Planning Commission Agenda 02-02-2016
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 2nd, 2016 - 6:00 p.m.
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Commissioners: Brad Fyle, Linda Buchmann, Sam Murdoff, John Falenschek,
Marc Simpson
Council Liaison: Charlotte Gabler
Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), John Rued
1. General Business
A. Call to Order
B. Consideration of approving minutes
a. Special Meeting Minutes – January 5th, 2016
b. Regular Meeting Minutes – January 5th, 2016 (to be provided)
C. Citizen Comments
D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda
2. Public Hearings
A. Continued Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, Section 1 – Use Table, Section 2 – Use-
Specific Standards, Section 3 – Accessory Use Standards and Chapter 8, Section 4
– Definitions for amendments regulating Massage Therapy
Applicant: City of Monticello
B. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use
Permit for commercial lodging building addition in the B-3 (Highway Business)
Zoning District as per Chapter 3.5(E) and Chapter 5.2(F)(8) of the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance and Consideration of a request for sideyard building setback
variance as per Chapter 3.5(E) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance
Applicant: Seifert, Joe/Miller Architects & Builders
C. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use
Permit in the R-A (Residential Amenities) Zoning District for wireless telecomm
service antennae as per Chapter 4.13(G) Telecommunication Towers and Antennas
of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance
Applicant: Richter, Kristine/Black & Veatch
3. Regular Agenda
A. Consideration of an update on the Monticello Comprehensive Plan
B. Consideration of the Community Development Directors Report
4. Added Items
5. Adjournment
1
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 5th, 2016 - 4:30 PM - Academy Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Brad Fyle, Linda Buchmann, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson, John Falenschek
Absent: Charlotte Gabler (Council Liaison)
Others: Angela Schumann, John Rued, Kerry Burri
1. Call to Order
Brad Fyle called the special meeting to order at 4:37 p.m.
2. Purpose
The purpose of the special meeting is to provide foundational training in a workshop
setting for the Planning Commission.
3. Workshop
The Planning Commission reviewed “Land Use Basics: Grasping the Ground Rules,” a
webinar developed by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of its City Learning Point
online training series. The course was designed to help clarify the role and authority of
cities in regulating land use.
Commissioners responded to the scenarios presented in the webinar and shared
perspectives about the challenges involved in considering land use issues. Staff asked that
the commissioners review the course online independently and earn a certificate of
completion to document their participation.
4. Adjourn
BRAD FYLE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 5:55 PM. MARC
SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
Recorder: Kerry Burri ___
Approved:
Attest: ___________________________________________
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 5th, 2016 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Brad Fyle, Linda Buchmann, Sam Murdoff, John Falenschek, Marc Simpson
Absent: None
Others: Angela Schumann, John Rued, Charlotte Gabler, Steve Grittman (NAC),
Chuck Rickart (WSB)
1. General Business
A. Call to Order
Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
B. Approve minutes
SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO APPROVE THE DECEMBER 5TH, 2015
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES. JOHN FALENSCHEK SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
C. Citizen Comments None
D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda
● Consideration of a recommendation related to the appointment of City Planner
(Schumann)
2. Public Hearings
A. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 5(I) – Temporary Signs
Angela Schumann outlined temporary sign provisions included within the existing
ordinance, interim ordinance provisions and those currently proposed for
amendment. She pointed out that extending the interim ordinance timeframe had
provided ample opportunity to evaluate its impact and to develop provisions for
amending the existing ordinance. The provisions proposed for amendment were
developed based on analysis of previous staff recommendations, permit data,
primary enforcement issues, feedback from the business community, as well as a
review of regulations in place in other communities.
Schumann noted that the amendments proposed retain some of the flexibility
established within the interim ordinance. She also suggested that the proposed
amendments provide an opportunity to educate applicants about public safety
concerns and aesthetic impacts related to placing temporary signage within rights-
of-way and easements.
Planning Commission Minutes: 1/05/16
2
Schumann summarized the following provisions proposed for amendment:
One temporary sign allowed per business; located on the parcel on which the
business is located
When multiple temporary signs are permitted per parcel, such signs are to be
spaced 75 lineal feet apart;
two multi-day permits not to exceed a total of 120 days per business per
calendar year;
area not to exceed 40 square feet;
sign may be used on a vacant parcel adjacent to a parcel occupied by an
active and permitted principal use when properties are commonly owned.
Brad Fyle opened the public hearing.
River City Signs owner Pat Sawatzke agreed that it is time to amend the existing
temporary sign ordinance rather than extend the interim ordinance again. He
suggested that doing so would help to ensure that temporary sign rental customers
understand the regulations in place without the need for extensive clarification.
Sawatzke noted his concern that the proposed amendments would limit opportunities
for non-profits to publicize community events. He also asked about the option of
waiving permit fees for such organizations.
Schumann pointed out that community informational signage is addressed as an
additional separate allowance within the code. She noted that it would be useful to
review the community informational signage code language for amendment as well.
Schumann suggested that Building Department staff might provide input related to
fees for non-profits should the matter be presented for Council consideration.
Sawatzke commended staff for efforts to address the temporary signage needs of the
business community. He asked if new businesses would still be allowed additional
days for temporary sign usage. Schumann confirmed that provision is included
within the existing ordinance. Though Sawatzke indicated that he would prefer a 150
day use allowance, he suggested that increasing the number of temporary sign
permits allowed would provide additional flexibility for those with varied signage
usage needs.
As there were no further public comments, the hearing was closed.
The commissioners specifically discussed options for allowing additional permits.
LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL
THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 629 AMENDING MONTICELLO
ZONING ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 5(I) – TEMPORARY SIGNS,
WITH A REVISED ALLOWANCE OF UP TO A TOTAL OF FOUR PERMITS
PER CALENDAR YEAR OR UNTIL 120 DAYS ARE REACHED
Planning Commission Minutes: 1/05/16
3
CUMULATIVELY, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST, BASED ON FINDINGS
THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WILL:
a. PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE;
b. MAINTAIN, ENHANCE AND IMPROVE THE AESTHETIC
ENVIRONMENT OF THE CITY BY PREVENTING VISUAL
CLUTTER THAT IS HARMFUL TO THE APPEARANCE OF THE
COMMUNITY;
c. IMPROVE THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE CITY WHILE
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE MEANS OF COMMUNICATION,
CONSISTENT WITH CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES AND THE
CITY'S GOALS OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND AESTHETICS.
SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION.MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
B. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, Section 1 – Use Table, Section 2 – Use-Specific
Standards, Section 3 – Accessory Use Standards and Chapter 8, Section 4 –
Definitions for amendments regulating Massage Therapy Applicant: City of
Monticello
MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO TABLE ACTION AND CONTINUE THE
PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO THE
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 5, SECTION 1 – USE
TABLE, SECTION 2 – USE-SPECIFIC STANDARDS, SECTION 3 –
ACCESSORY USE STANDARDS AND CHAPTER 8, SECTION 4 –
DEFINITIONS FOR AMENDMENTS REGULATING MASSAGE THERAPY TO
THE FEBRUARY 2ND, 2016 REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
C. Public Hearing – Consideration to recommend for the adoption the 2016 City
of Monticello Official Zoning Map
Angela Schumann explained that the proposed 2016 Official City Zoning Map
includes the rezoning related to Ordinance No. 614 – Rezoning First Lake
Substation from A-O (Agriculture-Open Space) to I-1 (Light Industrial) and
corrects an error to reflect R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) zoning for
some duplex unit parcels in the River Mill neighborhood. There have been no
changes to the Shoreland Overlay District since the map was last adopted.
SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2016-001
RECOMMENDING THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 631 FOR THE 2016
CITY OF MONTICELLO OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, INCLUDING
SHORELAND/FLOODPLAIN COMPANION MAP, BASED ON THE FINDINGS
IN SAID RESOLUTION. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Planning Commission Minutes: 1/05/16
4
MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
3. Regular Agenda
A. Consideration of election of officers for 2016
LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER BRAD FYLE AS
CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2016. MARC SIMPSON
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER SAM
MURDOFF AS VICE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2016.
JOHN FALENSCHEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
B. Consideration of an update on the Monticello Comprehensive Plan –
Transportation
Schumann explained that the Planning Commission typically reviews the 2008
Comprehensive Plan and recommends amendments as needed on an annual basis.
She indicated that the commission would review and consider the Transportation
Plan (Chapter 6) in January and conduct a core review of the Plan in February.
Chuck Rickart reported on the status of capital improvement projects included
within the Transportation Plan. He provided project updates related to Interchange
Planning, TH 25/CSAH 75 Intersection Improvements, TH 25/7th Street Intersection
and Streetscape Improvements, Fallon Avenue Overpass, 95th Street Extension, and
the TH Corridor Coalition.
Steve Grittman presented an overview and responded to questions and comments
related to the land use concept development component of the Interchange Planning
study. He explained that the purpose of this component of the study is to identify
land use patterns which will be used to develop traffic generation estimates needed
to more fully describe interchange scenarios. The four interchange scenarios are:
Orchard Road, County Road 39, Orchard Road and County Road 39, and a no build
scenario.
C. Community Development Director’s Report
Planning Commission Survey 2016 - Survey responses due by January 5th
Status of Planning Commission Recommendations - The City Council approved
amending the Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development for
Monticello Big Lake Community Hospital District Campus (CentraCare Health
Monticello) for continued use of an accessory heliport. Applicant: CentraCare
Health System. Council also approved the site plan and development agreement
contract amendment for the Auto Zone retail store
Planning Commission Minutes: 1/05/16
5
4. Added Items
● Consideration of a recommendation related to the appointment of City Planner
(Schumann)
LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE APPOINTMENT OF
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. (NAC) AS THE 2016
CITY PLANNER. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) Alternate Representative (Fyle) – Brad
Fyle asked commissioners to consider acting as alternate Planning Commission
representative to the TAC. The TAC meets at 7:30 a.m. the 2nd Thursday of each
month.
5. Adjourn
SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:58 PM. LINDA
BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
Recorder: Kerry Burri __
Approved:
Attest: ____________________________________________
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/2016
1
2A. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, Section 1 – Use Table, Section 2 – Use-Specific
Standards, Section 3 – Accessory Use Standards and Chapter 8, Section 4 –
Definitions for amendments regulating Massage Therapy. Applicant: City of
Monticello (AS)
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
The City Council has called for a public hearing by the Planning Commission on
amendments to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance as related to Massage Therapy and
other Personal Services. In January, the Planning Commission tabled action on the
item and continued the public hearing to allow staff time to develop additional
information and a recommendation relating to the item.
In terms of zoning regulations, massage therapy is currently included within the use
classification of “Personal Services” in the Zoning Ordinance and regulated as such
for land use purposes.
City staff have received an increasing number of inquiries over the past few years
related to massage therapy in terms of both its allowance under zoning regulations
and any required City licensing requirements.
In research involved in responding to inquiries on these types of uses, City staff have
learned that the State of Minnesota does not currently have a statewide licensing
program for this type of activity. Minnesota is one only five states which does not
have such a licensing program. In lieu of a statewide licensing program, many cities
have adopted their own licensing programs. At this time, the City of Monticello does
not have a city code establishing a licensing requirement and program for message
therapy.
In adoption of licensing codes, other Minnesota cities have cited health, safety and
welfare as the basis for such licensing ordinances. The adoption of massage therapy
licensing ordinances has allowed cities to take a more proactive approach in
regulating massage therapy as a legitimate business practice, serving as a tool to
prevent or discourage businesses which may engage in illegal activity under the
auspices of massage therapy.
Establishing a licensing program would be a City Council consideration and occur
through adoption of a City code amendment, separate from the zoning ordinance.
The licensing program may include regulations for required education, inspection and
general operational requirements, such as hours of operation. These licensing
programs also require compliance with zoning ordinances.
The Monticello City Council will be considering the adoption of a massage therapy
licensing ordinance on February 8th, 2016.
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/2016
2
Whether the City wishes to adopt a licensing program, the City may also consider
distinguishing massage therapy from other “Personal Services” within the zoning
ordinances. This would require a zoning ordinance amendment to establish the use
classification and to determine the additional land use standards and review processes
for such uses.
For Planning Commission’s purposes, after review of the licensing program being
developed for Council consideration, staff’s recommendation at this time is to allow
the licensing ordinance to move forward for analysis prior to consideration or
adoption of separate zoning ordinance amendments.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to recommend no action on this item at this time.
2. Motion to table for additional information.
3. Motion of other.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends no action related to zoning ordinance amendments at this time.
Rather, staff would propose allowing the City licensing program to be considered by
City Council, with analysis of the program if adopted, prior to consideration of
zoning ordinances specific to massage therapy uses.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Excerpt, Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Sections 5.1 and 8.4
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
Section 5.1 Use Table
Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 315
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
5.1 Use Table
(A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
(1) Organization of Table 5-1
Table 5-1 organizes all principal uses by Use Classifications and Use Types.
(a) Use Classifications
The Use Classifications are: Agricultural Uses; Residential Uses; Civic and
Institutional Uses; Office Use; Commercial Uses; and Industrial Uses. The
Use Classifications provide a systematic basis for assigning present and future
land uses into broad general classifications (e.g., residential and commercial
uses). The Use Classifications then organize land uses and activities into
specific “Use Types” based on common functional, product, or physical
characteristics, such as the type and amount of activity, the type of customers
or residents, how goods or services are sold or delivered and site conditions.
(b) Use Types
The specific Use Types identify the specific uses that are considered to fall
within characteristics identified in the use Classifications. For example;
detached dwellings, parks and recreational areas, and schools are “Use Types”
in the Single Family Residence District.
(2) Symbols used in Table 5-1
(a) Permitted Uses = P
A “P” indicates that a use is permitted by right, subject to compliance with all
other applicable provisions of this ordinance. Uses may be subject to special
regulations as referenced in the “Additional Requirements” column.
(b) Conditionally Permitted Uses = C
A “C” indicates that a use is permitted provided the City can establish
conditions necessary to ensure the use is compatible to the proposed location
and surrounding properties. Inability of the City to establish conditions to
adequately control anticipated impacts is justification for denial of a
conditionally permitted use. Conditional Uses may also be subject to special
regulations as referenced in the “Additional Requirements” column.
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
Section 5.1 Use Table
Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
Page 316 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
(c) Interim Permitted Uses = I
An “I” indicates that a use may be permitted for a brief period of time
provided certain conditions are met, and a specific event or date can be
established for discontinuance of the use. Inability of the City ]o establish
conditions to adequately control anticipated impacts is justification for denial
of an interim permitted use. Interim Permitted Uses may also be subject to
special regulations as referenced in the “Additional Requirements” column.
(d) Prohibited Uses = Shaded Cells
A shaded cell indicates that the listed use is prohibited in the respective base
zoning district.
(e) Unlisted Uses
If an application is submitted for a use that is not listed in Table 5-1, the
Community Development Department is authorized to classify the new or
unlisted use into an existing Use Type that most closely fits the new or
unlisted use. If no similar use determination can be made, the use will be
considered prohibited in which case an amendment to the ordinance text
would need to be initiated to clarify if, where, and how a proposed use could
be established.
TABLE 5-1: USES BY DISTRICT
Use Types
“P” = Permitted
“C” = Conditionally
Permitted
“I” = Interim Permitted
Base Zoning Districts
Additional
Requirements A
O
R
A
R
1
R
2
T
N
R
3
R
4
M
H
B
1
B
2
B
3
B
4
C
C
D
I
B
C
I
1
I
2
Agricultural Uses
Agriculture P P P P P P P P P P P P
*SE
E
T
A
B
L
E
5
-1A
P P P 5.2(B)(1)
Agricultural Sales P 5.2(B)(2)
Community Gardens P P P P P P P P P 5.2(B)(3)
Stables C 5.2(B)(4)
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
Section 5.1 Use Table
Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 317
TABLE 5-1: USES BY DISTRICT (cont.)
Use Types
“P” = Permitted
“C” = Conditionally
Permitted
“I” = Interim Permitted
Base Zoning Districts
Additional
Requirements A
O
R
A
R
1
R
2
T
N
R
3
R
4
M
H
B
1
B
2
B
3
B
4
C
C
D
I
B
C
I
1
I
2
Residential Uses 5.2(C)(1)
Attached Dwelling Types 5.2(C)(2)(a)
- Duplex P C
*SE
E
T
A
B
L
E
5-1A
5.2(C)(2)(b)
- Townhouse C P 5.2(C)(2)(c)
- Multiple-Family C P C C 5.2(C)(2)(d)
Detached Dwelling P P P P P P None
Group Residential
Facility, Single Family P P P P P 5.2(C)(3)
Group Residential
Facility, Multi-Family C C C 5.2(C)(3)
Mobile & Manufactured
Home / Home Park C C C P C 5.2(C)(4)
Civic & Institutional Uses
Active Park Facilities
(public) P P P P P P P P P P P P
*SE
E
T
A
B
L
E
5-1A
P P P None
Active Park Facilities
(private) P P P P P P P 5.2(D)(1)
Assisted Living Facilities C P C 5.2(D)(2)
Cemeteries C C C C C C C 5.2(D)(3)
Clinics/Medical Services C P P C None
Essential Services P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P None
Hospitals C P P C 5.2(D)(4)
Nursing/Convalescent
Home C C C C C C C C C P P 5.2(D)(5)
Passenger Terminal C C C C None
Passive Parks and Open
Space P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P None
Place of Public Assembly C C C C C P C 5.2(D)(6)
Public Buildings or Uses C C C C C C C P C C P P C P P 5.2(D)(7)
Schools, K-12 C C C C C C I I 5.2(D)(8)
Schools, Higher
Education C None
Utilities (major) C C C 5.2(D)(9)
Office Uses
Offices P P C P * P P P 5.2(E)
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
Section 5.1 Use Table
Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
Page 318 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
TABLE 5-1: USES BY DISTRICT (cont.)
Use Types
“P” = Permitted
“C” = Conditionally
Permitted
“I” = Interim Permitted
Base Zoning Districts
Additional
Requirements A
O
R
A
R
1
R
2
T
N
R
3
R
4
M
H
B
1
B
2
B
3
B
4
C
C
D
I
B
C
I
1
I
2
Commercial Uses
Adult Uses
*SE
E
T
A
B
L
E
5-1A
P P 3.7(K)
Auction House C 5.2(F)(2)
Auto Repair – Minor C C P P 5.2(F)(3)
Automotive Wash Facilities P C 5.2(F)(4)
Bed & Breakfasts C C C C C 5.2(F)(5)
Boarding House C 5.2(F)(6)
Brew Pub P P 5.2(F)(7)
Business Support Services P P P P P None
Commercial Lodging C P P 5.2(F)(8)
Communications/Broadcasting P P P P 5.2(F)(9)
Convenience Retail C P P P 5.2(F)(10)
Country Club C 5.2(F)(11)
Day Care Centers C C P P C 5.2(F)(12)
Entertainment/Recreation,
Indoor Commercial P C C C 5.2(F)(13)
Entertainment/Recreation,
Outdoor Commercial C C C C 5.2(F)(14)
Financial Institution P C P 5.2(F)(15)
Funeral Services P P 5.2(F)(16)
Kennels (commercial) C 5.2(F)(17)
Landscaping / Nursery
Business P 5.2(F)(18)
Personal Services C P P P P P 5.2(F)(22)
Production Brewery or
Micro-Distillery without
Taproom
P P 5.2(G)(10)
Production Brewery or
Micro-Distillery with
Taproom or Cocktail Room
C C C C C 5.2(F)(24)
5.2(G)(11)
Recreational Vehicle Camp
Site C C 5.2(F)(25)
Repair Establishment C P P 5.2(F)(26)
Restaurants C P P 5.2(F)(27)
Retail Commercial Uses
(other) P P P 5.2(F)(28)
Specialty Eating
Establishments C P P P 5.2(F)(29)
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
Section 5.1 Use Table
Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 319
TABLE 5-1: USES BY DISTRICT (cont.)
Use Types
“P” = Permitted
“C” = Conditionally
Permitted
“I” = Interim Permitted
Base Zoning Districts
Additional
Requirements A
O
R
A
R
1
R
2
T
N
R
3
R
4
M
H
B
1
B
2
B
3
B
4
C
C
D
I
B
C
I
1
I
2
Vehicle Fuel Sales C C C
SE
E
T
A
B
L
E
5
-1A
5.2(F)(30)
Vehicle Sales and Rental C C 5.2(F)(31)
Veterinary Facilities
(Rural) C 5.2(F)(32)
Veterinary Facilities
(Neighborhood) C C C 5.2(F)(32)
Wholesale Sales P P P None
Industrial Uses
Auto Repair – Major C
*SE
E
T
A
B
L
E
5-1A
P P 5.2(G)(1)
Bulk Fuel Sales and
Storage P P 5.2(G)(2)
Contractor's Yard,
Temporary I I I 5.2(G)(3)
Extraction of Materials I I I 5.2(G)(4)
General Warehousing C C P P 5.2(G)(5)
Heavy Manufacturing C 5.2(G)(6)
Industrial Services C P None
Land Reclamation C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 5.2(G)(7)
Light Manufacturing P P P 5.2(G)(8)
Machinery/Truck Repair
& Sales P P 5.2(G)(9)
Recycling and Salvage
Center C C 5.2(G)(10)
Self-Storage Facilities P C P 5.2(G)(11)
Truck or Freight
Terminal C P P 5.2(G)(12)
Waste Disposal &
Incineration C 5.2(G)(13)
Wrecker Services C P 5.2(G)(14)
TABLE 5-1A: CENTRAL COMMUNITY DISTRICT (CCD) USES
Use Types
“P” = Permitted
“C” = Conditionally Permitted
“I” = Interim Permitted
Sub-Districts
Exceptions Additional
Requirements F-1 F-2 F-3 L
Brew Pub P P P P none 5.2(F)(7)
Commercial Day Care C C C C none 5.2(F)(12)
Commercial Lodging P P C none 5.2(F)(8)
CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS
Section 5.1 Use Table
Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure
Page 320 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
TABLE 5-1A: CENTRAL COMMUNITY DISTRICT (CCD) USES
Use Types
“P” = Permitted
“C” = Conditionally Permitted
“I” = Interim Permitted
Sub-Districts
Exceptions Additional
Requirements F-1 F-2 F-3 L
Commercial Offices – Principal C P P C L-2: NA first floor,
CUP upper floors 5.2(F)(20)
Commercial Recreation: Indoor P P C C none 5.2(F)(13)
Commercial Recreation:
Outdoor C C none 5.2(F)(14)
Convenience Retail C P* C C *F-2 Drive Through by CUP 5.2(F)(10)
Funeral Services C C none 5.2(F)(16)
Medical / Clinical Services C P P P L-2: NA first floor,
CUP upper floors 5.2(F)(19)
Personal Services P P P P L-3: CUP 5.2(F)(22)
Places of Public Assembly C C C C none 5.2(F)(23)
Production Brewery or Micro-
Distillery with Taproom or
Cocktail Room
C C C C none 5.2(F)(24)
Professional Office-Services
Including Financial Institutions P P P C L-2: NA first floor,
CUP upper floors
5.2(F)(15)
5.2(F)(21)
Restaurants, Bars < 10,000 SF P P C C none 5.2(F)(27)
Restaurants, Bars > 10,000 SF P C C none 5.2(F)(27)
Retail Sales < 10,000 SF P P C C none 5.2(F)(28)
Retail Sales > 10,000 SF P C C none 5.2(F)(28)
Retail with Service P C C L-2: NA first floor,
CUP upper floors 5.2(F)(28)
Specialty Eating Establishments
< 10,000 SF P* P* C* P* *Drive Through by CUP 5.2(F)(29)
Vehicle Fuel Sales C C C* L-8 only 5.2(F)(30)
Veterinary Facilities C P C C none 5.2(F)(32)
Residential – Upper Floors P P P P L-2: NA
Residential – Street Level C C L-2: NA
Residential – Multiple Family C C L-2: NA
Residential – Townhouse C none
Residential – Single Family C none
Industrial PUD L-3: PUD Only
Public Buildings or Uses C C C P none
CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS
Section 8.4 Definitions
Subsection (B) Lots
Page 452 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
PERMITTEE: Applicant for and recipient of an approved permit.
PERSON: An individual, firm, partnership, association, corporation, or organization of any
kind.
PERSONAL SERVICES: Establishments that primarily engage in providing services
generally involving the care of the person or person’s possessions. Personal services may
include but are not limited to: laundry and dry-cleaning services, barber shops, beauty salons,
health and fitness studios, music schools, informational and instructional services, tanning
salons, and portrait studios.
PHASING (in relation to grading): Clearing a parcel of land in distinct phases, with the
stabilization of each phase completed before the clearing of the next.
PLACE OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY: An institution or facility that congregations of people
regularly attend to participate in or hold meetings, workshops, lectures, civic activities,
religious services, and other similar activities, including buildings in which such functions and
activities are held.
PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES: Manual detailing City
specifications for all plan requirements.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: A type of development which may incorporate a
variety of land uses planned and developed as a unit. The planned unit development is
distinguished from the traditional subdivision process of development in that zoning standards
such as density, setbacks, height limits, and minimum lot sizes may be altered by negotiation
and agreement between the developer, the municipality, and the Commissioner of Natural
Resources as may be required.
PLANTING STRIP: Areas intended for the placement of vegetation within the interior of
vehicular use areas or along street right-of-way edges, typically between the back of the curb
and the inside edge of the sidewalk.
PORTABLE CONTAINER: A large container designed and rented or leased for the
temporary storage of commercial, industrial, or residential household goods that does not
contain a foundation or wheels for movement.
PRINCIPAL USE: The main use of land or buildings as distinguished from subordinate or
accessory uses.
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
1
2B. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use
Permit for commercial lodging building addition in the B -3 (Highway Business)
Zoning District as per Chapter 3.5(E) and Chapter 5.2(F)(8) of the Monticello
Zoning Ordinance and Consideration of a request for sideyard building setback
variance as per Chapter 3.5(E) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Applicant:
Seifert, Joe/Miller Architects & Builders (NAC)
Property: Legal: PID: 155-079-001030
Address: 89 Chelsea Road, Monticello, MN, 55362
Planning Case Number: 2016-005
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND:
Request(s): 1. Variance request to encroach into setback.
2. Conditional Use Permit to allow hotel expansion
(Commercial Lodging) including CUP for use and
height.
Deadline for Decision: March 11th, 2016
Land Use Designation: Places to Shop
Zoning Designation: B-3, Highway Business District
The purpose of the “B-3” (highway business) district is
to provide for limited commercial and service activities
and provide for and limit the establishment of motor
vehicle oriented or dependent commercial and service
activities.
Overlays/Environmental Freeway Bonus Sign District
Regulations Applicable:
Current Site Use: Hotel / Commercial
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Places to Shop (Motel)
East: Places to Shop (Former Bowling Alley)
South: Places to Shop (Vacant)
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
2
West: Places to Shop (Hotel)
Project Description: The applicant proposes to add 21 rooms to an existing
hotel. The expansion will include three stories with 7
rooms on each floor. The project is requesting a
variance to encroach into the 20-foot side yard setback.
The building expansion has two corners that will be 17
feet 7 inches and 18 feet 1 inch.
The applicant is also requesting a condit ional use
permit to allow for a hotel in the B-3 zoning district.
By code, a hotel (commercial lodnging) is allowed with
a conditional use permit in the B-3 district. In addition,
the height of the expansion area, at threes stories,
requires a conditional use permit.
ANALYSIS
Conditional Use Permit.
In the B-3, Highway Business District, hotels are listed as Conditional Uses in the B-
3 District.
The proposed hotel expansion would be a reasonably expected use in a business
district. In this case, a hotel is already in operation on the site. The use is compatible
with the surrounding area which includes two other hotel uses, restaurants, and a
banquet hall. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance identifies the following special
requirements for “Commercial Lodging”:
Commercial Lodging
(a) All hotels and motels shall adhere to the following:
(i) A hotel or motel shall have its principal frontage, access, and
orientation direction on an arterial street or collector street.
(ii) Vehicular access from a local residential street is prohibited.
(iii) No more than one security or caretakers quarters may be
provided on the site, and such quarters shall be integrated into
the building’s design.
The facility in question has its frontage and access on Chelsea Road, a major east -
west collector route. The hotel expansion is to the east side of the property. The
existing hotel is three stories tall with 51 rooms. The proposed expansion would
continue the third story, and include an over all renovation of the exterior of the
building.
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
3
When the facility was initially constructed, no CUP was necessary under the zoning
ordinance at the time. However, a CUP was approved and is in place for the shared
access/parking configuration with the ad jacent property. The current regulations
changed commercial lodging to a conditional use in the B-3, and added a CUP
provision for buildings exceeding the standard allowed height of two stories.
Parking. The site currently has 89 parking stalls and will remain the same after the
expansion of the building. The parking supply includes a row of parking accessible
from a shared driveway to the northwest of the building that will remain in place as
part of the expansion project. The zoning ordinance applies a parking standard of one
space for each unit, plus one space for each ten units, plus one space on the maximum
shift. For a facility of 72 units, this would result in a standard of 79 spaces for the
room count, plus the shift requirement. The existing supply of 89 spaces will
accommodate that standard without requiring additional parking to serve the facility.
Site Landscaping and Lighting. The applicant has proposed landscaping around the
new part of the building on the east side of the site. The plan consists of deciduous
shrubs and coniferous shrubs both existing and new including the relocation of some
plantings. The total number of shrubs meets the requirements of the code. In
addition, the lighting photometric plan indicates compliance with the requirements of
the zoning ordinance. The applicants will be required to verify compliance with all
related standards, including light source, at the time of building permit application.
Signage. The site plan shows the existing wall sign on the front of the building will
remain the same. There are also two directional signs on site that are not shown in
the building plans. Presumably, the directional signs are to remain, the applicant
shall confirm this. The facility also includes an existing freestanding sign identifying
the site, which is not proposed to change. All signage on the property as shown is
compliant with existing sign regulations. Any sign changes would be required to
meet the City’s sign regulations in Section 4.5 of the zoning ordinance.
Variance to side yard setback.
The variance request is to encroach into the side yard setback on the eastern part of
the property. The required setback is 20 feet from a public right -of-way. Currently,
the ROW in this area contains a pedestrian path that connects the Oakwood Drive cul-
de-sac to Chelsea Road. The variance would encroach into the required setback at the
two corners of the building, with the proposed encroachment leaving a setback of just
over 17 feet.
The street formerly within the Oakwood Drive right of way was removed several
years ago as a part of reconstruction of Chelsea Road and the realignment of the
Chelsea/Oakwood intersection. With that project, there does not appear to be any
likelihood of a need to re-construct street in the right of way. The right of way was
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
4
retained, however, since there are utilities and the pathway noted above that still exist
in that space.
When reviewing variances, the Planning Commission, sitting as the Board of
Zoning Adjustments and Appeals, is required to consider whether the
proposed use is a reasonable one, given the site and the neighborhood, and
whether there are unique conditions of the property that create practical
difficulties in putting the property to this reasonable use.
The variance request that has been made on behalf of the Best Western Hotel
is to accommodate three additional rooms (one on each floor) and a stairwell.
The encroachment is into a 20-foot setback toward a walking path. In this
case, the encroachment will not hinder any traffic sight lines, and is not
adjacent to a different land use.
The expansion resulting in the variance request does not encroach into the
nearby utility and drainage easement. However, the site plan shows an
underground phone line running where the building expansion is scheduled.
Staff recommends this phone line be relocated inside the utility easement.
But for the existence of the right of way, the required setback would be 10 feet
from this property line. Staff believes that the variance request is a reasonable
one, given the unique conditions on the site (the right of way without a fully
improved street) and the minimal degree of encroachment proposed.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Decision 1. Variance from the side yard setback of 20 feet
1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC- 2016-002 approving the variance for the
subject property to allow encroachment into the 20-foot side yard setback, based
on findings stated in said resolution.
2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2016-002 approving the variance
of the subject property to allow encroachment of the 20-foot side yard setback,
based on findings identified by the Planning Commission
Decision 2. Conditional Use Permit for a hotel building in the B-3 Highway
Business District
1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-2016-2003 recommending approval of the
Conditional Use Permit for hotel building expansion, based on findings stated in
the resolution, and the Conditions listed in Exhibit Z of this report.
2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2016-003, based on findings
identified by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
5
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the two Resolutions PC-2016-002, and PC-2016-003.
The resolutions support the approval of the variance, and a recommendation of
approval for the Conditional Use Permit, with the condit ions identified in Exhibit Z.
As noted, the expansion represents a reasonable and expected use of the subject
property, and can be accommodated with the existing improvements, both private and
public.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
A. Variance Resolution No. PC-2016-2006
B. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC-2016-003
C. Applicant Narrative
D. Certificate of Survey
E. Colored Building Elevations
F. Landscape Plan
G. Site Plan
H. Floor Plans
I. Building Elevations
J. Civil Plan Title Sheet
K. Erosion Control Details
L. Existing Conditions & Removals
M. Site & Grading Plan
N. Erosion Control Plan
O. Photometric Plan
Z. Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
6
EXHIBIT Z
Variance, Conditional Use Permit,
SILVER FOX Lot-3 Block-1 (as platted)
1. The underground phone line be relocated to the utility / drainage easement on the
eastern part of the property.
2. Compliance with the conditions identified by the City Engineer.
1
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. PC-2016-002
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO APPROVING
A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK
TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING
COMMERCIAL LODGING FACILITY
WHEREAS, the applicant operates an existing hotel at 89 Chelsea Road West, legally
described as Lot 3, Block 1, Silver Fox; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned B-3, Highway Business District, in which
commercial lodging establishments are allowed by Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to expand the existing hotel to add 21 rooms, and
renovate the existing structure; and
WHEREAS, the proposed expansion will encroach into the required side yard setback
adjacent to a public street, requiring a variance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed encroachment will be less than three (3) feet into a required
setback of 20 feet; and
WHEREAS, the expansion will otherwise be consistent with the improvements currently on
the property; and
WHEREAS, the proposed land use is a reasonable use of the subject property, consistent
with the land uses in the area, including other commercial lodging establishments; and
WHEREAS, the right of way adjacent to the side yard has public utilities and other
improvements, but no public street; and
WHEREAS, the City does not expect the need for public street improvements within the
subject right of way for the foreseeable future; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the matter at its
regular meeting on February 2nd, 2016 and the applicant and members of the public were
provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff
report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and
2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following
Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval:
1.The proposed expansion is consistent with the intent of the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan.
2.The proposed use is reasonable, given the conditions in the area, and on the subject
property.
3.There are practical difficulties in using the lot as proposed without approval of the
proposed variance.
4.The proposed expansion will meet the requirements of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance for consideration of the proposed setback variance.
5.The proposed expansion will not create undue burdens on public systems, including
streets and utilities.
6.The proposed use will not create substantial impacts on neighboring land uses that are
not within the expectations of the current zoning allowances.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello, sitting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, Minnesota that the proposed
Conditional Use Permit amendment is hereby approved.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 2016, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota.
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
By: _______________________________
Brad Fyle, Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
3
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
1
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. PC-2016-003
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE
EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL LODGING
FACILITY OF THREE STORIES IN HEIGHT
WHEREAS, the applicant operates an existing hotel at 89 Chelsea Road West, legally
described as Lot 3, Block 1, Silver Fox; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned B-3, Highway Business District, in which
commercial lodging establishments are allowed by Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to expand the existing hotel to add 21 rooms, and
renovate the existing structure; and
WHEREAS, the proposed expansion will, pending approval of a proposed setback variance,
meet the zoning requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the height of the building, at three stories, also requires approval of a
Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the expansion, including the third story, will be consistent with the
improvements currently on the property; and
WHEREAS, the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses in the area, including
other commercial lodging establishments; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the matter at its
regular meeting on February 2nd, 2016 and the applicant and members of the public were
provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff
report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following
Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval:
2
1.The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent of the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan.
2.The proposed amendment will meet the requirements of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance, subject to consideration of the proposed setback variance, including
parking, supply.
3.The proposed amendment will not create undue burdens on public systems, including
streets and utilities.
4.The proposed amendment will not create substantial impacts on neighboring land
uses that are not within the expectations of the current zoning allowances.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota that the proposed Conditional Use Permit amendment is hereby
recommended for approval.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 2016, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota.
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
By: _______________________________
Brad Fyle, Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
THISDRAWINGANDTHEINFORMATIONTHEREINISTHEPROPERTYOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.USEBYTHEHOLDERORDISCLOSURETOOTHERSWITHOUTTHEPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.ISPROHIBITED.ITCONTAINSPROPRIETARYANDCONFIDENTIALINFORMATIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.REPRODUCTIONOFTHEMATERIALHEREINWITHOUTWRITTENPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.VIOLATESTHECOPYRIGHTLAWSOFTHEUNITEDSTATESANDWILLSUBJECTTHEVIOLATORSTOLEGALPROSECUTION.COPYRIGHT@2010BYDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGIHEREBYCERTIFYTHATTHISPLAN,SPECIFICATION,ORREPORTWASPREPAREDBYMEORUNDERMYDIRECTSUPERVISIONANDTHATIAMADULYLICENSEDPROFESSIONALENGINEERUNDERTHELAWSOFTHESTATEOFMINNESOTA.DANIELJ.FOLSOMDATE:01/11/16LICENSE#:23897BESTWESTERNCHELSEAINN&SUITES2016ADDITIONSHEETDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLESHEETC1.0EROSIONCONTROLDETAILSC2.0EXISTINGCONDITIONS&REMOVALSC3.0SITE&GRADINGPLANC4.0EROSIONCONTROLPLANPROJECTAREAGOPHERSTATEONECALL1-800-252-1166LOCATIONOFPROJECTAREAVICINITYMAPPROJECTLOCATIONST.HWYNO.25
CITYOFMONTICELLOINTERSTATE94CHELSEAROAD
THISDRAWINGANDTHEINFORMATIONTHEREINISTHEPROPERTYOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.USEBYTHEHOLDERORDISCLOSURETOOTHERSWITHOUTTHEPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.ISPROHIBITED.ITCONTAINSPROPRIETARYANDCONFIDENTIALINFORMATIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.REPRODUCTIONOFTHEMATERIALHEREINWITHOUTWRITTENPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.VIOLATESTHECOPYRIGHTLAWSOFTHEUNITEDSTATESANDWILLSUBJECTTHEVIOLATORSTOLEGALPROSECUTION.COPYRIGHT@2010BYDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGIHEREBYCERTIFYTHATTHISPLAN,SPECIFICATION,ORREPORTWASPREPAREDBYMEORUNDERMYDIRECTSUPERVISIONANDTHATIAMADULYLICENSEDPROFESSIONALENGINEERUNDERTHELAWSOFTHESTATEOFMINNESOTA.DANIELJ.FOLSOMDATE:01/11/16LICENSE#:23897EMBEDMENTMETHODBLANKETMETHOD4"BALEBARRIERDETAILFLOW45CRITICALRESOURCE(WETLANDETC.)CONSTRUCTIONAREABALEBARRIERSBALESPLACEDONEDGE,BUTTEDTIGHTTWINEORWIRETOBEUSEDFORCRITICALPERIMETERCONTROLAREAS4APPROX.BALESIZE:14"X18"X36"LONG6"STAPLESAT1'-0C.623SECTIONA-ASEDIMENTMATMAXIMUMFLOWVELOCITY:5FT./SEC.MAXIMUMFLOWDEPTH:2FT.FLOWD=2FT.DESIGNGUIDELINES:STREAMBEDTYPICALSTREAMBEDINSTALLATION<ROADWAYCONSTRUCTTEMPORARYBERMINLETAPRONINSTALLEDINTEMPORARYBERMSTORMFREQUENCY:2YEAR-24HOURDESIGNGUIDELINES:ROCKCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCERADIUSASREQUIREDPUBLICROADASREQUIREDENTRANCEWIDTH1MIN.DONOTCONSTRUCTDITCHGROUNDLINEDIVERSIONMOUNDCONSTRUCTDIVERSIONMOUNDFROMMATERIALOBTAINEDFROMROADWAYCUTNOTES:1SEESPECS.2573,3892,&3894.45PLACEACATEGORY3EROSIONCONTROLBLANKET,6FT.WIDEMINIMUM,OVERTHEBALEINSTEADOFTRENCHING.MAXIMUMDRAINAGEAREA:3ACRESWIREPIPETOTWO2"X2"WOODSTAKESEMBEDDED10"MIN.INTHEGROUND10"DIA.FLEXIBLEPLASTICDRAINAGEPIPE18"MIN.24"6"MIN.DEPTHOF1"TO2"CRUSHEDROCKSEDIMENTMATSEDGEOFSTREAMEXCAVATIONAREAEXCAVATIONAREAEDGEOFSTREAMASTORMFREQUENCY:10YEAR-24HOURDESIGNGUIDELINES:MAXIMUMDRAINAGEAREA:5ACRESMAXIMUMDIVERSION:GRADE5%L=2WPLANSECTIONB-B1%MIN.REVERSEGRADIENTSEDIMENTTRAPDETAILB<DRAINAGEWAYINSTREAMDISTURBANCEINSTREAMDISTURBANCE5'-0''6'-0"4'MIN.DOWNSTREAMCOVERAGEOFSEDIMENTMATSFOREACHFT./SEC.OFWATERVELOCITYTWO2IN.X2IN.WOODSTAKESORREINFORCINGBARSINEACHBALEEMBEDDED10INCHESMINIMUMINTHEGROUND.STAKEAT4'INTERVALS6"MIN.OVERLAP2'2'18"MIN.DEPTHTEMPORARYDOWNDRAINONFILLSLOPEPROVIDERIPRAPATOUTLETW=10FT.MIN.,20FT.MAX.STREAMFLOW56THISDETAILMAYNOTBEACCEPTABLEFORWORKONPUBLICWATERS,SEEGENERALPUBLICWATERSPERMIT(GP)2004-0001.ROCKSATENTRANCECLEANWORKSITEMUDOFFOFTRUCKTIRESBEFORETRUCKSENTERMAINROAD.KEEPINGMUDOFFTHEROADWILLPREVENTAUTODAMAGEANDKEEPCONSTRUCTIONSEDIMENTOUTOFDRAINAGESYSTEMSANDWETLANDS.GEOTEXTILEMAYBEPLACEDUNDERTHEROCKTOKEEPROCKSSEPARATEFROMSOIL.B77LOCATIONOFDOWNSTREAMTEMPORARYSEDIMENTCONTROLDEVICE.TYPE9MULCHCATCHBASIN/MANHOLEFLANGESFLAPPOCKETFRONT,BACK,ANDBOTTOMTOBEMADEFROMSINGLEPIECEOFFABRIC.INLETSPECIFICATIONSASPERTHEPLANDIMENSIONLENGTHANDWIDTHTOMATCHNOTES:MINIMUMDOUBLESTITCHEDSEAMSALLAROUNDSIDEPIECESANDONFLAPPOCKETSTYPE9MULCH113SPACING(CANBEINSTALLEDINANYINLETTYPEWITHORWITHOUTACURBBOX)DROPINLETWITHGRATE21/2"D=2"TUBERISER36"GEOTEXTILE5'MIN.LENGTHPOST2"2"6"6"DIAMETERADJUSTLEVELOFFILTERSOCKTOBEBELOWROADSURFACEELEV.2.5'MAXPLASTICZIPTIES(50LBTENSILE)HOLDSGEOTEXTILEINPLACEONALLPOSTS5GEOTEXTILEANCHORAGELAYGEOTEXTILEUNDERTYPE9MULCH12"OUT12"USEWHEREINLETDRAINSINANAREAWITHSLOPESAT1:3orLESS265436FINISHEDSIZE,INCLUDINGPOCKETSWHEREREQUIREDSHALLEXTENDAMINIMUMOF10INCHESAROUNDTHEPERIMETERTOFACILITATEMAINTENANCEORREMOVAL.ENDSSECURELYCLOSEDTOPREVENTLOSSOFOPENGRADEDAGGREGATEFILL.SECUREDWITH50PSI.ZIPTIE.SECTIONSECTIONPERSPECTIVEVIEW(DOWNPOSITION)(UPPOSITION)SEDIMENTCONTROLINLETHATSILTFENCERINGANDROCKFILTERBERMUSEREBARORSTEELRODFORREMOVAL(FORINLETSWITHCASTCURBBOXREPLACERODWITHWOOD2"X4").EXTEND10"BEYONDGRATEWIDTHONBOTHSIDES,LENGTHVARIES.SECURETOGRATEWITHWIREORPLASTICTIESPOP-UPHEADMANUFACTUREDALTERNATIVESLISTEDONMn/DOT'SAPPROVEDPRODUCTSLISTMAYBESUBSTITUTED.TUBERISERPOLYETHYLENENOTE:THESEDIMENTCONTROLBARRIERSHALLBEAMETALORPLASTIC/POLYETHYLENERISERSIZEDTOFITINSIDETHECATCHBASIN/MANHOLE;HAVEPERFORATIONSTOALLOWFORWATERINFILTRATION;HAVEANOVERFLOWOPENING,FLANGESANDALID/COVER.GROUNDLINE8"ALLGEOTEXTILEUSEDFORINLETPROTECTIONSHALLBEMONOFILAMENTINBOTHDIRECTIONS,MEETINGSPEC.3886.SEESPECS.2573,3137,3886&3891.INSTALLATIONNOTES:DONOTINSTALLFILTERBAGINSERTININLETSSHALLOWERTHAN30INCHES,MEASUREDFROMTHEBOTTOMOFTHEINLETTOTHETOPOFTHEGRATE.THEINSTALLEDBAGSHALLHAVEAMINIMUMSIDECLEARANCEOF3INCHESBETWEENTHEINLETWALLSANDTHEBAG,MEASUREDATTHEBOTTOMOFTHEOVERFLOWHOLES.WHERENECESSARYTHECONTRACTORSHALLCLINCHTHEBAG,USINGPLASTICZIPTIES,TOACHIEVETHE3INCHSIDECLEARANCE.OVERFLOWHOLES(2"X4"HOLESHALLBEHEATCUTINTOALLFOURSIDEPANELS)SOCKHEIGHTMUSTNOTBESOHIGHASTOSLOWDOWNWATERFILTRATIONTOCAUSEFLOODINGOFTHEROADWAY.FLAPPOCKETSSHALLBELARGEENOUGHTOACCEPTWOOD2INCHX4INCHORUSEAROCKSOCKORSANDBAGSINPLACEOFTHEFLAPPOCKETS.3/16"THICK(MIN.)STEELCOVER3/16"THICK(MIN.)STEELPLATE3/16"THICK(MIN.)STEELPLATEGEOTEXTILESOCKBETWEEN4-10FEETLONGAND4-6INCHDIAMETER.SEAMTOBEJOINEDBYTWOROWSOFSTITCHINGWITHAPLASTICMESHBACKINGORPROVIDEAHEATBONDEDSEAM(ORAPPROVEDEQUIVALENT).FILLROCKLOGWITHOPENGRADEDAGGREGATECONSISTINGOFSOUNDDURABLEPARTICLESOFCOARSEAGGREGATECONFORMINGTOSPEC.3137TABLE3137-1;CA-3GRADATION.TOEOFSLOPEFUTUREBRIDGEROADWAYSHOULDERBRIDGEENDSLOPEBRIDGEFILLWATERCOURSEFLOWVELOCITY:STAGNANTCONTRIBUTINGSLOPEAREA:1/2ACRETOEOFSLOPEFUTUREBRIDGEROADWAYSHOULDERBRIDGEENDSLOPEBRIDGEFILLEMBANKMENTSILTFENCETOMEETSANDBAGBARRIERCONTRIBUTINGSLOPEAREA:1ACRESILTFENCEWRAPPEDAROUNDTOEOFEMBANKMENTTOEOFSLOPEFUTUREBRIDGEROADWAYSHOULDEREMBANKMENTEMBANKMENTORWORKROADFILLCONTRIBUTINGSLOPEAREA:3ACRESEMBANKMENTORWORKROADENDSLOPESILTFENCETOMEETSHEETINGSANDBAGBARRIER3FT.HIGHADJACENTTOWATERCOURSE.EXTEND50FT.BACKFROMTOEOFENDSLOPE.DESIGNGUIDELINES:DESIGNGUIDELINES:DESIGNGUIDELINES:<ROADWAYLOCATIONOFSILTFENCEATTOEOFROADWAYEMBANKMENT5FT.MIN.LENGTHPOSTAT6FT.MAX.SPACINGGEOTEXTILEFABRIC,36''WIDE6''MIN.6''MIN.SILTFENCE,HEAVYDUTY6''MIN.FABRICANCHORAGETRENCH.BACKFILLWITHTAMPEDNATURALSOILSTAPLES5FT.MIN.LENGTHPOSTAT6FT.MAX.SPACINGGEOTEXTILEFABRIC,36''WIDESILTFENCE,PREASSEMBLEDSILTFENCENEARTOEOFSLOPEANDOUTSIDEOFCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSMAXIMUMCONTRIBUTINGAREA:1ACRE.TOPROTECTAREASFROMSHEETFLOW.DESIGNGUIDELINES:MAXIMUMCONTRIBUTINGAREA:1ACRE.TOPROTECTAREASFROMSHEETFLOW.DESIGNGUIDELINES:(HANDINSTALLED)SILTFENCEDISTRURBEDSOIL,WORKAREADRAINSTOSTREAMCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSMINIMUMPOSSIBLETURNINGRADIUS=10'(MAYBELARGERSILTFENCESILTFENCE,J-HOOKINSTALLATIONSTREAMBANKORTOEOFSLOPESTREAMBANKORTOEOFSLOPEPLANVIEWSIDEVIEW1NOTES:SILTFENCEATBRIDGEEMBANKMENTADJACENTTOWATERGEOTEXTILEFABRIC,36''WIDECOARSEFILTERAGGREGATE12"12"COARSEFILTERAGGREGATE(SPEC.3149)SHALLBEINCIDENTAL.FABRICANCHORAGETRENCH.BACKFILLWITHTAMPEDNATURALSOIL.SEEOPTIONALMETHODININSET.SEESPECS.2573,3149&3886.OPTIONALMETHODFORSILTFENCE,HEAVYDUTYWATERCOURSEFLOWVELOCITY:1TO7FT./SEC.GEOTEXTILEFABRICWATERCOURSEFLOWVELOCITY:8TO15FT./SEC.TEMPORARYSHEETINGADJACENTTOWATERCOURSE.EXTEND10FT.BACKFROMTOEOFENDSLOPE.STANDARDSHEETNO.STANDARDAPPROVED:TITLE:TEMPORARYSEDIMENTCONTROLSUPERDUTYSILTFENCE5-297.408(2of2)GEOTEXTILEFABRICBARRIERBARRIERBARRIERMETALFENCEPOSTGEOTEXTILEFABRIC8'BUFFERMINIMUM,ASDIRECTEDBYTHEENGINEERMACHINESLICEDSILTFENCEBARRIERACCESSSTOCKPILESTOCKPILECRITICALAREACRITICALSTOCKPILEACCESSROCKPADCRITICALAREAMETALFENCEPOSTSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYSTOCKPILESTOCKPILESILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYDITCHPROTECTIONSYSTEMSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYCURBANDGUTTERPROTECTIONSYSTEMSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYACCESSSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYMACHINESLICEDSILTFENCESTOCKPILEAREASILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYSTOCKPILECONTAINMENTSTOCKPILESEDIMENTCONTROL3DVIEWMETALFENCEPOSTINABSENCEOFRINGSREBARBETWEENANCHORRINGSORCABLERING(MINIMUM6"DEPTHBY1HAULTRUCKLENGTHANDWIDTHLONG)ORSTEEPSLOPEORSTEEPSLOPEORSTEEPSLOPETOPVIEWBARRIERWITHCABLERINGSBARRIERWITHOUTCABLERINGSSIDEVIEWTOPVIEWSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYSILTFENCE,SUPERDUTYCRITICALAREASINCLUDEWETLANDS,JUDICIALDITCHES,STREAMS,WATERBODIES,ANDOTHERAREASREQUIRINGPROTECTION.GEOTEXTILEFABRICGEOTEXTILEFABRIC,3'WIDTH,ATTACHTOBARRIERCABLERINGS,IFPRESENT,BYWIREORPLASTICZIPTIES,ORTOMETALFENCEPOSTWITHWIREORTHREEPLASTICZIPTIES.PLACINGSTOCKPILESNEXTTOANENVIRONMENTALLYSENSITIVEAREAISNOTRECOMMENDED.WHENTHEREARENOFEASIBLEALTERNATIVES,THESUPERDUTYSILTFENCEISTOBEUSEDASSHOWNORASDIRECTEDBYTHEENGINEER.WIREORPLASTICZIPTIESWIREOR3PLASTICZIPTIESWIREORTHREEPLASTICZIPTIESTEMPORARYPORTABLEPRECASTCONCRETEBARRIERDESIGN8337(TYPICAL)(SEESTANDARDPLATE8337)GEOTEXTILEFABRICGEOTEXTILEFABRICNOTES:SEESPECS.2533,2573&3886.SUPERDUTYSILTFENCECANUTILIZEEITHERACONCRETE,ORWATERFILLED,TEMPORARYMEDIANBARRIER.PLACESUPERDUTYSILTFENCEALONGACONSTANTELEVATION.SEPTEMBER27,2006WITHLARGEREQUIPMENT)
020'40'LEGENDOHEFOUGEGASlWTHISDRAWINGANDTHEINFORMATIONTHEREINISTHEPROPERTYOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.USEBYTHEHOLDERORDISCLOSURETOOTHERSWITHOUTTHEPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.ISPROHIBITED.ITCONTAINSPROPRIETARYANDCONFIDENTIALINFORMATIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.REPRODUCTIONOFTHEMATERIALHEREINWITHOUTWRITTENPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.VIOLATESTHECOPYRIGHTLAWSOFTHEUNITEDSTATESANDWILLSUBJECTTHEVIOLATORSTOLEGALPROSECUTION.COPYRIGHT@2010BYDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGIHEREBYCERTIFYTHATTHISPLAN,SPECIFICATION,ORREPORTWASPREPAREDBYMEORUNDERMYDIRECTSUPERVISIONANDTHATIAMADULYLICENSEDPROFESSIONALENGINEERUNDERTHELAWSOFTHESTATEOFMINNESOTA.DANIELJ.FOLSOMDATE:01/11/16LICENSE#:23897NOTES:1.CONTRACTORSHALLFIELDVERIFYLOCATIONANDELEVATIONSOFALLEXISTINGUNDERGROUNDUTILITIES.2.CONTRACTORSHALLFIELDVERIFYALLBUILDINGDIMENSIONSPRIORTOANYCONSTRUCTION.3.GOPHERSTATEONECALLDAMAGEPREVENTIONSYSTEMFORBURIEDUTILITIES.1-800-252-1166.4.THELOCATIONSANDELEVATIONSOFTHEEXISTINGUTILITIESSHOWNHEREINAREAPPROXIMATE.THEYHAVEBEENPLOTTEDFROMAVAILABLESURVEYSAND/ORRECORDS.THECONTRACTORISRESPONSIBLETOENSURETHATANYEXISTINGUTILITIES(SHOWNORNOTSHOWN)ARENOTDAMAGEDDURINGCONSTRUCTION.AREAOFIMPROVEMENTSCONCRETESIDEWALKTOBEREMOVEDLANDSCAPINGANDSHRUBSTOBEREMOVEDWITHINBUILDINGFOOTPRINTSAWCUTORREMOVESIDEWALKATEXPANSIONJOINTEXISTINGUNDERGROUNDTELEPHONEWIRESTOBERELOCATED.COORDINATEWITHLOCALUTILITYCOMPANY
XXXX.XXGRADINGLEGEND=EXISTINGMAJORCONTOUR=EXISTINGMINORCONTOUR=EXISTINGCONTOURLABEL=PROPOSEDMAJORCONTOUR=PROPOSEDMINORCONTOUR=PROPOSEDCONTOURLABEL=EXISTINGSPOTELEVATION*=PROPOSEDSPOTELEVATION*=PROPOSEDSPOTELEVATIONATTOPOFSIDEWALKORBACKOFCURB*SPOTELEVATIONSALONGCURB&GUTTERANDOTHERREVEALSARETOFLOWLINE,UNLESSOTHERWISENOTED.NOTES:1.CONTRACTORSHALLFIELDVERIFYLOCATIONANDELEVATIONSOFALLEXISTINGUNDERGROUNDUTILITIES.2.CONTRACTORSHALLFIELDVERIFYALLBUILDINGDIMENSIONSPRIORTOANYCONSTRUCTION.3.HANDICAPACCESSIBLERAMPSHALLMEETADAREQUIREMENTSANDSHALLNOTEXCEED1:12LONGITUDINALSLOPE.4.FILLAREASUNDERPROPOSEDROADSANDBUILDINGSSHALLBECOMPACTEDTO100%OFTHEMAXIMUMDRYDENSITY.5.ALLEXCESSORWASTEMATERIALGENERATEDASPARTOFCONSTRUCTIONSHALLBEREMOVEDFROMTHESITEANDDISPOSEDOFINACCORDANCEWITHSTATEANDLOCALREQUIREMENTS.6.GOPHERSTATEONECALLDAMAGEPREVENTIONSYSTEMFORBURIEDUTILITIES.1-800-252-1166.100XXXX.XXTC020'40'THISDRAWINGANDTHEINFORMATIONTHEREINISTHEPROPERTYOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.USEBYTHEHOLDERORDISCLOSURETOOTHERSWITHOUTTHEPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.ISPROHIBITED.ITCONTAINSPROPRIETARYANDCONFIDENTIALINFORMATIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.REPRODUCTIONOFTHEMATERIALHEREINWITHOUTWRITTENPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.VIOLATESTHECOPYRIGHTLAWSOFTHEUNITEDSTATESANDWILLSUBJECTTHEVIOLATORSTOLEGALPROSECUTION.COPYRIGHT@2010BYDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGIHEREBYCERTIFYTHATTHISPLAN,SPECIFICATION,ORREPORTWASPREPAREDBYMEORUNDERMYDIRECTSUPERVISIONANDTHATIAMADULYLICENSEDPROFESSIONALENGINEERUNDERTHELAWSOFTHESTATEOFMINNESOTA.DANIELJ.FOLSOMDATE:01/11/16LICENSE#:23897PROPOSEDADDITIONFFE=962.90MATCHINTOEXISTINGCONCRETESIDEWALKEXISTINGUNDERGROUNDTELEPHONEWIRESTOBERELOCATED.COORDINATEWITHLOCALUTILITYCOMPANY962962961TEMPORARY5'CONCRETESIDEWALK5.00VARIABLE
WIDTH
2%MAX.CROSSSLOPE1/2"EXPANSIONJOINTSATADJACENTWALKORSTRUCTUREMN/DOT3702CONCRETESIDEWALKMN/DOTSPEC.2521,MIXNO.3A32CONTRACTIONJOINTSPERMN/DOTSPEC.25211/2"EXPANSIONJOINTCOMPACTEDGRANULARMATERIAL6"4"TYPICALSIDEWALKDETAILSCALE=N.T.S.4'CONCRETESTOOP1 8.83
PROPOSED5'CONCRETEHANDICAPACCESSIBLERAMP1 8.88 5.00
=================020'40'THISDRAWINGANDTHEINFORMATIONTHEREINISTHEPROPERTYOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.USEBYTHEHOLDERORDISCLOSURETOOTHERSWITHOUTTHEPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.ISPROHIBITED.ITCONTAINSPROPRIETARYANDCONFIDENTIALINFORMATIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.REPRODUCTIONOFTHEMATERIALHEREINWITHOUTWRITTENPERMISSIONOFDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGINC.VIOLATESTHECOPYRIGHTLAWSOFTHEUNITEDSTATESANDWILLSUBJECTTHEVIOLATORSTOLEGALPROSECUTION.COPYRIGHT@2010BYDESIGNTREEENGINEERINGIHEREBYCERTIFYTHATTHISPLAN,SPECIFICATION,ORREPORTWASPREPAREDBYMEORUNDERMYDIRECTSUPERVISIONANDTHATIAMADULYLICENSEDPROFESSIONALENGINEERUNDERTHELAWSOFTHESTATEOFMINNESOTA.DANIELJ.FOLSOMDATE:01/11/16LICENSE#:23897PROPOSEDADDITIONFFE=962.90NOTES:1.ALLDISTURBEDAREASSHALLBERESTOREDANDSEEDEDWITHSEEDMIX25-251(HYDROSEED)ORSOD.2.INLETPROTECTIONSHALLBEPROVIDEDONALLCATCHBASINSANDINLETSDOWNGRADIENTOFCONSTRUCTIONACTIVITY.3.PROVIDESILTFENCEPERIMETERCONTROLAROUNDENTIRECONSTRUCTIONACTIVITY,ANDALLTEMPORARYSTOCKPILES.4.TEMPORARYROCKENTRANCESSHALLBEINSTALLEDANDMAINTAINEDTHROUGHOUTTHEDURATIONOFCONSTRUCTION.5.NOOFFSITEVEHICLETRACKINGISPERMITTED.STREETSSHALLBECLEANEDANDSWEPTWHENEVERTRACKINGOFSEDIMENTSOCCURSANDBEFORESITESARELEFTIDLEFORWEEKENDSANDHOLIDAYS.6.REFERTOTHECITYOFMONTICELLOEROSIONCONTROLREQUIREMENTSFORFURTHEREROSIONCONTROLSEQUENCING.EROSIONCONTROLQUANTITIES:ROCKCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE(100SY)SILTFENCE(282LF)SEEDMIX25-151(HYDROSEED)ORSOD(510SY)INLETPROTECTION(3EA)=PROVIDESILTFENCEPERIMETERCONTROLINLETPROTECTIONINLETPROTECTIONMNDOTSEEDMIX25-151(HYDROSEED)ORSODPROVIDEINLETPROTECTIONONCATCHBASINAPPROX.78'NORTHALONGPROPERTYLINEREMOVETEMPORARYSIDEWALKANDREPLACEWITHSEEDORSOD
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
1
2C. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use Permit
in the R-A (Residential Amenities) Zoning District for wireless telecomm service
antennae as per Chapter 4.13(G) Telecommunication Towers and Antennas of the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Applicant: Richter, Kristine/Black & Veatch (NAC)
Property: Legal: Outlot A, Spirit Hills
Address: 6111 Wildwood Way
The site is a wooded outlot near the crest of the “Monti
Club Hill”, and is occupied by two telecommunications
towers, accessed from the Wildwood subdivision.
Planning Case Number: 2016-006
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Conditional Use Permit to replace wireless communication
equipment on an existing tower (applicants are upgrading
their own existing equipment).
Deadline for Decision: March 13th, 2016
Land Use Designation: Places to Live
Zoning Designation: R-A (Residential Amenities District)
The purpose of the "R-A" residence district is to provide
move up housing in the form of low density, single family,
detached residential dwelling units and directly related
complementary uses in areas of high natural residential
amenities including such conditions as woodlands,
wetlands, and significant views.
The proposed use is a conditional use in the district.
Current Site Use: The site is currently occupied by two telecommunication
towers, one of which (a self-supporting tower on the south)
contains various telecommunications equipment, including
that of the current applicant, and another, taller tower array
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
2
(north tower) which also includes a large area occupied by
guy wires.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Public uses, including park and water tower
East: Single Family Residential
South: Single Family Residential
West: Public uses, primarily open space
Project Description: The applicant proposes to replace existing antenna and
ground equipment with newer technology. The ground
equipment will be located within the existing enclosure.
The applicant has indicated that they are still waiting for a
structural engineer’s review. The three existing antenna
arrays will be replaced by three new arrays of slightly
larger dimensions, including four antenna panels on each
bracket structure, rather than the current three.
Ordinance Requirements: The zoning ordinance encourages co-location of antenna
equipment on existing towers or other structures. Chapter
4, Section 13 of the Zoning Ordinance provides for
regulation of Telecommunication Towers & Antenna. Per
ordinance, a Conditional Use Permit is required for the new
antenna equipment.
ANALYSIS
As noted, the ordinance is written to encourage co-location of antenna arrays on existing
structures. The replacement of the proposed equipment will facilitate that objective in
this case, by increasing capacity in the area served by this tower, potentially limiting the
need for future tower construction.
Common Conditional Use application materials include the following:
Parking. There is no specific parking requirement.
Landscaping. The enclosure is not being altered as a part of this work.
Lighting. No additional lighting is proposed.
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
3
Signage. No signage is proposed.
Building Design. The equipment is required to match existing buildings,
however, no additional construction is proposed.
Access and Circulation. The property gets its access from Wildwood Way, within
the Wildwood subdivision. An existing easement is in
place for this access. No additional traffic or improvements
are anticipated resulting from this application.
Grading and Drainage. No changes to grade or drainage are proposed.
Utilities. No city utilities are impacted by this work.
Conditional Use Permit Requirements
The zoning ordinance requires a Conditional Use Permit for co-location of antenna
equipment on existing structures. The applicants have submitted the required information
and appear to be in compliance with each of the required regulations of the code. The
applicant has submitted with their narrative a description of the proposed project in
relationship to the ordinance’s criteria for conditional use permit.
As noted, the changes are slight; the applicant seeks to replace old equipment with new
equipment near the top of the towner. The existing antenna arrays are approximately 15
feet in width and extend about 4 feet out from the tower (the submitted plans do not
include dimensioned details). The proposed replacement arrays are approximately 20
feet in width and extend out about 6 feet from the tower. As noted previously, each of
the three bracketed structures will have four, rather than the current three, antenna panels.
The height of the existing tower (370 feet) will remain the same, and the antenna arrays
will be replaced at the same height (nearly 350 feet above ground level). The fact that the
proposed antenna changes are near the top of the tall structure results in an expectation
that the visual impact will be minimal.
As with all telecommunications equipment of this type, the City is required to make
reasonable accommodations to allow the use, based on technology and service needs of
the operator and the public. Moreover, the City must accommodate minor expansions of
this equipment when the impact is not substantial, and there is no expectation of impacts
on public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed expansion appears to be consistent
with these requirements.
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
4
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Decision 1: Resolution recommending approval of an amended CUP for the
replacement of existing telecommunication antenna equipment.
1. Motion to approve Resolution PC-2016-004 recommending approval of the
Conditional Use Permit pending the structural engineer’s review and approval.
2. Motion to deny Resolution PC-2016-004 recommending Conditional Use Permit,
based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission.
3. Motion to table action on the request, pending additional information as identified
by the Planning Commission and staff report.
C. STAFF RECOMMNDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit pending the structural
engineer’s review and approval, based on the application materials provided, and with
findings that the proposal meets the requirements of the ordinance, and that the proposal
is replacing existing equipment with no visual or other impacts on surrounding property.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Resolution PC-2016-004
B. Applicant Narrative
C. Frequency/Interference Information
D. Decommissioning Information
E. Application Plan Packet, including:
Title Sheet
Compound Plan
Shelter Plan
Site Work and Drainage Note
Tower Elevations
Antenna Configurations
Antenna & RRH Requirements
Tower Equipment Notes
Tower Section Notes
Planning Commission Agenda – 2/02/16
5
Antenna Grounding Plan
Grounding Details
Electrical Section Notes
Legend and Abbreviations
General Notes
1
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION
RESOLUTIONNO.PC-2016-004
ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOF
THECITYOFMONTICELLORECOMMENDINGAPPROVALOF
ACONDITIONALUSEPERMITAMENDMENTRELATINGTO
ALLOWTHEREPLACEMENTOFEXISTINGTELECOMMUNICATIONS
ATTENNAEQUIPMENTONANEXISTINGTOWER
WHEREAS,theapplicanthasanexistingwirelessservicesantennaarrayonanexisting
towerat6111WildwoodWay,legallydescribedasOutlotA,SpiritHills;and
WHEREAS,thesubjectpropertyiszonedR-1,SingleFamilyResidential,inwhichco-
locationofwirelesscommunicationsantennaeareallowedbyConditionalUsePermit;and
WHEREAS,theapplicantproposestoamendtheexistingCUPtoreplacethecurrentantenna
arrayswithnewequipmentatthesamelocationonthetower;and
WHEREAS,theproposedreplacementequipmentwillbeslightlylargerthantheexisting
equipment;and
WHEREAS,theheightoftheequipmentabovegradewillminimizeanypotentialvisual
impactofthereplacementequipment;and
WHEREAS,nootherchangesareproposedtothesitethatwouldimpactlandusesinthe
area;and
WHEREAS,theproposeddevelopmentamendmentisconsistentwiththegeneralintentof
thecommunicationsrequirementsofthezoningordinance;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionheldapublichearingtoconsiderthematteratits
regularmeetingonFebruary2nd,2016andtheapplicantandmembersofthepublicwere
providedtheopportunitytopresentinformationtothePlanningCommission;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionhasconsideredallofthecommentsandthestaff
report,whichareincorporatedbyreferenceintotheresolution;and
WHEREAS,thePlanningCommissionoftheCityofMonticellomakesthefollowing
FindingsofFactinrelationtotherecommendationofapproval:
1.TheproposedamendmentisconsistentwiththeintentoftheMonticello
ComprehensivePlan.
2
2.TheproposedamendmentwillmeettherequirementsoftheMonticelloZoning
Ordinance.
3.Theproposedamendmentwillnotcreateundueburdensonpublicsystems,including
streetsandutilities.
4.Theproposedamendmentwillnotcreatesubstantialimpacts,visualorotherwise,on
neighboringlanduses.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,MinnesotathattheproposedConditionalUsePermitamendmentishereby
recommendedforapproval.
ADOPTED this2nddayofFebruary,2016,bythePlanningCommissionoftheCityof
Monticello,Minnesota.
MONTICELLOPLANNINGCOMMISSION
By:_______________________________
BradFyle,Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
AngelaSchumann,CommunityDevelopmentDirector
Monticello1900Narrative
Monticello1900
MRUMW013973 3511A03GN7MONTICELLO1900LTE3C/4C10081753MNL01136
AT&Tisproposingtoswapand/orreplacingantennas,andassociatedequipment(suchasRRHs),andthatthere
willbenoincreasetotheheightofthetower,ortothesizeofthecompound.
Monticello1900
MRUMW013973 3511A03GN7MONTICELLO1900LTE3C/4C10081753MNL01136
ConditionalUsePermitApprovalCriteria ApprovalofaConditionalUsePermitapplicationrequiresthatthe
Cityfindthatconditionscanbeestablishedtoensurethatthefollowingcriteriawillbemet:
1.Theconditionalusewillnotsubstantiallydiminishorimpairpropertyvalueswithintheimmediate
vicinityofthesubjectproperty;
RESPONSE:Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradesoftheexistingtowerwillnot
substantiallydiminishorimpairpropertyvalueswithintheimmediatevicinityofthesubject
property;
2.Theconditionalusewillnotbedetrimentaltothehealth,safety,morals,orwelfareofpersons
residingorworkingneartheuse;
RESPONSE:Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwillnotbe
detrimentaltothehealth,safety,morals,orwelfareofpersonsresidingorworkingneartheuse;
3.Theconditionalusewillnotimpedethenormalandorderlydevelopmentofsurroundingpropertyfor
permittedusespredominantinthearea;
RESPONSE:Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwillnotimpede
thenormalandorderlydevelopmentofsurroundingpropertyforpermittedusespredominantin
thearea;
4.Theconditionalusewillnotposeanundueburdenonpublicutilitiesorroads,andadequatesanitary
facilitiesareprovided;
RESPONSE:Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwillnotposean
undueburdenonpublicutilitiesorroads,andadequatesanitaryfacilitiesareprovided;
5.Theconditionalusecanprovideadequateparkingandloadingspaces,andallstorageonthesitecan
bedoneinconformancewithCitycoderequirements;
RESPONSE:Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwillprovide
adequateparkingandloadingspaces,andallstorageonthesitedoesconformtotheCityCode
6.Theconditionalusewillnotresultinanynuisanceincludingbutnotlimitedtoodor,noise,orsight
pollution;
RESPONSE:Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwillnotresultin
anynuisanceincludingbutnotlimitedtoodor,noise,orsightpollution;
7.Theconditionalusewillnotunnecessarilyimpactnaturalfeaturessuchaswoodlands,wetlands,and
shorelines;andallerosionwillbeproperlycontrolled;
Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwillnotunnecessarilyimpact
naturalfeaturessuchaswoodlands,wetlands,andshorelines;andallerosionwillbeproperly
controlled;
8.TheconditionalusewilladheretoanyapplicableadditionalcriteriaoutlinedinChapter5ofthe
MonticelloZoningOrdinancefortheproposeduse.
Theapplicantassuresthemaintenanceupgradeoftheexistingtowerwilladheretoanyapplicable
additionalcriteriaoutlinedinChapter5oftheMonticelloZoningOrdinancefortheproposeduse.
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
COVER
S I T E
S I T E
11"x17" PLOT WILL BE HALF SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
90°
135°
45
°
270°
22
5
°
180°
315°
0°
N
90°
135°
45
°
270°
22
5
°
180°
315°
0°
N
TO OBTAIN LOCATION OF PARTICIPANTS UNDERGROUND FACILITIES
BEFORE YOU DIG IN MINNESOTA, CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 OR
FAX A LOCATE: 1-800-236-4967
AT&T
MOBILITY
AREA MAP
VICINITY MAPLOCAL MAP
DRIVING DIRECTIONS
DRAWING INDEX
SITE PHOTO ENGINEERING
REFERENCE MATERIALS
PROJECT: LTE 3C/4C
AT&T SITE ID: MNL01136
AT&T FA#: 10081753
PACE#: MRUMW012745
PTN#: 3511796704
MONTICELLO 1900
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
PROJECT INFORMATION
12/21/2015
90°
135°
45
°
270°
22
5
°
180°
315°
0°
N
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
C-1
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
C-2
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
C-3
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
T-1
12/21/2015
90°
135°
45
°
270°
22
5
°
180°
315°
0°
N
90°
135°
45
°
270°
22
5
°
180°
315°
0°
N
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
T-2
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
T-3
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
T-4
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
T-5
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
E-1
”
“”
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
E-2
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
E-3
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
N-1
12/21/2015
®
AT&T
MOBILITY
N-2
12/21/2015
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/16
3A. Consideration of an update on the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. (AS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Each year, the Planning Commission is asked to complete an annual review of the
adopted 2008 City of Monticello Comprehensive Plan, and to provide recommendations
for amendment, if desired.
The Comprehensive Plan states that an annual review of the plan “keeps an active and
current focus on achieving the vision for Monticello and the use of the Comprehensive
Plan.” Staff has focused the 2016 annual review on two primary areas:
1. Core Annual Review Areas – areas specifically cited for annual review
2. Chapter 6 – Transportation – Update on planning called for within
In January, the Planning Commission received an update on the City’s Transportation
Plan, including planned capital improvements for the coming year.
For February, the Commission’s review will focus on the Core Annual Review. To
follow below is an analysis of each of the Core Annual Review areas as specified by the
Comprehensive Plan.
1. Development trends and projects from the current years.
a. Growth Projections
Generally, the City’s residential growth over the last two years is tracking at about
one third to half of the average as projected in the Comprehensive Plan. The
housing market is still recovering from its decline and this permit trend line is
indicative of this recovery. Actual new home construction permitting is as shown
on the included graph.
b. Land Use Trends
Residential land use trends:
In reviewing building permit and planning application information, the data
illustrates that the predominant type of residential unit development over the last
five years has been in the detached single-family home sector. Single family
attached (townhome) permits are down substantially from their peak in the early
to mid-2000’s.
Staff believes that this trend is related not only to the overall housing decline, but
also to housing market trends for renting and ownership of housing in suburban
areas, along with Monticello’s demographic characteristics. Monticello is a
relatively young community. The 2010 median age of Monticello’s population
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/16
was 32.4 years. This compares with 35 years for the county and 37 years for the
region. In addition, in a comparison with Wright County and the Twin Cities
SMSA, Monticello has a larger percentage of families with children (72%) than
the Twin Cities SMSA (63%). Single-family home ownership is likely to be
more common along this demographic.
Planning Commission will also note that the townhome product originally platted
at Sunset Ponds was replatted in 2014/2015 as a detached single-family product,
which further illustrates the current residential market trend toward detached
single-family homes in suburban areas.
It is noted that the city’s supply of platted and utility-served single-family
residential lots has decreased to the point of approximately 3 years of inventory at
current permit rates.
As it relates to multi-family home products outside the single-family attached
townhome sector, t he construction of a 202-unit multi-family apartment complex
is underway. This development is likely a response to the aging of existing rental
housing stock in the community, as well as the demand for rental housing in the
marketplace. The updated Community Context Chapter of the Comprehensive
Plan notes that 40% of the city’s apartment stock was built prior to 1970.
Commercial land use trends:
While the City has received few applications opening up new commercial
development areas within the last 5 years (Great River plat along 7th Street west in
example), the City has been fortunate to see stable commercial growth and
redevelopment/re-use within existing commercial areas, even during the
recession. A sampling of commercial development, redevelopment and re -use
activity since the last report in 2012:
Union Crossings Area – new Development
Mattress Firm/AT & T
Marshall’s
Monticello Business Center/Cedar Street & School Boulevard Area
Dollar Tree
ALDI
Goodwill
Other New Development
NAPA/Cherry Berry/Jimmy John’s – Monticello Travel Center
Von Hanson’s
Re-Use/Redevelopment
Oakwood Professional Center – now Schlenner Wenner and Foster White
Former Schlenner Wenner building – now Cargill
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/16
Former Ford - now Cornerstone Chevrolet
Former Dodge building – now Quality RV
O’Ryan’s – now Kwik Trip
D & D Bus – Now Bedrock Motors
Former Kmart – now Runnings
Former Monticello Veterinary Clinic – Now Great River Spine & Sport
Numerous rental spaces in 6th Street Station, Town Center, Hillside
Partnership, Hwy 25 multi-tenant spaces and other downtown buildings
Taken together, this samp ling of activity illustrates a typical pattern of absorption of
existing inventory prior to t he addition of land/space for the commercial market.
Available commercial land inventory is as shown on the attached map.
Industrial land use trends:
Industrial land use development within the past three years has been limited to
expansions on existing sites or within existing industrial areas. Notable expansions
include All Elements and WSI, as well as the platting and development of a new
electrical substation by Xcel Energy.
Available industrial land inventory is as shown on the attached map.
Action/Recommendation:
At this time, staff’s recommendation is to continue to monitor housing trends and
permitting for any required action related to the comprehensive plan.
Given the inventory of commercial and industrial land, staff has no recommendations
related to those land use types at this time, other than continued economic
development initiatives on the part of the EDA and staff.
2. Summary of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
A summary of comprehensive plan amendments is published with each amendment
approved. Since the plan’s adoption in 2008, three amendments representing broader
scale planning initiatives for the City have been adopted:
The 2011 Park & Pathway Plan was adopted by the City Council in June
and has been incorporated as an appendix document to the 2008 Comp
Plan as Chapter 5.
The Embracing Downtown Plan was adopted by the City Council in
January of 2012 and incorporated as an appendix to Chapter 3- Land Use
in 2012. The City also made other changes within the text of the Land Use
chapter relating to the goals and policies established by the Embracing
Downtown.
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/16
Following the release of 2010 Census data and 5-year American
Community Survey data, the City completed an update to Chapter 2 –
Community Context in 2013. The data in Chapter 2 provides a baseline of
information on the community which the City uses to make policy and
land use decisions. Corresponding text changes in Chapter 3 and 4 were
also made to reflect updated data.
Since the time of the Commission’s last summary review of t he Comprehensive
Plan in 2012, the City also adopted a text change to Chapter 3 relating to high-
density uses and adopted a comprehensive plan amendment re-guiding the land
use designation for a 12-acre parcel pf property at the southeast corner of CSAH
18 and I-94 from “Places to Work” to “Places to Live”.
Action/Recommendation:
In reviewing activity within the downtown area, a number of developments or
projects have occurred since the adoption of the Embracing Downtown Plan in
2012. Much like the need to review the overall Comprehensive Plan each year,
staff believes that these projects have created a need to re-evaluate some of the
goals and policies set out by the Embracing Downtown Plan.
Staff has recommended to the City Council and EDA (as part of its goal setting
processes) that the City complete a review of the downtown plan for possible
amendment within the next 2-3 years. The Planning Commission would be
involved in that planning effort if and when it should occur.
3. Discussion of current development issues and implications for the
Comprehensive Plan.
In 2015, the City responded to the issue of solar energy systems and their impact
on land use. The City completed an analysis related to both principal and
accessory use solar systems, developing corresponding ordinances. In addition,
the City responded to a large-scale solar development conceptually proposed
within the city’s orderly annexation area, detailing the costs and impacts to the
city as associated with the proposal.
Other development issues have been noted in the sections above.
Action/Recommendations
Staff would recommend continued monitoring of the solar issue and solar
proposals in the MOAA.
In addition, staff would recommend continued involvement and review of
transportation initiatives in terms of their relationship to comprehensive plan goals
and land use planning. Planning for Fallon Avenue, a possible west interchange,
and a potential river crossing will certainly impact land use planning in the future.
Planning Commission Agenda – 02/02/16
Staff would defer to the Planning Commission on other development issues which
may require attention.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
No action of the Commission required at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that the Comprehensive Plan document continues to represent the goals and
object ives outlined by the City, providing a guide for future development. Actions or
recommendations resulting from an annual review of the document are as noted above
and re-stated below:
o Monitor housing trends and permitting for any required action related to the
comprehensive plan.
o In conjunction with the EDA and Council, complete a review of the downtown
plan for possible amendment within the next 2-3 years
o Continue to monitor solar energy development and solar proposals in the MOAA.
o Continued involvement and review of transportation initiatives in terms of their
relationship to comprehensive plan goals and land use planning.
In addition, continued annual review and amendment of the Comprehensive Plan a s
necessary are important to the continued validity of the document.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
A. Comprehensive Plan
To access the Comprehensive Plan and the Transportation Plan (Chapter 6)
please visit www.ci.monticello.mn.us. Click on “City Departments”, then
“Community Development”, “Planning”, and then ”2008 Comprehensive Plan”.
B. Building Permit Data
C. Commercial Land Availability
D. Industrial Land Availability
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Single Family Detached 74 33 12 9 2 2 22 49 70 38
Single Family Attached 18 12 8 0 0 0 0 3 3 6
Multi - Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 136
TOTALS 92 45 20 9 2 2 22 52 73 180
NEW CONSTRUCTION STATISTICS - RESIDENTIAL
Destination for Innovation
1.
3.
7.
5.
9.
2.
4.
8.
6.
10.
14.
18.
23.
27.
12.
16.
20.
25.
29.
39.
11.
15.
19.
24.
28.
38.
13.
17.
22.
21.
26.
30.
40.
31.
41.
32.
42.
33.
43.
34.
44.
35.
45.
36.
46.
37.
47.48.
49.
PIDUpdated: 8/2015 Owner
John Uphoff
juphoff@wsbeng.com
(763) 267-2942
Properties for Sale
Guided Commercial
Size (Acres)2013 TaxesZoning
155-050-000020
155-018-001020
155-500-142104
155-500-142300
155-500-142303
155-213-001010
155-500-142400
155-227-000010
155-221-000010
155-210-001010
155-164-000020155-176-001020
155-176-002011
155-164-000040155-164-000050
155-164-000030
155-193-001020
155-151-004010
155-174-001010
155-171-001021
155-157-001020
155-157-001010
155-151-003010
155-500-142210
155-125-000070
155-125-004110
155-125-000040
155-171-000040
155-171-000030
Joseph Lofromboise Trust
Kean of Monticello, Inc
City of Monticello
Premier Bank Minnesota
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
Glen & Lois Posusta
John & Mary Lundsten
Ocello LLC
Quad Development LLC
Kleinbank
City of MonticelloCity of Monticello
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
Highland Bank
Ohana Properties Family LP
Ohana Properties Family LP
4134 Deegan Avenue NE LLC
Arma Property LLCOhana Properties Family LP
Bradley & Sharon Larson
City of Monticello
Ocello LLC
Wells Fargo Bank NA
Ocello LLC
John Chadwick Farms LLC
J X Bowers LLC
3.13
1.92
5.11
18.31
3.20
3.07
1.79
38.87
43.15
3.80
1.80
2.832.70
1.29
6.14
2.14
7.20
7.02
0.57
0.90
1.16
1.671.55
1.78
4.11
12.96
6.28
11.85
19.09
19.09
$3,340.00
$4,938.00
$0.00
$29,934.00
$0.00
$0.00
$9,800.00
$1,628.00
$0.00
$6,474.00
$6,160.00
$0.00$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$7,984.00
$2,476.00
$4,482.00
$6,304.00
$9,424.00$6,368.00
$2,950.00
$0.00
$7,055.00
$6,042.00
$6,452.00$878.00
$841.00
IBC
B-2
B-2
R-PUD
B-2
B-4
B-3
B-3
B-3
B-3
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-3
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-3
B-3
B-3B-3
B-4
B-4
155-029-002130G&E Properties LLC 4.18 $5,302.00IBC
155-029-002120G&E Properties LLC 2.03 $2,940.00IBC
155-029-002110G&E Properties LLC 2.11 $3,054.00IBC
155-029-002100G&E Properties LLC 2.20 $3,186.00IBC155-029-002090G&E Properties LLC 2.28 $3,300.00IBC
155-029-002050
155-068-001010
155-185-001010
155-202-001060155-079-001010
155-011-000171
155-212-001010
155-212-001030155-178-002030
155-205-001020
155-117-002010
155-117-001030
155-086-000010
155-196-000020
Kenneth Maus
Riverwood Bank
State of Minnesota
IRET PropertiesJyoti R Patel
Monticello Industrial Park
Monticello Industrial Park, Inc
Ryan Companies US INC
Kean of Monticello, IncRyan Companies US INC
Ryan Companies US INC
MMC Land Company LLC
MMC Land Company LLC
SPO LLC
5.40
19.35
1.58
0.510.79
40.83
1.54
1.091.27
1.87
5.04
2.24
0.95
1.43
$3,230.00
$30,286.00
$0.00
$0.00$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$263.00
IBC
B-3
B-3
B-3
B2/IBC
B-3
B-4
B-4
B-4
B-4
Legend
Privately Owned Properties - Guided Commercial
City Owned Properties - Guided Commercial
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.8.9.
10.11.12.13.
14.15.
16.17.
18.
19.20.
21.
22.
23.24.25.26.
27.
28.
30.31.32.33.34.35.
36.
37.38.
39.40.
41.
42.43.44.45.
46.
47.48.
49.
29.
155-037-001010
B-4
B-4
Destination for Innovation
1.
5.
9.
3.
7.
11.
2.
6.
10.
12.
4.
8.
PID
Updated: 8/2015
Owner Size (Acres)2013 TaxesZoning
John Uphoff
juphoff@wsbeng.com
(763) 267-2942
Properties for Sale
Guided Industrial
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,
Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Legend
Privately Owned Properties - Guided Industrial
City Owned Properties - Guided Industrial
1.2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
155-194-000-010City of Monticello 10.87 $0.00I-1
155-191-000020City of Monticello 1.83 $0.00I-1
155-223-000010City of Monticello 5.28 $0.00I-1
155-194-000010City of Monticello 4.99 $0.00I-1
155-194-000020City of Monticello 6.67 $0.00I-1
155-171-000050City of Monticello 16.1 Dev$0.00I-1
155-194-000040City of Monticello 5.01 $0.00I-1
155-185-000010
155-171-000060
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
2.32
13.67
$0.00
$0.00
I-1
A-0
155-018-003020Kenneth & Teresa Spaeth 4.39 $4,452.00I-2
John Uphoff
juphoff@wsbeng.com
(763) 267-2942
Properties for Sale
Guided Industrial
155-143-001020 Monticello Industrial Park Inc
Schultz & Schupp LLC
7.25
1.18
$4,164.00
$3,302.00
IBC
I-1155-038-001060
Planning Commission Agenda: 02/02/16
1
3B. Community Development Director’s Report .
Planning Commission Recommendations
The City Council took the following action on January 25th as related to items on the January
agenda of the Planning Commission:
Consideration to recommend for the adoption the 2016 City of Monticello
Official Zoning Map.
Council action: Approved unanimously with notation to update underlying base
parcel map.
Consideration to a request for amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance,
Chapter 4, Section 5(I) – Temporary Signs and Chapter 8, Section 4 – Definitions
for amendments to Temporary Sign regulations.
Council action: Council approved 4-1 after discussion related to off-premise
signage allowances. Approval motion included the notation that the Planning
Commission and Council hold a workshop on permanent and temporary signage.