Planning Commission Minutes 06-03-2014MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, June 3rd, 2014 - 6 p.m., Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Brad Fyle, Sam Burvee, Charlotte Gabler, Grant Sala
Absent: Alan Heidemann
Others: Angela Schumann, Ron Hackenmueller, Lloyd Hilgart, Steve Grittman
1. Call to order
Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 6 p.m.
2. Citizen Comments None
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda None
4. Approval of Planning Commission minutes
a. Regular Meeting —April 1St, 24th, 2014
CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE APRIL 1sT, 2014 SPECIAL
MEETING MINUTES. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 4 -0.
b. Regular Meeting — May 6th, 2014
CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE
MAY 6TH, 2014 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES. SAM BURVEE FYLE
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0.
5. Consideration of a request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
changing a parcel from Places to Shop (Commercial) to Places to Live (Residential)
Applicant: City of Monticello
City Planner Steve Grittman outlined the issues and actions which prompted the request
to amend the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment would reguide the 12.7 acre
parcel, Outlot A, Monticello Commerce Center Seventh Addition, from commercial to
residential land use and establish a specific site to address the emerging multi- family
housing need in Monticello.
The request meets the criteria for approval for as required by Section 2.4 (A)(5) of the
zoning ordinance in that it addresses a changed condition and a community need; is
consistent with the guiding principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the
zoning ordinance; and is compatible with surrounding land uses and furthers a logical and
orderly development pattern of existing land use and infrastructure.
Planning Conunission Minutes: 6/03/14
During their discussion, Commissioner Gabler inquired whether the City could consider a
mixed use land use designation for the Comprehensive Plan which could be applied to
this property, which would allow a potential user to site both residential and commercial
uses on the property. Grittman indicated that in order to do so, the City would need to
develop language specific to such mixed use guidance within its Comprehensive Plan,
then consider whether it was appropriate for this site. Commissioner Gabler inquired
whether the application the City received had included only residential or commercial.
Grittman indicated that the application was residential.
Grittman explained that at present, mixed use is accommodated primarily with the
downtown area. Commissioner Gabler noted that the site could potentially support both
uses and that a mixed use guidance could offer the opportunity to leave the northern or
western portion of the site for a commercial node, with the southern portion for
residential. She stated she is considering how to achieve balance for commercial and
residential uses. Grittman noted that the request to re -guide had been initiated by the City
Council, but that the property owner through the public hearing had the opportunity to
provide comment on whether they would support a commercial or residential designation.
Grittman stated that the challenge in preparing the mixed use language would be to
distinguish why mixed use would be appropriate to areas outside of the downtown and
allowable in more suburban areas. He indicated that if the Commission was inclined to
look at mixed use guide planning for some of the transitional areas of the city, that staff
could prepare some background in that regard for a future meeting. He suggested,
however, that there is probably a reason that commercial activity hasn't developed on this
parcel and it would be less likely to do so if the property were further carved up.
Commissioner Gabler also inquired about impacts on sewer and water systems for the
areas. Grittman stated that the shift in comprehensive plan designation did note raise any
utility issues in staff's review and could likely reduce demand in some services.
Commissioner Gabler inquired about noise issues relative to the interstate. Grittman
stated that staff's understanding is that when MnDOT considers a major expansion
project for that section of the interstate, then noise impacts would be considered as part of
that project.
Commissioner Burvee inquired whether there had been any commercial interest in the
subject site. Grittman indicated that he was not aware of any requests for commercial use,
and none that had risen to the level of formal application.
Commissioner Sala asked if the application submitted was for development of the full
subject property. Grittman confirmed his understanding was that it did include the full
property, to be developed in phases. Commissioner Sala stated that the development of
residential on the site could spur interest in commercial as the project was phased.
Commission Chair Fyle explained that he had studied the location of the property and
surrounding uses and that he supported the change to residential with the understanding
that this could be a location of higher density housing. He noted the presence of the
F?
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
ponding on the west and park on east as buffers.
Commissioner Burvee noted that during previous Planning Commission and Council
workshop and public hearings related to the R -4, the consensus had been not to reguide or
rezone property for higher- density residential at that time, but rather to allow an
individual applicants or property owners to make a request. The Commissioners noted
that this property was discussed as a likely location for higher density residential.
Commissioners Sala and Burvee agreed. Commissioner Burvee commented that of all
locations within the community that could be possible sites, this site made the most sense
in terms of location and surrounding uses.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Grittman noted for the record that Monticello Independent School District Superintendent
Jim Johnson and Tim O'Connor, and Xcel Energy Senior Vice President and Chief
Nuclear Officer for the Monticello and Prairie Island nuclear plants had each submitted a
corporate letter of support for the amendment.
As there were no comments, the public hearing was closed.
BRAD FYLE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2014 -059 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE SUBJECT PARCEL
FROM PLACES TO SHOP TO PLACES TO LIVE. GRANT SALA SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0.
In considering land use changes, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan require a 4/5
vote of the City Council to proceed. If a rezoning action is eventually considered for the
property, a simple majority is necessary to rezone land from commercial to residential
zoning. As an advisory body, the Planning Commission may forward its
recommendation regardless of vote count.
6. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for Schools,
K -12 (Monticello Alternative Learning Program/Turning Point) in an IBC
(Industrial and Business Campus) District. Applicant: Colosimo, Mike /Monticello
Training Center, LLC, Planning Case Number: 2014 - 015
Steve Grittman summarized that the Monticello School District and the owners of the
property at 406 East 7' Street had requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a
school use within an Industrial and Business Campus (IBC) zoning district. The school's
Alternative Learning Program (ALP) has outgrown its current facility and are looking to
lease space in a building which would accommodate future expansion. ALP intends to
modify the interior of the west side of the building at the subject site and add a wall sign
to the exterior of the building.
3
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
This request meets the criteria for approval as required in Section 2.4(D)(4)(a) in that the
conditional use is compatible with existing property use and is without negative impact to
property values, development, or existing utilities. Parking supply and storage space available
at the proposed site is sufficient to meet code requirements and serve future program
expansion needs.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Joel Lundeen, representing the Monticello Public Schools, said that the School District
had been looking for a different facility for some time because the program is almost at
maximum capacity at the present site. The students are excited about the parking
availability. Lundeen said they'd been working with Barb Chafee, Director of Central
Minnesota Jobs and Training, making plans to partner with the Workforce Center. He
noted that they'd work with the architect to ensure that the wall sign designed by the
students meets requirements.
As there were no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2014 -058 TO
APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A SCHOOL
(MONTICELLO SCHOOL DISTRICT ALTERNATIVE LEARNING PROGRAM) IN
AN IBC, INDUSTRIAL AND BUSINESS CAMPUS DISTRICT BASED ON
FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION AND SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OUTLINED
IN THE RESOLUTION. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 4 -0.
EXHIBIT Z
Conditions for Approval
Conditional Use Permit for a K -12 School Use in an
IBC, Industrial and Business Campus District, 406 East 7th Street
Lauring Hillside Terrace, Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 2
Bus circulation and related drop- off /pick -up activities shall be addressed to the
satisfaction of the City.
2. Any new site signage shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Sign
ordinance and be subject to sign permit.
7. Public Hearing — Consideration of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit for
Planned Unit Development for an Outdoor Storage accessory use. Applicant:
AMAX Storage, Planning Case Number: 2014 - 025
Steve Grittman presented the request to amend the existing PUD regulating the AMAX
Storage facility located at 36 Dundas Road (Lot 1, Block 2) to allow for expansion to the
south property line to accommodate the storage, use and display of 12 -24 individual
temporary storage containers.
11
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
Grittman explained that, because the applicant is interested in acquiring property to the
south as it becomes available and expanding storage facility operations at that time, it is
reasonable to treat the request as an interim use under the existing PUD. He noted that
the applicant requested a 10 year interim use timeframe and proposed to forgo the
surfacing and screening improvements commonly required for outdoor storage within the
B -3 district. The applicant also asked that there be no setback from the property line.
Grittman described the storage containers and provided some detail about the proposed
placement on the property between an existing curb line and a block retaining wall to be
built near the property boundary. The top portion of the units would be visible to the
adjoining agricultural property and north -bound traffic. Future development on the
adjoining property would likely block the view of the storage units to north -bound traffic.
Grittman briefly reviewed issues related to proposed surface materials, screening,
drainage, retaining wall encroachment, and property line considerations and identified the
conditions of approval for the PUD as noted in Exhibit Z.
Grittman indicated that the proposed use is consistent with the intent of the zoning
ordinance and, in combination with future intended changes to the property, and that the
interim use under the PUD is justified.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
Amax Storage owner Glen Posusta, of 2330 Eastwood Circle, provided additional
information related to the request and responded to questions. He noted that the storage
facility is 100% occupied and that there is, at this time, no opportunity to expand the
facility to surrounding parcels. He indicated that he'd start with 12 storage units and
would expand to 24 units if the demand is there. He said that each unit is a well -made
steel product which costs over $4,000. He agreed to comply with conditions in Exhibit Z.
As there were no other comments, the public hearing was closed.
There was some discussion about how to define the containers due to the non - permanent
nature of off -site storage. The commissioners asked questions related to the local demand
for this type of storage and shared a concern that the containers may sit onsite long term.
In regard to the 6' setback requirement, Grittman stated that it is reasonable under an
interim use to forgo the improvement setback at this time and reevaluate the arrangement
when a larger expansion of the site occurs.
The overall consensus of the commission seemed to be to retain the 6 foot setback from
the property line as recommended by staff and to reduce the interim use period to 5 years.
SAM BURVEE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -060
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR PUD APPLICABLE TO THE AMAX STORAGE PLANNED UNIT
5
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
DEVELOPMENT, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION AND SUBJECT
TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 5 YEARS.
CHARLOTTE GABLER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION WAS CARRIED 4 -0.
EXHIBIT Z
Amendment to Planned Unit Development
Amax Storage, 36 Dundas Road, Lot 1, Block 2, Amax Addition
1. The amendment shall be treated as an interim use under the existing planned unit
development for a period not to exceed five (5) years, after which the site will require
a new amendment, and be returned to a condition in compliance with all applicable
zoning regulations in effect at that time.
2. The applicant shall mark and submit drainage and stormwater plans identifying catch
basin elevations and drainage patterns, in accordance with the requirements of the
City Engineer.
3. If the area designated for temporary storage units is vacant for a period of at least
twelve months, the amendment shall expire, and the property be returned to a surface
in accordance with zoning regulations.
4. No active business or other occupancy may be made of the temporary storage
buildings, with the exception of storage, and loading or unloading of said storage.
5. The applicant shall verify the type and material of the current surfacing for the
outdoor storage area. The material shall be sufficient to control dust.
6. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement as related to the retaining
wall and placement of outdoor storage within the existing southern drainage and
utility easement. The proposed storage units shall remain 6' from the property line.
7. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City specifying the
terms of the PUD, including the termination date as agreed to by the City Council.
8. Public Hearing — Consideration of amendments to the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance, Chapters and Sections as follows. Applicant: City of Monticello
Planning Case Number: 2014 -026
Angela Schumann briefly summarized the following proposed amendments to the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance. The majority of the amendments are housekeeping in
nature and were identified as a result of the zoning code's daily use and application.
• Chapter 2, Section 3 (G) — Pre Application Conferences
o Allows pre - application conferences as an optional meeting and deletes reference
to complete applications
• Chapter 2, Section 2 (G) —Administrative Adjustments
10
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
o Deletes section entirely as Administrative adjustments are variances and must be
treated as such via ordinance requirements
• Chapter 2, Section 4 (D) — Conditional Use Permits
o Changes expiration and time limits to one year consistent with past ordinance and
provides for one year consistency for all sections of the Time Limit provisions
• Chapter 3, Section 2 (B), Table 3 -1— Base Zoning Districts
o No change proposed; error corrected in previous amendment.
• Chapter 3, Section 3 (D) (2) — Allowable Yard Encroachments
o Adds reference to conservation easements
• Chapter 3, Section 4(F) —R-2 Single and Two - Family Residence District
o Re- instates language from the previous zoning ordinance which allowed for
varying square footage requirements per unit by unit type in the R -2 District and
increases the square footage requirements for duplex, townhome and multi - family
units. Schumann noted some corrections would need to be made to the chart prior
to finalization of the ordinance for the Council to reflect accurate density
calculations and lot width requirements. It was also noted that the requirement for
duplex and townhome units should be increased to 7,000 square feet per unit.
• Chapter 4, Section 3 (C) — General Requirements for Fences and Walls
o Adds a reference to conservation easements as a cue to reviewing staff that
conservations easements may exist on a given property and therefore may prohibit
structure encroachments
• Chapter 4, Section 3 (G) — Prohibited Fences
o Simplifies and clarifies code requirement pertaining to fence materials
0 ` Chieken e- €exc-es.
• Chapter 4, Section 5 — Signs
o Amends sign ordinance provide to provide clarity related to violations and
consistency for specific overlay district
I+, n P D, Planned 16;ni Development Disti4 t, signing restrietions shall bo 1-.ase
upon the individua4 eses and stfuetur-es eontained in the eawplex. Signs shall be in
whieh the use is allowed-.
• Chapter 4, Section 8 (F)(2) —Residential District Garage Requirements
o Provides consistency with accessory structure standards as identified in each
district in Chapter 3
• Chapter 4, Section 11(C) — Residential District Requirements
o Adds clarification to measurement of fagade area for purpose of calculating
required brick or stone in the (2) R -1 District and the (2) R -A and T -N Districts
• Chapter 5, Section I — Use Table, Table 5 -1, Uses by District
o Removes light industrial uses from commercial B -4 District
• Chapter 8, Section 4
o Amends definitions section add clarity to the two office use designations within
the 5 -1A CCD Use table
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing. Hearing no comments, the hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE
ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED, INCLUDING A CHANGE TO THE
TABLE IN CHAPTER 3, SECTION 4(F)(2) INCREASING THE MINIMUM LOT
AREA/UNIT FOR DUPLEX/TWO- FAMILY AND TOWNHOME TO 7,000 SQUARE
FEET, CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SERVE TO
CLARIFY EXISTING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS, AND SUPPORT
CONSISTENCY WITH CURRENT CITY REVIEW PROCESS AND, TO DIRECT
STAFF TO PREPARE THE REQUIRED ORDINANCE NO. 599 FOR
CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0.
9. Consideration of analysis related to Interim Ordinance #590, an Interim Ordinance
Allowing Places of Public Assembly on a Temporary Basis as a Principal or
Accessory Use in a B -3 (Highway Business) District
Steve Grittman summarized that the City Council had previously approved an interim
ordinance to allow Places of Public Assembly on a temporary basis (as a principal or
accessory use) in B -3 (Highway Business) Districts by Interim Use Permit (IUP) and a
specific IUP to allow Faith Family Life Center to lease space at the former Cornerstone
Chevrolet property located at 3939 Chelsea Road West. Grittman noted that staff had
evaluated the potential impact of a policy to consider changes to its land use controls
during this interim period.
Grittman suggested that adding Places of Public Assembly to the B -3 District would not
only expand the potential siting for such uses to much of the Highway 25 corridor but
also remove commercial land from the available stock of potential business locations. He
indicated that staff do not recommend permanently amending the ordinance because such
outcomes conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
There was some discussion about issues surrounding specialized zoning districts and
overlay districts designed to accommodate locating religious institutions. Grittman noted
that such uses were excluded from the B -3 and B -4 Districts as these districts serve more
of a regional than local population.
Grittman clarified that, if the City is satisfied with allowing Places of Public Assembly
only in the B -2 and CCD Districts, it would not be necessary to amend the ordinance. The
interim ordinance and IUP would expire in August if no action were taken.
BRAD FYLE MOVED TO DENY CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
AMENDMENT, TO PERMIT THE CURRENT INTERIM ORDINANCE TO EXPIRE
AT THE END OF AUGUST 2014, AND TO DIRECT PREPARATION OF A
RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS. SAM BURVEE SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 3 -1 WITH CHARLOTTE GABLER VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
(Gabler stated she preferred to amend the zoning ordinance to allow Places of Public
Assembly as a conditional use in the B -3 zoning district.)
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
Grittman said that allowing the interim ordinance to expire would not preclude bringing a
request forward in the future. The Planning Commission recommendation will move
forward for City Council consideration.
10. Community Development Director's Report
Variance Request — The Planning Commission asked questions but made no
recommendation in response to a recommendation by the Wright County Planning &
Zoning staff as related to a request for variance to increase the height and size of a
detached structure within the Monticello Orderly Annexation Area (MOAA).
Bertram Park — The City is scheduled to close on the purchase of Bertram Park property
(including the beach at Bertram Lake and the first of the athletic complexes) on June 3rd
Schumann provided an update on grant applications and a proposal to use a portion of the
City's biosolids property. There may be some Comprehensive Plan work to be done to
reguide the property to Places to Recreate.
25175 Intersection Improvements — Staff continue to address issues related to the
proposed removal of on- street parking as proposed in the final buildout of intersection
improvements from Broadway to Walnut in the downtown.
Block 34 — Staff has met with interested developers and will work with EDA to
determine the best option for moving forward with downtown redevelopment.
Land Use Basics Training — Staff will schedule a special Planning Commission meeting
for 4:30 p.m. on July I st. The purpose of the meeting is to participate in land use basics
training. Those who are unable to attend the meeting will have an opportunity to
participate in the training individually online.
Call for a Public Hearing — Staff explained that Xcel Energy had requested that the
Planning Commission expedite review of their upcoming development request.
CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON
TUESDAY, JULY 22, 2014 CONTINGENT ON XCEL ENERGY'S APPLICATION
FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE REQUEST. GRANT SALA
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0.
Building Department Report — Building Official Ron Hackenmueller will present the
annual Building Department report to the City Council at its June 9"' meeting.
Truck Parking — Staff will look into an ongoing parking issue at Broadway Market.
11. Adjourn
CHARLOTTE GABLER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:21 PM. SAM
BURVEE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0.
Planning Commission Minutes: 6/03/14
Recorder: Kerry Burri —P)
Approved: October 7, 2014 f; /
Attest:
An&-la -Sch�V, Community Development Director
10