Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 11-04-2009MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION — SPECIAL MEETING November 4th, 2009 6:00 PM Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, William Spartz, and Barry Voight Council Liaison: Susie Wojchouski Staff: Angela Schumann, Gary Anderson, Steve Grittman — NAC 2. Call to order. Chairman Dragsten called the meeting to order and declared a quorum of the Commission, noting the absence of Commissioner Hilgart and presence of Council liaison Wojchouski. St MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18% 2009. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5 -0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMEBER 22 °a, 2009. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED, 5 -0. 3. Citizen Comments. Bob Grabinski, 1610 Oak Ridge Court, addressed the Commission regarding setbacks on comer lots. Grabinski explained that he is trying to build a garage and the current code requires him to be 20 feet from the property line. He stated he will be 40 feet from the County Road. He commented that there should be two different rules, one for corner lots on City streets and one for comer lots on County Roads. Chairman Dragsten inquired if Grabinski had spoken with staff regarding the variance process. Grabinski responded that he had spoken with staff but had some concern regard the fees for that process. Grabinski asked for clarification on those fees. Community Development Director Schumann explained that each year the Council adopts fees for various planning applications, including those for variance. There is a basic non- refundable fee for a variance. This fee covers the costs for publication in the newspaper and the mailed notification of surrounding property owners. There is also an escrow deposit required. That amount varies based on the type of application and is used to cover the staff and consultant costs to review the application in relationship to the ordinance and to prepare a report for the Planning Commission and City Council. Schumann indicated that final costs for these services are reconciled against the deposit, and the applicant will either receive a refund or an invoice, depending on the costs involved. Grabinski asked the Commission to consider reviewing the setback issue for corner lots. Grabinski explained that the County has no problem with the proposed placement of his garage, but the City regulations actually apply. Dragsten inquired about Grabinski's timeline. He indicated he would likely apply in the spring. 4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. NONE. 5. Consideration of a request to table action on an amendment to Planned Unit Development to allow application of R -1 Zoning District Standards in an R -lA Zoning District. Applicant: Pearson, Robert Schumann reported that applicant Robert Pearson had provided a written request to table action on his request. Pearson indicated that he would be completing additional research and would provide that information along with request for action in the future. Dragsten noted that two of the Commission members met with Mr. Pearson the previous week and discussed his request. At the conclusion of the discussion, Pearson indicated he would do some additional background work and prepare the information for a future review by the Commission. MOTION BY COMMISISONER VOIGHT TO TABLE ACTION ON THE ITEM UNTIL FURTHER ACTION IS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED, 4 -0. 6. Public Forum — Monticello Zoning Ordinance Revision Chairman Dragsten introduced the Public Forum for the Zoning Ordinance Revision. The Chairman stated that the City had been making incremental improvements to its development process over the past few years. He cited the completion of the Comprehensive Plan and the changes to the development process. He also noted the completion of the natural Resource Inventory and the recent update to the Sign ordinance. As part of the continued improvements, Dragsten explained that at this time, the City is looking at clarifying and streamlining the Zoning Ordinance as a whole. Community Development Director Schumann welcomed those in attendance and those watching the program. She indicated that the public forum would be the first in a series of public events aimed at engaging the community in the zoning ordinance revision process. She stated that the City has often struggled with portions of its ordinance, for a variety of reasons. When the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan in 2008, the plan outlined a series of next steps, which included the updating of the zoning ordinance. The ordinance needed to be revised to not only be consistent with the updated Comp Plan, but also needed to be more user - friendly. Schumann stated that while the Comprehensive Plan guides long range land use for the City, it is the Zoning Ordinance which controls actual development. It is the tool that planning staff use most often. Schumann indicated that the City expects the process to be a highly participatory process that will take approximately one year. The process will effectively take the existing code apart and put it back together. The process will be guided by a Steering Committee made up of the five Planning Commissioners and two City Council members and will include the input from community members throughout the process. Schumann turned the forum over to Ben Gozola and Bill Weber of MFRA, the City's Zoning Ordinance Revision project consultant. Ben Gozola, representing MFRA, welcomed the attendees. Gozola stated that he would be discussing the project's purpose, timeline, guiding themes, code structure overview and then conclude with an open forum for individual questions and comment. Gozola explained that in part, the project is being completed due to the fact that the current ordinance that was last comprehensively updated 30 years ago. The ordinances are cobbled together, with amendments put in inappropriate places, and numerous formatting challenges. This process is intended to address these concerns and those that are important to citizens. In terms of a timeline, Gozola stated that issues will be identified, then a framework for the new code will be presented in outline form. That portion is expected to be completed in November. Then the code will be updated in three phases. From November through December, the administrative sections will be completed. After that, the zoning districts and uses allowed throughout the community will be reviewed. Finally, the finishing standards, such as signs, landscaping and parking will be reviewed. This process will be followed by a series of public hearings and the adoption of the code. Gozola reviewed the guiding themes of the project, which were developed in conjunction with policymakers, staff and the Steering Committee. Five major themes came out of this analysis. First is the achievement of goals and visions of the comp plan through the code. Second, the improvement of the overall organization of the code and making the code more user - friendly. This will be accomplished through illustrations, graphics and other format changes. Third, to improve review procedures. For this item, Gozola stated that they will look at the public's experiences in going through a planning process. The goal will be to clearly indentify and convey the steps in the process, which review bodies are involved, and how long the process will take. Fourth, the code will modernize zoning districts and allowable uses. Gozola indicated that the existing code "cascades ", which requires that users refer back through the districts to figure out what might be allowed in their district. The new code will utilize charts and illustrations and be very illustrative in district requirements. It will provide a table that allows a user to easily scan through to find their allowable use. Lastly, theme five will be the improvements of development standards. Again, the question will be asked — "what issue has the public experience and how can we improve existing regulations as the code is constructed ?" In terms of the structure, Gozola stated that the Zoning Code will be condensed from 33 chapters into 8 easy to understand chapters. Chapter I will include general provisions, including the legal foundations. Chapter 2 will cover application reviews and procedures. Chapter 3 will be focused on the zoning districts. Chapter 4 will be the finishing standards. Chapter 5 will be use standards. Chapter 6 will deal with non - conformities. Chapter 7 will outline enforcement procedures. Chapter 8 will be a reference section, including the definitions section. Gozola reviewed the three primary phases. He stated that the first task will be the administrative sections which include chapters 1, 2, 7 and 8. The second task will be undertaken from December through March and will include districts and uses, chapters 3 and 4. Finally, chapters 5 and 6, finishing standards and non - conformities, will be addressed. Gozola cited some examples of items that would be changed within the code document, including basic formatting changes such as headings at the top of each page and the addition of charts and tables. Each of these items will be geared toward improving the ability to use the document. Gozola noted that staff and the Steering Committee have already identified 44 individual goals from the Comprehensive Plan that need to be addressed in addition to 83 general issues within the code itself. During the next portion of the meeting, we hope to take your comments on these items as well as any other comments from the public. Again, the goal is to create a very inclusive process. This process will include 11 Steering Committee meetings, 3 meetings with the IEDC, 1 meeting with the EDA, three open forums and three public hearings. Additionally, MFRA will be setting up an email distribution list for project updates and input. The meeting broke into an informal period for individual questions and comments. 7. Adiourn. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO ADJOURN. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED, 5 -0. ecord