shall not duplicate, distribute to the public, or display this blueprint or floor plan. This floor plan or blueprint is not a work made for hire as defined under 17 U.S.C. section § 101. 130 KAMPA CIRCLE MONTICELLO MINNESOTA 55362 PAGE: Ot KAMPA CIR ti 4 C O O O d- M (OVER EX i i i i i --7 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'-0" ARCTEK DESIGN LLC 4376 MIDWAY ROAD HERMANTOWN MINNESOTA 55811 PHONE: (715) 494-9668 ARCTEKDESIGN @OUTLOOK.COM APPROVED: CHECKED BY: SCALE: 1" = 10'-0" DRAWN BY: MSS 9/11/2023 Arctek Design LLC owns all rights, including, but not limited to, copyrights of the blueprints or floor plans created under this agreement. Arctek Design licenses the blueprint or floor plan to the customer for purposes of constructing the structure depicted in the blueprint or floor plan. Although every effort has been made in preparing these plans for accuracy, the customer must verify accuracy & be responsible for the same.The customer shall not duplicate, distribute to the public, or display this blueprint or floor plan. This floor plan or blueprint is not a work made for hire as defined under 17 U.S.C. section § 101. 71T \ w 130 KAMPA CIRCLE MONTICELLO MINNESOTA 55362 PAGE: S1 Planning Commission Agenda: 11/06/23 3A. Consideration of adopting Resolution PC -2023-36, a Resolution Finding that the Proposed Acquisition of Certain Land, Outlot A of the Great River Addition and that land to be platted as Outlot B, Great River 2nd Addition, by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Consistent with the City of Monticello Comprehensive Plan (Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan) Prepared by: Meeting Date: Council Date (pending Community Development Director 11/06/2023 Commission action): NA Additional Analysis by: City Administrator, Economic Development Manager, Community & Economic Development Coordinator ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to adopt Resolution PC -2023-36 finding that the proposed acquisition of certain land, Certain Land, Outlot A of the Great River Addition and that land to be platted as Outlot B, Great River 2nd Addition, by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is consistent with the City of Monticello Comprehensive Plan (Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan). 2. Motion of other. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to consider a recommendation finding that the acquisition of parcels in the Great River and Great River 2nd Addition by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, Monticello 2040. The acquisition of the parcel is intended to facilitate future economic development efforts. There are two parcels included in the proposed acquisition. The first is located directly between 1-94 and 7t" Street West. The parcel is vacant. The portion considered for acquisition by the EDA is approximately 14 acres of the larger parcel, of which 6 acres at the corner of 7t" and Elm was recently approved to be subdivided for a multi -family residential project. The second acquisition parcel is located across 7t" Street and provides the stormwater capacity for much of the first parcel and is covered by a public drainage and utility easement. Acquisition of these parcels will expand the opportunity for economic development consistent with the Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. The parcel is guided "Commercial and Residential Flex" Planning Commission Agenda: 11/06/23 within the current Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan. The designation is intended to allow flexibility for compatible and supportive land uses. Acquisition by the EDA is intended to facilitate the ability to further specific economic development objectives. Possible uses may include commercial development meeting specific community needs, such as medical office, childcare or hospitality. The acquisition could also support the EDA's work in housing, meeting demonstrated needs for senior or affordable housing. While those uses are immediately consistent with the 2040 Plan, the EDA over time may also consider the potential for light industrial uses more commonly found in the Light Industrial Park (LIP) land uses designation. In any case, the acquisition is specifically intended to further the EDA's ability to attract businesses meeting a demonstrated need for the community or attracting high-quality jobs. Its proximity to the amenities of the Downtown, visibility from 1-94 and the TH25/1-94 interchange also make it an attractive development location. The following statements within the 2040 Vision are relevant to this acquisition: "A diversified and strong local economy competitive at regional, state and national levels." Further, the 2040's Plan Implementation chapter opens with the statement "The Future Land Use Plan describes a strategic, recommended pattern of land uses in the City and MOAA. The strategy also emphasizes the improvement and enhancement of Monticello's downtown and surrounding traditional neighborhood blocks, the repositioning of the City's commercial areas to take advantage of emerging economic opportunities, and the diversification of the tax base through ongoing economic development efforts that promote job growth and expand existing employment centers." The Land Use Chapter's three objectives statements are also in clear alignment with the acquisition. At this time, there is no immediate plan to develop the site. The EDA will be holding a workshop in November to review its landholdings and provide guidance on marketing and development objectives. The EDA will consider entering into a purchase agreement on the property at its regular meeting on November 8, which is contingent on the Planning Commission's finding. The Commission's role is to provide a report to the City and EDA on the conformance of the acquisition to the adopted Comprehensive Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City staff supports Alternative #1 above. The EDA's intent is to develop the site for the highest and best use of property within the core city. Therefore, acquisition of this property by the EDA N Planning Commission Agenda: 11/06/23 is consistent with the Monticello 2040 Plan's goals for encouraging economic development and growing from within. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution PC -2023-36 B. Aerial Site Image C. Monticello 2040 Plan, Excerpts D. M N Statute 462.356 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-26 A RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES BY THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF MONTICELLO'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (the "Authority") proposes to purchase certain property (the "Property") located on 7th Street West in the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto, for the purposes of redevelopment; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.356, subd. 2, requires the City Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") to review the proposed acquisition or disposal of publicly owned real property within the City prior to its acquisition or disposal, to determine whether in the opinion of the Planning Commission, such acquisition or disposal is consistent with the City's comprehensive municipal plan (the "Comprehensive Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed acquisition of the Property and has determined that the Property is designated for "Commercial Residential Flex" land use within the Comprehensive Plan, and that the Authority's purpose is to redevelop the Property consistent with these uses, and that the proposed acquisition is therefore consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, that the acquisition of the Property by the Authority is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will promote the successful redevelopment of the City. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be communicated to the Board of Commissioners of the Authority. ADOPTED this 61h day of November, 2023, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. 93 MN325\50\912491.v1 1► [�L��[y��l�e1►1�11�[e��Z�l► 1► 1[.Y.y[�LI Paul Konsor, Chair CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-26 I_11111MIN Angela Schumann, Community Development Director MN325\50\912491.v1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC -2023-26 L*A': I H. IIl_1 Legal Description of the Property A portion of PID 155226000020, which will be platted as Outlot A, Great River Second Addition, County of Wright, State of Minnesota. All of PID 155226000010, which is legally described as Outlot A, Great River Addition, County of Wright, State of Minnesota. MN325\50\912491.v1 Riverwood Site - 14.17 Acres - Zoned B-3, Highway Business District s i• �I Cal f Ad 1 in = 400 Ft N A October 23, 2023 Map Powered By Datafi wSb Monticello 2040 - VISION + PLAN - PHASE ONE I JANUARY 2020 This first phase of the Comprehensive Plan process, the Visioning phase, included a community engagement process to identify common values, growth aspirations and a vision to inform the planning direction for the next 20 years. The vision, value statements and preferred development scenario will serve as the foundation for creating the new Comprehensive Plan during the second phase of the planning process. The Comprehensive Plan provides a set of goals, policies and strategies for achieving Monticello's vision for the future. 11 In 2040 the City of Monticello is an inclusive community focused around sustainable growth while maintaining its small-town character. Monticello is a Mississippi River town known for its schools, parks, biking and walking trails and vibrant downtown. Monticello is an evolving, friendly and safe community that respects the quality of its environment, fosters a sense of belonging and connection, encourages a healthy and active lifestyle and supports innovation to promote a prosperous economy. A safe, clean, and beautiful community supported by caring and helpful residents. A network of parks, open space and trail connections that provide recreation opportunities. An inclusive community welcoming people of all ages, races, religions and ethnic backgrounds. A diversified and strong local economy competitive at regional, state and national levels. A vibrant downtown that embraces the River and provides a focal point for the community. A healthy community focused on physical and mental health and wellness of its residents. A range of attainable housing options in terms of type, cost, and location. A respected school and education system serving the community. A balanced land use and transportation framework that provides options and connectivity. A thriving arts and culture scene that reflects the creativity of the community and supports a sense of place. Monticello 2040 - VISION + PLAN - PHASE ONE I JANUARY 2020 Development Assumptions 0 Sustainability - Focus on sustainability, open space and wetland preservation throughout City. Q Infill Development - New service commercial and light industrial infill. Q Conservation Neighborhoods - Single-family housing developed as conservation subdivisions in a clustered fashion mitigating impacts to sensitive areas. Q Industrial Expansion - Full build out and expansion of Otter Creek Industrial Park and growth around future Interchange. Q Multi -Family Housing - New multi -family infill development near core of downtown and other focus areas. 0 New School - New elementary and middle school campus with environmental focus. Q Downtown - Downtown plan implementation thriving with new commercial, mixed-use and public realm improvements. Q Mississippi River - Focus on River with new access, connections and rive rfront trail. 0 New Employment Center - New industrial business park developed around new interchange with green technology, renewable energy, manufacturing and other uses. 0 Xcel Facility - The Xcel Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant is licensed through 2030 and will seek relicensing to 2040. Q Annexation Area - Portions of the Orderly Annexation Area are designated as an Urban Reserve for future development. Development would likely include conservation single-family cluster subdivisions. Note: The Preferred Scenario guidance and mapping provided in the Vision Report will be further refined during the Comprehensive Plan process. This map is not the City of Monticello's final Land Use Plan. This map provides initial guidance for the next phase of the project, the Comprehensive Plan, and will be further detailed and refined. D INCREMENTAL, SUSTAINABLE Growth Scenario The preferred development scenario is the result of community feedback on the four previous scenarios and the community's vision. The community envisions Monticello in 2040 as an environmentally and economically sustainable community that has experienced strong, balanced growth. Key Preferred Scenario Aspects Downtown Focus 6 Industrial and Employment Q New School 0 Conservation Neighborhoods Otter Creek Industrial Park M —I pr- "FA- ft - Technology, Renewable Energy, OManufacturing & Distribution Warehousing ILI Potential School Site with U Retail and Commercial Trails and Open Space AN H , Multi -Family 10-18 Unit/Acre Commercial/Residential Mix (Neo Traditional) Development Residential (South) 8-10 Units/Acre �A Downtown Mixed Use 10-18 Unit/Acre '. LRegionalOriented� Commercial _ ..W I- L vicCommercial Light Industria Infill i I CHAPTER 3: ND USE .. GROWTH AND ORDERLYANNEXATFON 47 INTRODUCTION The Land Use, Growth and Orderly Annexation Chapter outlines the goals, policies and land use strategy that will guide future land use development and decision- making in the community as well as in the Orderly Annexation Area (MOAA). The MOAA is included in this land use plan to help plan for and ensure orderly and efficient growth, and to protect and maintain the MOAA until that growth occurs. This Chapter also serves to inform other aspects and chapters of the Comprehensive Plan, including transportation and mobility, housing, community facilities and parks and open space. Overall, the Future Land Use Plan will help define the pattern and location of development in the City for the next 20 years. Monticello desires a balanced land use pattern to ensure a stable and growing tax base that promotes economic diversity and resiliency to changes in the local, regional, state and national economy. The Future Land Use Plan describes a strategic, recommended pattern of land uses in the City and MOAA. The strategy also emphasizes the improvement and enhancement of Monticello's downtown and surrounding traditional neighborhood blocks, the repositioning of the City's commercial areas to take advantage of emerging economic opportunities, and the diversification of the tax base through ongoing economic development efforts that promote job growth and expand existing employment centers. The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) illustrates land use planning according to specific land use categories. In addition, this Chapter is an important tool for achieving Monticello's environmental sustainability and public health goals. Specific policies and strategies are included that advance an efficient land use and transportation pattern to reduce greenhouse gases and promote clean air and water, provide new mobility options, support local businesses, and is accessible and inclusive of persons of all ages, races and physical capabilities. This Chapter supports goals for economic sustainability consistent with the Economic Development Chapter. This Chapter also integrates transportation strategies recommended in the Mobility and Connectivity Chapter with an aim toward implementing a complete multi -modal transportation system. This Chapter introduces concepts that reinforce goals and strategies for other chapters of the Monticello 2040 Plan, including Parks, Pathways and Open Space and Community Character. TABLE 31- EXISTING LAND USEACREAGES (WITHIN CITYBOUNDARIES) CategoriesLand Use Acreage Residential (Single -Family, Twin and Townhomes, Multi -Family, Manufactured) 3,479 Agriculture 1,078 Vacant (Only Commercial and Industrial Designated Land) 1,112 Infrastructure (Railway, ROW, Utility) 465 Open Space (Natural Resources, Parks and Open Space) 457 Commercial 425 Industrial 194 Source: City of Monticello Geographic Information System (GIS) 2019 Existing Land Use Data Downtown Monticello Looking East on West Broadway Street 48 LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION GROWTH STRATEGY Monticello's growth strategy balances land use development needs with real estate market demand, and transportation and infrastructure improvement requirements to ensure an orderly and efficient use of land and resources. There is a significant amount of development potential within Monticello's existing municipal boundary and even greater potential in the surrounding MOAA. Therefore, for the next 20 years, the general growth strategy prioritizes development of remaining available vacant land within existing boundaries and the downtown and surrounding area before substantially developing and annexing land within the MOAA. The growth strategy has three objectives: Encourage growth which creates a strong and vibrant place to live, work, shop and recreate, with focused infill development and redevelopment to create a vibrant downtown and core community, development which provides a range of housing, employment and economic opportunity,• development which provides both a walkable community and safe multi -modal transportation options; and development which sustains and enhances the natural amenities of Monticello. • Support investment and reinvestment within the existing city boundary of Monticello, directing development into areas of Monticello already serviced or planned to be serviced by roads and utilities, while also thoughtfully designing and limiting development within and around sensitive natural areas. • Ensure the managed development of appropriate and compatible land uses which is resilient to shifts and changes in the economy, real estate market and consumer demand, and responds to a changing tax base. Briar Oakes Residential Property, Source: City of Monticello Another aspect of the growth strategy is the designation of significant portions of the MOAA as a Development Reserve. This is land reserved for an extended, longer-term growth horizon beyond 2040 and the time horizon of this Comprehensive Plan. However, some development in the MOAA is likely to occur before 2040 and Monticello should adjust its land use policies and decision- making with some measure of flexibility to accommodate new development proposals as they occur. As long as development proposals meet the overarching land use planning goals presented in this Comprehensive Plan, an amendment to the Plan is the proper procedure for consideration of such projects. Consideration for projects in the MOAA and annexation requests will follow the current annexation agreement parameters, or any future amendments to the agreement. Growth and development within the MOAA would naturally follow the existing roadway network and its potential for expansion as well as the availability of utility infrastructure, specifically sewer and water lines provided as City services. Specific projects will require analysis of utility and infrastructure needs, roadway network capacity, as well as land use compatibility. Given the MOAA's existing land area and its growth potential, its full development build -out would occur over a much longer time period, extending beyond the 20 -year timeline of this plan. Land in the Monticello Orderly Annexation Area 50 («(«(« LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION MINNESOTA STATUTES 2022 462.356 462.356 PROCEDURE TO EFFECT PLAN: GENERALLY. Subdivision 1. Recommendations for plan execution. Upon the recommendation by the planning agency of the comprehensive municipal plan or sections thereof, the planning agency shall study and propose to the governing body reasonable and practicable means for putting the plan or section of the plan into effect. Subject to the limitations of the following sections, such means include, but are not limited to, zoning regulations, regulations for the subdivision of land, an official map, a program for coordination of the normal public improvements and services of the municipality, urban renewal and a capital improvements program. Subd. 2. Compliance with plan. After a comprehensive municipal plan or section thereof has been recommended by the planning agency and a copy filed with the governing body, no publicly owned interest in real property within the municipality shall be acquired or disposed of, nor shall any capital improvement be authorized by the municipality or special district or agency thereof or any other political subdivision having jurisdiction within the municipality until after the planning agency has reviewed the proposed acquisition, disposal, or capital improvement and reported in writing to the governing body or other special district or agency or political subdivision concerned, its findings as to compliance of the proposed acquisition, disposal or improvement with the comprehensive municipal plan. Failure of the planning agency to report on the proposal within 45 days after such a reference, or such other period as may be designated by the governing body shall be deemed to have satisfied the requirements of this subdivision. The governing body may, by resolution adopted by two-thirds vote dispense with the requirements of this subdivision when in its judgment it finds that the proposed acquisition or disposal of real property or capital improvement has no relationship to the comprehensive municipal plan. History: 1965 c 670 s 6 Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes Planning Commission Agenda: 11/06/23 3B. Consideration of Planning Commission Resignation and Interview Meeting Prepared by: Meeting Date: Council Date Community Development Director 11/06/2023 (pending 3 yr 12/2024 Commission action): 12/2025 Council liaison TBD Additional Analysis by: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to accept the resignation of Eric Hagen from the Planning Commission and to call for a special meeting of the Commission on December 51", 2023 for interview and recommendation of a candidate. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to consider accepting the resignation of Planning Commissioner Eric Hagen. Mr. Hagen has indicated that his last regular meeting will be the December meeting. The open Commission position will be posted following the acceptance of Mr. Hagen's resignation. The Planning Commission is asked to call for a special meeting to interview candidates prior to their regular meeting on December 5, 2023. Current terms for the Commission are as follows. Other expiring term renewals will be considered on the December Commission agenda. Planning Commission (3 -year staggered terms) SUPPORTING DATA: Teri Lehner Eric Hagen Andrew Tapper Paul Konsor Melissa Robeck Charlotte Gabler A. City Code - Planning Commission 3 yr 12/2023 3 yr 12/2023 3 yr 12/2024 3 yr 12/2024 3 yr 12/2025 Council liaison PLANNING COMMISSION § 32.001 NAME OF THE COMMISSION. The name of the organization shall be the Monticello Planning Commission. (Prior Code, § 2-1-1) § 32.002 AUTHORIZATION. (A) The authorization for the establishment of this Commission is set forth under M.S. Ch. 462, Municipal Planning Enabling Act, as it may be amended from time to time. (B) The Planning Commission is hereby designated the planning agency of the city pursuant to the Municipal Planning Act. (Prior Code, § 2-1-2) § 32.003 MEMBERSHIP. The Planning Commission shall consist of five members appointed by the City Council. All members shall be residents of the city and shall have equal rights and privileges. (Prior Code, § 2-1-3) § 32.004 TERM OF OFFICE. (A) Appointments. All members shall be appointed for three-year terms ending on December 31 of a given year; however, the term may be terminated earlier by the City Council. Terms shall be staggered so that no more than two members' terms shall expire in a given year. The terms are to commence on the day of appointment by Council. Every appointed member shall, before entering upon the discharge of his or her duties, take an oath that he or she will faithfully discharge the duties of office. (B) Renewals. When an expiring member's term is up, such member may be reappointed by Council with the effective date of the new term beginning on the first day of the next year following the expiration. (Prior Code, § 2-1-4) § 32.005 ATTENDANCE. It is the City Council's intention to encourage Planning Commission members to attend all Planning Commission meetings. Should any Planning Commission member be absent for more than three meetings in a calendar year, that member may be subject to replacement by the Council. (Prior Code, § 2-1-5) § 32.006 VACANCY. Any vacancy in the regular or at -large membership shall be filled by the City Council, and such appointee shall serve for the unexpired term so filled. (Prior Code, § 2-1-6) § 32.007 OFFICERS. (A) Elections. The City Planning Commission shall elect at its January meeting from its membership a Chair, Vice Chair, and a Secretary who shall serve for a term of one year and shall have powers as may be prescribed in the rules of the Commission. (B) Duties of Chair. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Planning Commission and shall have the duties normally conferred and parliamentary usage of such officers. (C) Duties of Vice Chair. The Vice Chair shall act for the Chair in his or her absence. (D) Duties of Secretary. (1) A Secretary may be appointed who is not a member of the Planning Commission but can be employed as a member of city staff. (2) The Secretary shall keep the minutes and records of the Commission; and with the assistance of staff as is available shall prepare the agenda of the regular and special meetings for Commission members, arrange proper and legal notice of hearings when necessary, attend to correspondence of the Commission, and handle other duties as are normally carried out by a Secretary. (Prior Code, § 2-1-7) § 32.008 MEETINGS. (A) The Planning Commission shall hold at least one regular meeting each month. This meeting shall be held on the first Tuesday. Regular meeting times shall be established by the Commission and approved annually with the regular meeting schedule of Council and Commission. Hearings shall be heard as soon thereafter as possible. The Planning Commission shall adopt rules for the transaction of business and shall keep a record of its resolutions, transactions, and findings, which record shall be a public record. The meeting shall be open to the general public. (B) In the event of conflict for a regularly -scheduled meeting date, a majority at any meeting may change the date, time, and location of the meeting. (C) Special meetings may be called by the chair or two members of the Planning Commission together, as needed, and shall be coordinated with city staff. (Prior Code, § 2-1-8) § 32.009 QUORUM. A majority of all voting Planning Commission members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. (Prior Code, § 2-1-9) § 32.010 DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION. (A) The Commission has the powers and duties assigned to it under M.S. Ch. 462, Municipal Planning Enabling Act, as it may be amended from time to time, by this code, and state law. (Prior Code, § 2-1-10) (B) The Planning Commission shall act as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals for the Monticello zoning ordinance and shall act according to procedures as established by the Monticello zoning ordinance. § 32.011 AMENDMENTS. This subchapter may be amended as recommended by the majority vote of the existing membership of the Planning Commission and only after majority vote of the City Council. (Prior Code, § 2-1-11) § 32.012 COMPENSATION. Compensation of members of the Commission shall be as set forth in city code for fee schedule. (Prior Code, § 2-1-12) (Ord. 336, passed 11-22-1999; Ord. 337, passed 1-10-2011; Ord. 593, passed 3-10-2014; Ord. 607, passed 1-26-2015) Planning Commission Agenda —11/06/23 4A. Community Development Director's Report Council Action on/related to Commission Recommendations • Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Structures Exceeding 1,200 Square Feet in the R-2, Single & Two -Family Residential District. Applicant: Linn D. Jenson Approved on the October 23, 2023 City Council consent agenda. Consideration of a Request for Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Structures Exceeding 1,200 Square Feet in the R-1, Single -Family Residential District. Applicant: Chip Bauer Construction, Inc. Approved on the October 23, 2023 City Council consent agenda. Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello City Code, Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, including Section 153.067 — Off -Street Parking, related to Parking Area Surfacing Materials; Section 153.068 — Off -Street Loading Spaces, related to Surfacing Materials; Section 153.070— Building Materials, related to 1-2, Heavy Industrial District Building Materials and Finishing Standards; Section 153.092 — Accessory Use Standards, related to Accessory Use Outdoor Storage Standards. Applicant: Tim Flander/Big Bear Holdings, LLC. Application withdrawn. City is waiting on a submittal for concept stage PUD review. • Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Cross/Joint Parking Easement in the Riverfront Sub -District of the Central Community District (CCD). Applicant: City of Monticello Approved on the October 9, 2023 City Council consent agenda. • Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello City Code, Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, Section 153.012 — Definitions, as related to Public Building and Uses and Including Community Event Center. Applicant: City of Monticello Approved on the October 9, 2023 City Council agenda following discussion. • Consideration of an Amendment to the Monticello City Code, Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 153: Zoning Ordinance, Section 153.060 — Landscaping and Screening, for Standards Relating to Native Landscapes. Applicant: City of Monticello Approved on the October 9, 2023 City Council consent agenda. • Consideration of a Request for Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 150 -unit Multi -Family Residential Building in the B-3, Highway Business District. Applicant: Briggs Companies Approved on the October 23, 2023 City Council agenda following discussion. • Consideration of Adopting Resolution PC -2023-34, Finding the Proposed Acquisition of Certain Land by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority is Planning Commission Agenda —11/06/23 Consistent with the City of Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan (Comprehensive Plan). The EDA closed on the property at 216 Pine Street on October 31, 2023. Highway 25 Planning Open House Immediately prior to your regular meeting on MONDAY, November 6th, Wright and Sherburne Counties will be hosting an open house for the Highway 25 Area Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study here at the MCC. The open house is an opportunity to learn more about the study and gather feedback on transportation recommendations for the Highway 25 corridor area. Wright and Sherburne Counties are partnering to conduct the PEL study on Highway 25 between 1-94 and US 10. The study will look at the bigger picture to develop a plan for improving transportation through the corridor. More information on the TH 25 Planning and Environmental Linkage Study can be found at: Highway 25 Area PEL Study (arcgis.com) IEDC — Community Energy Transition During the November meeting of the IEDC, members will hear an update on Monticello's efforts to continue planning for a successful transition from an energy -based economy. Even as Xcel seeks relicensure of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, the City continues to implement strategies for lessening dependence on the MNGP tax base. The City has completed a Strategic Transition Plan, which is the foundation for that work. Housing Study Update MSA Professionals provided an overview of the Housing Study Update on October 26. Click here to access the full Housing Study Update. The Planning Commission is encouraged to review the full study, which provides an in-depth look at the current housing conditions in the community. The EDA will have a workshop in early 2024 to discuss housing priorities and strategies, using the study as a reference point. Project Update List November's updated project listing is attached. 2 Deephaven Apartments Residential 1255 Edmonson Ave NE 3 apartment buildings totalling 165 units 1/30/2020 Completed Take 5 Car Wash Commercial 4008 Deegan Court New construction car wash (4,146 sq ft) 9/27/2021 Completed Monticello Lakes Apartments Residential Southeast area of The Pointes at Cedar 2100 unit multi -family apartments 12/13/2021 Under Construction Runnings Expansion Commercial 3007th St W Expansion of current facility (13,962 sq ft) 12/13/2021 Completed Twin Pines Apartments Residential South Side of School Blvd. East of Wal-Mart 96 multi -family unit apartment building 2/28/2022 Yet to Break Ground Block 52 Redevelopment Mixed -Use NE Corner of Highway 25 and Broadway St 87 multi -family units with rougly 30,000 sq ft of 1st floor commercial 9/30/2022 Under Construction Featherstone 6th Addition Residential North of 85th St NE and West of Highway 25 21 Single-family lots with commercially guided outlots for future development 8/24/2022 Under Construction (Last New Const. Permit Pulled) Tesla Stations at Cub Foods Commercial 206 7th St W Installation of 8 charging ports in the Cub Foods parking lot 7/12/2022 Completed Taco Bell Remodel Commercial 124 7th St E Remodel of existing building and expansion of 724 sq ft 9/30/2022 Completed Haven Ridge 2nd Addition Residential South of Farmstead Ave and West of Fallon Ave NE 59 Single -Family Lot Development Reapproved 8/28/2023 Site Grading Headwaters West Development Residential Along South side of 7th St W between Elm St and Golf Course Rd 102 apartment unit & 60 townhome Senior 55+ Development 9/26/2022 Townhomes Under Construction Sunny Days Therapy Commercial Along South side of 7th St E West of Old McDonald's Location Development of an Occupational Child Therapy Facility 8/22/2022 Completed Camping World Commercial 3801 Chelsea Rd W Installation of an attached paint booth (1,100 sq ft) 8/22/2022 Under Construction Electro Industries Expansion Industrial 2150 River St Expansion of current facility (4,300 sq ft) 9/26/2022 Yet to Break Ground Wiha Tools USA Industrial Along South Side of 7th St E across from Wright St and Ramsey St New construction light manufacturing (72,540 sq ft) 11/28/2022 Under Construction Kwik Trip#345 Commercial 9440 State Highway 25 Expansion of current facility (520 sq ft) 1/23/2023 Completed Scooter's Coffee Commercial 1007th St W. New Construction of Drive Through Coffee Shop 1/23/2023 Completed Cargill Kitchens Solutions Industrial 206 W. 4th St. Replacement of Outdoor Storage Tanks 4/24/2023 Completed Deephaven 3 (Lot 2) Commercial Southeast corner of Cedar St and Chelsea Rd New Construction of a Clinic/Medical Service Facility (10,000 sq ft) N/A Under Construction Culver's 2nd Drive -Through Aisle Commercial 9395 State Highway 25 Addition of a 2nd Drive -Through Aisle along the South Property Line 7/24/2023 Yet to Break Ground