The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Agenda 10-06-2015AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, October 6th, 2015 - 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. Regular Meeting Minutes — August 4th, 2015 b. Regular Meeting Minutes — September 1St, 2015 C. Citizen Comments D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda 2. Public Hearings A. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Amendment to Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Sunset Ponds, for setback variance for attached accessory structure decks in the R -2 (Single and Two - Family Residence) District, as per Chapter 2.4(0)(10) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Applicant: Fedder Homes B. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an Accessory Building in a Manufactured Home Park (M -H) District, as per Chapter 5.3(D) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Applicant: Kjellberg's Inc./Kjellberg, Kent C. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Amendment to Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Taco Bell, for building addition in the Central Community District (CCD), as per Chapter 2.4(0)(10) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Applicant: Border Foods 3. Regular Agenda A. Update — November Hearing for Amendments to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance as related to Brew Pubs, Brewer Taprooms and Microdistilleries 4. Added Items 5. Adjournment MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, August 4, 2015 - 6:00 PM - Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Present: Brad Fyle, Linda Buchmann, John Falenschek, Marc Simpson Absent: Sam Murdoff Others: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), John Rued, Charlotte Gabler (Council Liaison) 1. General Business A. Call to order Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. B. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE JULY 7, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES. JOHN FALENSCHEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. C. Citizen Comments None D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda None 2. Public Hearings A. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 3, Section 4(F) - Single and Two - Family Residential, Chapter 4, Section 11 - Building Materials, Chapter 5, Section 2(C) - Standards for Residential Uses and Chapter 8, Section 4 - Definitions, for ordinance re2ulatin2 minimum residential standards in the R -2 District Applicant: City of Monticello Brad Fyle stated that the Planning Commission had participated in a workshop just prior to this meeting to consider proposed changes to the R -2 in more detail. Angela Schumann explained that staff had proposed amendments to minimum square footage standards within the R -2 District at the July Planning Commission meeting; the amendments were to address a discrepancy and clarify vague language within the ordinance. She indicated that the commissioners had discussed the viability of the proposed minimum square footage standards in response to current housing trends and had provided preliminary input. Schumann noted that the commissioners had opted to table action and schedule a workshop to consider the matter in more depth. Planning Commission Minutes: 8/04/15 Schumann summarized that staff had revised the proposed amendments to reflect the intent of both commissioner input and Comprehensive Plan policy guidance which establishes a priority on move -up (larger square footage, higher amenity) housing. The revised amendments proposed include requirements related to a minimum finishable area per unit type (1,800 square feet for single - family dwelling units and 1,400 square feet for duplexes, townhomes and multiple - family dwelling units); a finished square footage size at least equal to the foundation size of the dwelling unit; and a 15% brick or stone building facade requirement in the R -2 District. Schumann noted that the proposed amendments also include modifications to unit type definitions and amended language related to attached accessory structures (garages). Fyle noted that the public hearing had been continued from the July meeting and invited comment. As there were no comments, the public hearing was closed. JOHN FALENSCHEK MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS; AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE THE REQUIRED ORDINANCE NO. 619 FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SERVE TO CLARIFY EXISTING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS FOR THE R -2 DISTRICT, AND SUPPORT CONSISTENCY WITH CURRENT CITY REVIEW PROCESS. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. Angela Schumann stated that this item would move forward for City Council consideration within the next two or three meeting cycles of the Council. B. Public Hearing — Consideration of a Map Amendment for Rezoning from B- 3 (Highway Business) District to B -2 (Limited Business) District, and Zoning Text Amendment within the B -3 (Highway Business) District to allow Places of Public Assembly as a permitted or conditional use. Applicant: Quarry Community Church Steve Grittman explained that the Planning Commission had been asked to take action to either amend the zoning map or amend the zoning text to allow Quarry Church to permanently occupy the facility at 3939 Chelsea Road West (Lot 1, Block 1, Gould Addition). He noted that the City Council had approved an interim ordinance allowing a different church to use the facility temporarily as a Place of Public Assembly in 2014, but had not revised the ordinance permanently. Grittman outlined the proposed options and highlighted related issues. He explained that the option to rezone the property from a B -3, (Highway Business) District, to a B -2, (Limited Business) District, which permits public assembly use, would raise issues related to spot zoning. He also pointed out that rezoning the property would open the site up to other uses allowed within the B -2, which are 2 Planning Commission Minutes: 8/04/15 not compatible with the area. Grittman noted that staff does not support the request for rezoning for these reasons. Grittman indicated that the City's legal counsel had noted a preference for adding language to the B -3 District, should the decision be made to accommodate the proposed use. He explained that ordinance language could be amended to add Places of Public Assembly either as a permitted or conditional use within the B -3. Grittman pointed out that staff agree that the proposed use should be conditional within the B -3 if the text language is to be amended. Grittmanrecommended that the Planning Commission table action on the text amendment and direct staff to prepare language related to allowing the use by conditional use permit. Brad Fyle opened the public hearing. Jeff Bajek, Chief Credit Officer at Venture Bank, (6210 Wayzata Boulevard, Golden Valley) stated that Venture Bank had been involved with the property since providing financing in 2007 and has been fee owner of the property since March of 2015. He said that they'd marketed the property for two years and had spoken with 90% of dealerships within the metro area to identify interest in the property and determine its viability as a location for an auto dealership. He indicated that domestic auto dealers indicated that adding a dealership to the market was not a good idea. He said that foreign dealers said that the site was too big. Bajek said that existing dealerships are recognizing that large acreage, large footprint sites with hundreds and hundreds of cars isn't the model in today's retail market and that those facilities are just too big to take on. Bajek stated that they'd also marketed the property to farm implement, farm repair and auto repair companies and was told that the site was too big. He added that they had approached a recycling company, a grocery store and a health club facility in an effort to identify what type of facility might be viable on the site. Bajek noted that there is a purchase agreement on the property. He suggested that the church would drive a lot of traffic along a large thoroughfare benefitting the other dealerships in the area. He indicated that it would be a win -win to allow the church to occupy the space. Bajek said that, in his opinion, if the site is designated as an auto dealership it is likely that the property will sit vacant for years to come. He recommended changing the use. Kari Sanders, Executive Director for Quarry Church, (100 Chelsea Road, Monticello), briefly outlined the church's history in Monticello and explained why it is considering the property located at 3939 West Chelsea Road. Sanders summarized that Quarry was established as a portable church in Monticello in 2001. She said that the church has a great partnership with the middle school which allows them to rent the auditorium for Sunday services. Sanders said that church leadership had decided about five years ago to find a Planning Commission Minutes: 8/04/15 permanent physical location to show church stability within the community. She indicated that the church had looked into purchasing the bowling alley site in 2011 but was unable to make that option work due to timing and finances. She pointed out that the church had worked with the City of Monticello in 2012 to rezone and purchase property at 100 Chelsea Road to meet space needs for office staff and youth events. Sanders indicated that the church had been making plans to consolidate its programs under one umbrella in the future as it would be at maximum capacity, landlocked and looking for space options within five years at its current location. She noted that the church began more actively considering other options within the community in response to learning that they will have to shift between school buildings for several summers to rent auditorium space for Sunday services due to district renovations. Sanders pointed out that it came to the church's attention that the property at 3939 Chelsea is for sale within their range of bank approval and explained why the facility would be a good long term fit for the church. Sanders indicated that the layout of the showroom could be used as a fellowship area and that the space is very similar to their preferred building layout. She suggested that the church would utilize all of the finished area and build out one of the service areas for use as an auditorium. She pointed out that there is ample parking at the site and noted that congestion issues would be addressed. She said that they would be open to leasing a section of the building on a temporary basis until they grow into the space. Sanders asked the Commission to consider that churches are changing. She noted that, although the church is not for profit, it draws 50% of its membership from surrounding cities. She pointed out that these are people who love being in Monticello and who shop and eat here on Sundays and Wednesday nights. Sanders indicated that the church could expand the facility at 100 Chelsea Road to provide room to grow for several years but she noted that the facility at 3939 West Chelsea would provide a permanent location. She also suggested that it makes more sense financially to buy and renovate the 3939 facility than to add on at the current facility. Sanders pointed out that they plan to sell the 100 Chelsea Road facility which provides a new commercial opportunity for the City. Sanders noted that the church has the support of their congregation, their denomination and their bank and is prepared to handle operational and maintenance costs. She noted that the church had hired a Director of Operations to oversee the maintenance and management of the facility. Sanders indicated that the church supports the City's recommendation to retain the B -3 zoning designation and is open to conditional use permit ideas. Planning Commission Minutes: 8/04/15 Dean Wick, Outsource Architecture, (P.O. Box 7274, St. Cloud), stated that, as a previous Planning Commissioner, he'd like to note that staff had done a really good job of tying public assembly into the Comprehensive Plan within Places for Community. Wick said that he'd seen the scale of auto dealerships go down and scale of churches go up. He noted that churches are moving out of core neighborhoods and into industrial parks in buildings that don't look like churches. Wick said that the building is in good shape and is move -in ready. He indicated that future remodeling can be completed during occupancy. He pointed out that, although a landscape plan had not been previously required on the property, the church is looking at phasing in green space between the parking islands. He indicated that the church would not create a traffic problem for the area. Wayne Elam, of Commercial Realty Solutions, (3 Hwy 55 W., Buffalo), stated that he is the broker for the property. He said that he had looked into other uses for the property because no new franchise dealerships have been established since the industry retracted. Elam stated that he'd marketed the building to three heavy truck users but each had said that remodeling costs would exceed efficiencies. Elam pointed out that the industry had changed due to online sales. He indicated that the lot includes parking for 550 cars and noted that most dealerships are not stocking more than 200 -250 cars. He said that the total site is 10.66 acres and includes 700 feet of interstate frontage. He said that the building is 57,000 square feet in size and pointed out that splitting the lot would involve moving the property line which would change the use and code requirements for parking. Elam suggested that churches have chosen to locate in retail and industrial areas to enable them to buy massive amounts of square footage cheaply. He pointed out that the City's portion of property taxes on this building are $21,000. He suggested that a large church would bring in much more than $21,000 despite coming off the tax rolls due to its non - profit status. Ron Maas, (13830 Northdale Boulevard, Rogers), owner of the Maas Automotive Group, stated that he has 43 years of experience in the auto industry and had owned several dealerships. He said that he had not been contacted about buying the property but hadn't pursued it as an option because it isn't the niche he has established. Maas indicated that the information presented that suggests that dealerships are downsizing is misleading. He said that he hasn't seen any documentation to show that the site would not work for an auto dealership. He pointed out that CarMax had just built a facility in Brooklyn Park that likely houses a thousand cars. He said that he chose to purchase property in an area that would support automotive use and had expected to expand at 3887 Chelsea Road as the business grew. He suggested that auto use is the best fit for this property. Judd Johnson, (7520 Wedgewood Way, Maple Grove), disclosed that the church had supported him while overseas years ago and that he had previously served on the Isanti County Planning Commission and the Minnesota Planning Commission. 5 Planning Commission Minutes: 8/04/15 Johnson said that he had made a technical inspection of all building systems, with the exception of the fire system, and concluded that the facility would work for an assembly use. Johnson said that he had seen transitions at a lot of dealership properties. He said that the size of this property is great for a church because the multiple services doubles the number of cars parking at the facility. He noted that the size of the auditorium that the church is planning will require parking for 280- 300 cars. Johnson said that it is wise to look at the property as a B -3 and a good move to allow it as a conditional use. Hearing no other comments, Fyle closed the public hearing. Decision 1: MAP AMENDMENT FOR REZONING FROM B -3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS TO B -2, LIMITED BUSINESS: LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -011 RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE MAP AMENDMENT FOR REZONING FROM B -3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) TO B -2 (LIMITED BUSINESS), BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. Decision 2: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE B -3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT ADDING PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY TO THE LIST OF ALLOWABLE USES: LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO TABLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -012, AS RELATED TO THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE B -3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT; AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO DEVELOP ORDINANCE LANGUAGE ALLOWING PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY IN THE B -3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) DISTRICT AS A CONDITIONAL USE. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 3 -1 WITH BRAD FYLE VOTING IN DISSENT. Brad Fyle indicated that he thinks that the property should be used as it was intended and expects that it will be purchased for that use at some point. 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration of calling for a public hearing for Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 4.3 — Fences & Walls as related to fence materials and appearance rol Planning Commission Minutes: 8/04/15 Angela Schumann noted that the Planning Commission had agreed to consider calling for a public hearing related to fencing materials in response to a request presented by a resident during the citizen comments portion of the July meeting. Schumann explained that the Department of Building Safety and Code Enforcement had issued a violation notice citing that the materials used to construct the fence were prohibited. She indicated that it is staff's position that using only wire mesh as fencing material would present aesthetic and maintenance issues over time. Schumann pointed out that the commission could choose to consider allowing a mix of fencing materials. Commissioners made comments related to fence placement, design, materials and maintenance. Building Official John Rued indicated that the Building Code only addresses fence height and that most local fencing ordinances are vague. The commissioners agreed, by consensus, to review the entire fencing section of the zoning code in the near future. Schumann proposed that the Planning Commission schedule a field trip to view existing fences within the community in conjunction with considering ordinance amendments. MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 4.3 — FENCES & WALLS AS RELATED TO FENCE MATERIALS AND APPEARANCE. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. B. Consideration of a report regarding Temporary Signs, Chapter 4, Section 5 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Angela Schumann reported that the business community representative roundtable to provide feedback related to the temporary sign ordinance had not yet met due to conflicting schedules. She also noted that staff are reviewing materials related to a recent Supreme Court ruling which may impact sign regulations. She indicated that this item would be brought before the Commission again for consideration when more information is available. Schumann pointed out that the interim ordinance is in place until December. Charlotte Gabler asked about electronic options for obtaining preliminary input. Schumann indicated that she'd look into how such options might be structured. 4. Adjournment LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:48 PM. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. Recorder: Kerry Burri Approved: Attest: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 7 MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, September 1, 2015 - 6:00 PM - Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Present: Brad Fyle, Linda Buchmann, John Falenschek, Marc Simpson, Sam Murdoff Absent: Charlotte Gabler (Council Liaison) Others: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), John Rued 1. General Business A. Call to order Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. B. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE JULY 7, 2015 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 4, 2015 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Fyle noted that the August 4, 2015 regular meeting minutes were not yet available. C. Citizen Comments None D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda None 2. Public Hearings A. Continued Public Hearing — Consideration of a Text Amendment within the B -3 (Highway Business) District to allow Places of Public Assembly as a permitted or conditional use. Applicant: Quarry Community Church (NAC) Steve Grittman summarized that the Planning Commission had denied Quarry Church's request to rezone property located at 3939 Chelsea Road West to a B -2 (Limited Business) District at its August meeting, and continued the public hearing, directing staff to develop text amendment language which would allow Places of Public Assembly as a conditional use within the B -3 District. Grittman reviewed the general standards under which Places of Public Assembly are allowed. He noted that staff had also recommended additional conditions to ensure that the nature of the public assembly use reflects the regional (traveler- Planning Commission Minutes: 9/01/15 based) land use intent of the B -3 District. Grittman outlined the following additional conditions for B -3 amendment: 1. Public Assembly in the B -3 is only allowed on properties of 10 acres in size or more. 2. Public Assembly uses must occupy buildings of at least 20,000 gross square feet of area. 3. Public Assembly uses in the B -3 district shall provide off - street parking areas that are designed to meet their unique traffic patterns and parking accumulation ratios. For the B -3 district, the recommended requirement would be one parking space per 2.5 seats in the main assembly area, based on the building code calculation for maximum occupancy. 4. Public Assembly in the B -3 District will be required to provide a traffic study demonstrating peak traffic periods, and the ability to manage traffic loads without negatively impacting the adjoining public streets. Private and /or public street improvements may be required to ensure no negative impacts. 5. CUP applications for Public Assembly use in the B -3 District will require the identification of the principal use, and those other uses of the subject property that are proposed as accessory uses. All such uses must be allowed in the B -3 District, and may impact other support activities such as parking supply. Fyle resumed the continued public hearing. Kari Sanders, the Executive Director of Quarry Church, (100 Chelsea Road, Monticello), stated that the church supports the additional language for the conditional use permit. She also indicated that the church had begun to move forward with the traffic study should the request for text amendment be approved. Sanders noted that the traffic study would include the church's growth plan estimates. Wayne Elam, of Commercial Realty Solutions, (3 Hwy 55 W., Buffalo), broker for the property, suggested that the request would update the City's code related to Places of Public Assembly. He suggested that the typical minimum cost for a traffic study is $10,000. As there were no further public comments, the hearing was closed. Decision 1: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE B -3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT ADDING PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY TO THE LIST OF ALLOWABLE USES: 2 Planning Commission Minutes: 9/01/15 LINDA BUCHMANN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -012 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED TEXT AMENDMENT ADDING PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE B -3 LISTING OF ALLOWABLE PRINCIPAL USES, BASED ON FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -1 WITH BRAD FYLE VOTING IN DISSENT. (Brad Fyle said that he supports Quarry Church but does not think it is appropriate to allow the church to locate in the B -3 District.) Angela Schumann indicated that Quarry Church had asked that the map and text amendment requests be considered by the City Council. She noted that these items would be included on the regular Council agenda at the September 281h meeting. B. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4 - Finishing Standards, Section 4.3 - Fences & Walls, Subsections (G) Prohibited Fences and (J) Appearance re2ulatin2 Permit Requirements and allowable materials. Applicant: City of Monticello Planning Commission Angela Schumann summarized that the Planning Commission had called for a public hearing at its August meeting to consider amending standards for allowable fencing materials in response to a citizen comment related to a violation notice which had been presented at the July meeting. Schumann noted that the fence had been constructed using wire mesh which is a prohibited material. She stated that staff had proposed amendments to allow wire mesh to be used in combination with other approved fencing materials and to require that materials be coated to prevent future maintenance issues. Schumann pointed out that these amendments support the Comprehensive Plan emphasis on higher amenity development. Schumann also noted that staff had also proposed amending permitting requirements to maintain consistency with changes to the adopted Building Code. She stated that the proposed amendment would require a building permit for fences over seven (7) feet high. Schumann proposed that this change also be reflected in the language within the Industrial and Business Campus District provision in Section 4.3(D)(3). Schumann noted that the Planning Commission had indicated an interest in updating the full fencing ordinance at some point in the future. Schumann pointed out that the ordinance language did not refer to chicken wire or framing and material gauge requirements in an effort to keep ordinance language simple. She summarized that the proposed amendment would add a phrase to Section 4.3(G) Prohibited Fences as follows: "Wire or metal materials may be allowed if framed with permitted materials and treated with weather resistant coating. No "t" metal posts shall be permitted." Planning Commission Minutes: 9/01/15 Schumann also indicated that the proposed amendment would add a phrase to Section 4.3(J)(1) Appearance as related to Customary Materials as follows: "or metal materials treated with weather resistant coating, " Brad Fyle opened the public hearing. Anthony Buss stated that he owns the property at 4640 Country Circle and that he had attended the meeting in place of his brother, Joe Blum, who addressed the Planning Commission in July in regard to the violation notice. Buss said that he thought that he'd followed fence construction rules and apologized for creating a problem. He said that he had chosen to use green treated cedar and material two times the thickness of wire mesh so that the fence would be rigid, strong and easily maintained. He stated that he had intended to complete the top and bottom rails of the fence but stopped construction upon receiving the violation notice. He said that his neighbors love the fence. Hearing no additional comments, the public hearing was closed. Building Official John Rued noted that the material looks like reinforcement wire for concrete and pointed out that it was already rusty. Buss indicated that he hadn't been able to find galvanized material in the thickness he'd wanted so he used reinforced steel. He said that the material is not coated but indicated that he'd intended to paint it black so that it would be weather resistant. Rued suggested that it would meet the intent of the ordinance if Buss were to seal the wire and provide framing at the bottom. There was some discussion related to the value of including ordinance language which specifically prohibits the use of chicken wire and /or specifically includes top and bottom railings to define framing. Steve Grittman suggested identifying a gauge requirement in place of language which is subject to interpretation. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 622 FOR AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 4 - FINISHING STANDARDS, SECTION 4.3 - FENCES & WALLS, SUBSECTIONS (G) - PROHIBITED FENCES AND (J) - APPEARANCE REGULATING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ALLOWABLE MATERIALS; AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE ALLOWING MATERIALS TO BE USED IN COMBINATION, AND FURTHER SPECIFIES GAUGE AND FRAMING REQUIREMENTS. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. C. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5 - Use Standards, Section 5.3 - Accessory Use Standards, Subsection (D) Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses re2ulatin2 accessory use related to outdoor bulk fuel sales. Applicant: Ouality RV/Machholz, Craig for VHM HoldinoNon Hanson's Meats (AS) Planning Commission Minutes: 9/01/15 Angela Schumann summarized that representatives from Von Hanson's Meats and Quality RV had submitted a joint application requesting that the zoning ordinance be amended to allow them to install outdoor propane fuel containers on their commercial sites to serve their customers. She noted that the proposed text amendment would allow accessory use bulk fuel sales as permitted uses in the B -2, B -3 and B -4 commercial zoning districts and by conditional use permit in the CCD. Brad Fyle opened the public hearing. Jon Tennessen, of Von Hanson's Meats, said that, since O'Ryan's closed, he and business partner Craig Macholz, found out that there is a big local demand for propane. He said that many Von Hanson's customers had asked if they would provide bulk fuel service. Tennessen pointed out that service fits with what they do and meets the needs of their customers. He explained that the propane would be supplied and maintained by a reputable company. Craig Macholz, of Von Hanson's Meats, stated that he had recently met with city staff to discuss using shrubs to address the screening requirement. He indicated that fuel service would be located on the northeast corner of the building adjacent to County Road 39. Ron Vaughn, of Quality RV, 3801 Chelsea Road, stated that they would like to service new and used RV units within their own facility. Vaughn said that bulk fuel service is proposed to be located between the building and interstate on the north side of the building. He noted that they will accommodate whatever screening is recommended. Steve Colquist, of Ferrell Gas, indicated that the proposed installation would consist of stainless steel cabinets and look similar to those previously located at O'Ryan's. He responded to questions about safety and screening requirements related to bulk fuel dispensing stations. He said that it is nice to have shrubbery for screening but pointed out that the NFP 58 requires a minimum of three feet around any flammable material. He specified the importance of access to valves to cool the tank in the event of a fire. As there were no further public comments, the hearing was closed. Linda Buchmann suggested that it seemed excessive to require that businesses pay to screen such units because it to do so hides the service. She also pointed out that screening had not been included at other bulk fuel sales sites. Schumann explained that the code requires that outdoor storage areas be screened. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 621 FOR AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 5 - USE STANDARDS, SECTION 5.3 - ACCESSORY USE STANDARDS, SUBSECTION (D) ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORY USES REGULATING ACCESSORY USE RELATED TO OUTDOOR BULK FUEL SALES. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. 5 Planning Commission Minutes: 9/01/15 Schumann stated that this item would move forward for Council consideration as part of the consent agenda on September 14th. She said that staff would note the commission's discussion related to screening concerns should Council wish to address it. 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration of an update and recommendation on the Northwest Monticello Interchange Planning Area Angela Schumann summarized that staff had recently learned that a land use plan study of the Interchange Planning Area must be conducted prior to further research related to a west interchange. Schumann explained that Northwest Associated Consultants (NAC) had prepared a scope of work for the study which includes developing land use concepts for the four interchange scenarios (no build, interchange at Orchard Road, interchange at County Road 39, and interchanges at Orchard and County Road 39). She pointed out this information would enable WSB to prepare an analysis of the feasibility of the proposed scenarios and submit those findings to MnDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) for review and approval. Schumann asked that the Planning Commission review the scope of work developed by NAC and recommend moving forward with a land use planning effort that is directly tailored to the siting of an interchange. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT A LAND USE STUDY BE PREPARED FOR THE NORTHWEST MONTICELLO INTERCHANGE PLANNING AREA. JOHN FALENSCHEK SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Schumann noted that this item would be considered by the Council on September 281h 4. Adjournment MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:26 PM. LINDA BUCHMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Recorder: Kerry Burri Approved: Attest: Angela Schumann, Community Development Director m Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 2A. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Sunset Ponds, for a proposed rear yard setback variance for attached accessory structure decks in the R -2 (Single and Two Family Residence) District. Applicant: Fedder Homes (NAC) Property: Legal: Lots 22 -24, Block 7, Sunset Ponds Address: 6794, 6788 & 6782 Gingham Court Planning Case Number: ZSPDCK, 2015 -033 A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND Request(s): PUD Amendment to accommodate the construction of accessory decks to the rear of existing townhomes which will encroach into the required rear yard setback. Deadline for Decision: November 14, 2015 Land Use Designation: Places to Live Zoning Designation: R -2, Single and Two - Family District The purpose of the "R -2" single and two - family residential district is to provide for low to moderate density one and two unit dwellings and directly related complementary uses. Overlays /Environmental Regulations Applicable: NA Current Site Use: Attached townhomes Surrounding Land Uses: North: Wetland /Detached townhomes East: Attached townhomes South: Interstate 94 West: Wetland Project Description: The project consists of the construction of 8 foot decks attached to the north wall of three existing townhomes which are located on base lots with just over 8 feet of lot area depth. The required setback for such structures is normally 6 feet from the property line. Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 ANALYSIS The townhomes in question were constructed recently, subsequent to the original PUD construction, slightly different in design to the original structures. The builder included a "ledger board" to allow the construction of a deck, but decks were not proposed as a part of the townhouse construction. Decks were not constructed for other attached townhomes that had been built in the initial phase of work. To add the decks, the applicants are seeking an amendment to the PUD, since the construction would encroach into the base lot area that had been platted with the original project. The proposed decks would be 8 feet deep (leaving a 0.47 foot setback to the lot line), and 12 feet wide, with a stairway leading down from the deck. Procedurally, this request requires the PUD amendment as noted, but technically does not require a variance — flexibility under PUD design is allowed without adhering to the findings requirements for variances. Decks are not uncommon attachments for resdential PUD projects, and it is also common that, provided the structures fit within the lot lines established by the PUD and plat, very little or no setback is provided, given that the setback to other buildings, streets, or open spaces are controlled by association ownership and management. As noted, the decks are proposed to face the wetland, and are more than 130 feet from the closest planned structures to the north. While the decks would encroach into the current wetland buffer setback, these structures would be exempt from that regulation since the code applies only to projects newly undertaken after the wetland ordinance was adopted. In this regard, staff believes that the setback encroachment is in keeping with similar projects, even though this particular PUD does not have other decks. The primary concern lies in the construction details, since the wetland area has expanded since the Sunset Ponds wetland delineation was done at the outset of the project. Staff is concerned that soil conditions may impact the stability of typical deck footings. As such, staff notes the following: Because of the high water table, and anticipating that the soil is of poor bearing capacity, footing sizes and depth may deviate from the minimum standard dictated by the State Building Code. It should also be noted that the plans and final construction approval will require that all improvements are to be located within the limits of the private lot lines, including decks, railings, stairs, and all structural members including footings. 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 PUD applications are unique to the project under consideration, and this amendment impacts only the three structures subject to the application. Other townhomes in the project would need to provide their own justification for similar encroachments, and would be dependent on location, surrounding conditions, and the proximity of other buildings or streets. Finally, staff would note that the encroachment of the decks toward the wetland is allowed since that ordinance is not effective for previously platted projects. Nonetheless, staff would encourage the association to consider the establishment of a natural vegetation buffer between the lawn grasses and the current wetland edge. A natural buffer permits the filtering of lawn or stormwater chemicals from impacting the water quality in the wetland itself. This comment is not added as a condition of approval, but is only advisory to the larger association. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC- 2015 -015, recommending approval of the PUD Amendment allowing the construction of decks that encroach within the required setback, based on the conditions listed in Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No.PC- 2015 -015, based on findings to be identified at the public hearing. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the PUD amendment. Although the original project does not appear to have anticipated the construction of decks, there is room on the property, and setbacks approaching zero are common PUD conditions, especially in conditions where there is common ownership and maintenance surrounding the private lot area. Staff's recommendation incorporates the conditions in Exhibit Z, and staff encourages the applicants and the association to work toward the establishment of a naturally vegetated buffer strip along the wetland edge, although this comment is not made a condition of the staffs recommendation. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution PC- 2015 -015 B. Aerial Site Image C. Applicant Narrative D. Lot Exhibit E. Proposed Decks F. Deck Dimensions G. Deck Plan H. Deck Elevations L Site Images Z. Conditions of Approval 3 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 EXHIBIT Z PUD Amendment for Sunset Ponds Legal: Lots 22 -24, Block 7, Sunset Ponds Address: 6794, 6788 & 6782 Gingham Court 1. Because of the high water table, and anticipating that the soil is of poor bearing capacity, footing sizes and depth may deviate from the minimum standard dictated by the State Building Code. 2. All improvements are to be located within the limits of the private lot lines, including decks, railings, stairs, and all structural members including footings. 2 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -015 RECOMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR SUNSET PONDS RELATED TO DECK SETBACKS WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request to construct decks on existing townhomes that encroach into the required setback; and WHEREAS, the proposed decks would be located entirely within the private property of the applicants; and WHEREAS, the Planned Unit Development accommodates flexibility from the minimum standards of the applicable zoning district; and WHEREAS, the proposed decks will not encroach into the common area, or impact neighboring property or streets; and WHEREAS, the Wetland Ordinance buffer setback does not apply to previously platted land, as with this application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 6, 2015 on the application 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: 1. The proposed deck construction is common to developments of this type. 2. The proposed decks do not impact neighboring property or streets due to the excessive distance to other property or improvements. 3. The proposed decks do impact the common property of the PUD. 4. The proposed decks are consistent with the general requirements and intent of the PUD. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approve the PUD Amendment for Sunset Ponds, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z as follows: CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -015 1. Because of the high water table, and anticipating that the soil is of poor bearing capacity, footing sizes and depth may deviate from the minimum standard dictated by the State Building Code. 2. All improvements are to be located within the limits of the private lot lines, including decks, railings, stairs, and all structural members including footings. ADOPTED this 6th day of October, 2015, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION L-02 ATTEST: Brad Fyle, Chair Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 2 0 u s� 2 a u V v L u L O N N v u u v s u m Q O v U O C u c� �L E C U 00 v � 00 L 00 0 L .,i CU 0 �N c W > O CU m N C N N N Q O LL 4 — Lk ,do- rl t - fi . p,,` _ 'rr {: to �. i DJ2DMJ Planning, LLC 3004 Armour Terrace St. Anthony, MN 55418 August 8, 2015; updated September 8, 2015 Mayor and Council Planning Commissioners City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 C/o Community Development Director Angela Schumann Re: Final Stage PUD Amendment to Sunset Ponds building elevations for 6794, 6782 and 6788 Gingham Court Dear Ms. Schumann and staff, On behalf of the current owners for the above addresses, Fedder Homes has submitted several attachments, held review meetings with staff prior to application and as part of the application for the building plans and field measurement surveys to create the necessary support information to allow for a small deck and access stairs from the above homes to their rear yards. It is the intent of the PUD amendment application to allow for the construction of a small deck and optional stairs to complete a reasonable home design for the above residents. A unique issue to the original PUD approval was the requirement for architectural elevations depicting all elevation options. Since it was not anticipated that the units and neighborhood would not be completed by the original designer, the plans for the PUD were not amended prior to this application to recognize the minor differences in both fagade and egress. There is no greater encroachment to the wetlands than were previously approved for patios and structures, and no health safety welfare harm created by the addition of a small deck and optional stairs. The Optional stairs are to show, per City staff request, all possibilities so that there is no future need for a individual resident application, which would be necessary if the plans submitted omitted stairs. HISTORY The above addresses were initially platted, graded and utilities built under the control of MW Johnson in the early 2002 through 2006. Regulations and setback criteria were established and signed off by Monticello staff, Council and outside regulators at that time as compliant, reasonable and supportable for full construction. The building pad for the above addresses were completed by MW Johnson but the structure was not and the completed finished lots ended up in ownership by the development lender. Subsequent to that time, the lender sold the unbuilt lots to Paxmar, and Paxmar engaged Fedder Homes for building design and construction. Wetlands were delineated and shown on recorded plats, and the fills of all wetland applications were approved and edges for fill to be placed were completed by MW Johnson. We can find no specific confirmation that the grading contractor added fill to the delineated wetland line of the plat, but that would not have changed the facts that at the time of project creation a regulated delineation, TEP panel and required fill permits were obtained in order to construct the original proj ect. Subsequent to all fills and previous delineation work, the City of Monticello has accepted the project as complete for purposes of public streets and utilities and the obligations for drainage control and or maintenance of the various outlet structures for the wetlands as a resource and drainage basin. UNIQUE LOCATION and NEW BUILDER Fedder designed a new townhome substantially similar to the MW Johnson product line, but due to concerns over copyrighted plans did not build the exact same home. Plans were approved for construction and the homes finished, occupied and granted certificates of occupancy. Pads for the above addresses were certified prior to construction, verified competent through the building process, and granted all necessary permits except for deck construction due to plan depictions and an initial design request to go beyond the property line of the unit into common area. This excess distance could not be granted and the plans currently under consideration were created as compliant to the lot type and reasonable in size. Openings from the second floor for sliding doors to a future deck supported on a ledger board created with the initial home construction were not questioned at the time of building permit issuance, inspection and occupancy. These three units, like several of the MW Johnson Design, backed out onto the wetland complex in Sunset Ponds with no neighbors in immediate proximity to the rear of the structure. See photos. UTILITIES and FOOTINGS No changes to utilities are needed with this application and the deck posts necessary do not go beyond the property box created for the structure. Yard is existing, created and has been mowed regularly to the limits of the current cattails. The proposed decks would need their contractor to place drilled footings in locations shown on the submittals, or closer to the buildings so as to not encroach beyond the unit's property at 8.5 feet. It is anticipated that the depth of the footings would be about 48" below the surface. Typical auger attachments to a small mini loader machine would be able to properly dig a footing with minimal disruption. This type of excavation would allow for the subsoil bottom to be examined for competency to support the minimal load of a deck and its occupants. There is no reason to presume that poor soils exist at this distance from the structure since common building oversizing for pad designs extends to a 10 foot distance at a minimum. SUNIlUARY The use of the PUD amendment process allows for conversation and a fair hearing. It allows for the minor building designs and their options to be entered into a PUD record for allowable construction. There is no conceivable negative health, safety or welfare impact to either the association, the City or adjacent residents. There is no added cost to the association for common maintenance. The design proposed is similar to the criteria used in variance actions, in that is a solution that approximates the minimum necessary. An 8' deep by 12' wide deck is only 96 SF of surface area, not even as large as a 10 x 10 concrete slab. If there are questions or clarifications necessary as the submittal process moves forward to approved amendments, please contact myself or Fedder Homes through Steve McCann for clarifications. I will be at the required public hearings and municipal meetings on behalf of the applicants and residents group as their development representative. Respectfully Submitted, Donald Jensen DJ2DMJ Planning, LLC Cc: Steve McCann, for Fedder Homes Residents of above addresses Attachments: Meyer Rohlin surveys, existing and for delineated wetlands per plat. Building Elevations showing decks and stairs 4 Photos of existing building and similar setback relationships to wetland I \ f I 0 � N Z 1 � 0 It x f o z z wZ k _i z a q �t Its m o CD' h QQ OWN n. Q �: tp p c N i' <`A 4 mfr \ �7- Cfi 1 o O s� lx., w O �' � 1 Up . Ld O Q O LLJ i 0. I \ f i f' y -��01 4 2 w z J U U Q.. r1i I 0 � N Z " .. rJri 0 It x m o z z wZ k _i z a q �t Its m o CD' h QQ OWN n. Q �: tp p c N i' <`A 4 mfr \ �7- o O s� lx., w O �' � 1 Ld O Q O LLJ 0 1�� \ } Q) _ X I - \ o� mo i f' y -��01 4 2 w z J U U Q.. r1i N— — . 1�1 M W x 0 0 wtix 1 m 0ii w w IL z 0 QJ U C U m a, oz QLJ O w 00 co O � J 'D Lij 0 F- 0 O� W O tai) L, W QO> ~ti p � KL tUj LLJ U O � Q OU Z Z .Z Z °z ° uj Way Q:: 0- co Z OW t— cn ¢ CL mQ a LLJ vi ,,ZC a�Ln O� �W 5 as I 0 � N Z " .. rJri 0 It x m z wZ k _i z a q �t Its m o CD' h r� �. OWN n. Q �: tp p ate' K a`t�l ti �nQ i IL q N— — . 1�1 M W x 0 0 wtix 1 m 0ii w w IL z 0 QJ U C U m a, oz QLJ O w 00 co O � J 'D Lij 0 F- 0 O� W O tai) L, W QO> ~ti p � KL tUj LLJ U O � Q OU Z Z .Z Z °z ° uj Way Q:: 0- co Z OW t— cn ¢ CL mQ a LLJ vi ,,ZC a�Ln O� �W 5 as � I I 0 4- 41 IJJ z m ZME o z O(D 10, < Ld O C) C) C) Lo ZOO FZ Q C) cl� < 0 U) >- WpmLLJ C) Q� CL Q- �-- ca LAJ Z OW V) (10 X LIJ co CL C) CN ZI cc 0 ti -30�3- o Z -21-6- C, CL CNN A Q LLJ 00. C) 0 0 CL C) � I I 0 4- 41 IJJ z m ZME o z O(D 10, < Ld O C) C) C) Lo ZOO FZ Q C) cl� < 0 U) >- WpmLLJ C) Q� CL Q- �-- ca LAJ Z OW V) (10 X LIJ co CL C) CN ZI cc 0 Lti'8o om z air- - - - - -- _ „ 1 0 Z N� - z 0X0 C) Z f 4 4�p E N Q I OWN w � O -j Z I I J 1 � I 1 O � I s :o J I 1 O • ,� � I I III! O V I Q d o I Q i I o o N - V I I O 0 o0 V) L - - - -- U W al i z 0 I 1 NY LLJ rn U �� U U U z jn¢O Lti'0 -- r-- o vZ+ O Z ¢ ,nl a0 pZ Q �I Qom E N W w a CL wow - o O o "t N L d cr CL LJ m V) w I N — r� ►- cn ¢ Z i to I O 1 w N `° m w 2 0 ri r nj ao CAD t X ¢ L �`' y �r V) = Q. O ` I I *_* vi ~O� ��. Lti'8 iw ¢ v N Y.i o: O I hereby certify that this plan, Specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional eng i neer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. jD Douglas K, Whitney, P. E, Date: May 28, 2013 Reg. No, 15910 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES SOLID SHADED AREAS REP, SOLID BEARING DOWN TO GONG, O.S.B. SUBFLOOI INC AT ALL FLOORING AREAS OTHER THAN CARPET INTERIOR BEARING WALLS HAVE BLOCKING 0 MIDPOINT N r m i u 6 W d) 0 u 9'-O" _ 16'-O" _ �'-O" _ �'-O" _ 16'-0" _ 9'-O" T_9' -O" _ 16'-O" _ �'-O" 12'-O" 3'-0" I- 3'-0 12'-O" U, cel i i i i i i i ii FUTURE DECK FUTURE DECK R.O. 8'-O%2" x 3'-10/2" 2803-5LIDER-8040 (2 PLY V%2" TIMBERSTRAND W/ 2 TRIMMERS -0 EA_ SIDE) LIVING ROOM VAULTED CEILING PLT HEIGHT CARPET FLOORING IT -5" X 13'--l" 4'-O" 12'-0" X 8'-0" R.O. 6'-03/e" X 6'-Sh" 5 -100 -PATIO -6068-2 (OX) (3 PLY 2X10'5 SPF #2 W/ I TRIMMER 1D EA, SIDE) Q N X -OPERATING O -FIXED 6� u VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR U 6 VERIFY R,O. PRIOR TO `4 z CONST. N F 'D < Q EDGE OF CONIC, PORCH COVERED Z'0c ° w° @ DINING ROOM GONG, d Lu w VAULTED CEILING BEAM TO Z } 8'-4" PLT HEIGHT 'L CARPET FLOORING `'4 ' I3'-5" X I1'-1" — 6X6 POST I1-43/4" 1'4" - CHANGE IN SHEETROCK CAP =\ -7\-- -`- � �CLOSET 6 48" FLOORING LINE 12" OVERHANG w ; ABOVE LIVING ROOM _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I , 6UBFLOOR Q i 36" X 60"' - „� t - - --WALL 1' 42" HEIGHT ISLAND o - - - - - '3\ ' W Oo 2 ? KITCHEN m Z a* SRI 'E l- �� on o ' ' 's� 6 5" ' � � � �� VAULTED CEILING ° O CENTER LINE OF , , , , �- 8'-1/a" PLT HEIGHT VAULTED CEILING i i i� u i U p = -$ 6 u VINYL FLOORING O'n i 2-0 � 11-3 X 9'-9O -- - - V2 WALL a 53-104RANGE 111 w/42HEIT (o_MICRO HOODX X PANTRY REFRIGERATOR ------- O O O Q, Is � DW ® 5- 24" cn N r ENTRY $ 3 ' S. . SHELVES VAULTED CEILING O N 4�i _ i �. 13 9 IGHT a PLT, HE 6) VINYL FLOORING FRAME U FIRST PANTRY SHELF NOTE -2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION X 10'-11" TO BE FLUSH WITH TOP OF SECOND FLOOR m W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL � (3'-2 3/8" ABOVE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) N - FOR MECHANICAL CHASE ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS Q FIRE RATED STEEL ' DOOR 20 MIN, RATING N VERIFY R.O. PRIOR N CONST. (2 PLY 2X10'$)S) GARAGE TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR : 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH Q COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL SLOPE GONG. TOWARDS DOOR a 1/8" PER FT (2 PLY Viz" MICROLLAMS) I6' -O" X -1'-0" O.H. GARAGE DOOR (2 PLY 13/q" X 18" MIGROLLAM LVL 1.9E W/ 3 TRIMMERS a EA. SIDE) 12'-0" FUTURE DECK 3'-O" NOTE,,, ALL WINDOWS 4 PATIO DOORS SPECIFIED ON THIS PRINT ARE- SILVERLINE ALL BEAMS/HEADERS ON THIS PLAN ARE TRUS JOIST ENGINEERED WOOD PRODUCTS IF DIFFERENT BRAND IS USED, VERIFY SIZE 4 DEPTH PRIOR TO CONST, TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY THAT ALL BEAMS AND HEADERS WILL SUPPORT ROOF AND FLOOR TRUSS LOADS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 12'-0" X 8'-0" - - 12'-0" X 8'-0" /SECTION I E.,PAGE 451 R.O, 6'-03/e" X 6'-8V2"8 I I " I " s'� R.O. 8'-OV2" x 3'-11/2" R.O. 6'-03/e" X (0'-&V2" 5 -100 -PATIO -6068-2 (XO) I 2803 SL DER -8040 2803-5LIDER-8040 500 -PATIO -6068-2 (OX) (3 PLY 2X10'5 SPF #2 1 1 PLY 9i2" TIMBERSTRAND (2 PLY 9V2" TIMBERSTRAND (3 PLY 2X10'S SPF *2 W/ I TRIMMER e EA, SIDE) W/ 2 TRIMMERS -a EA SIDE) W/ 2 TfRIMMERS Q EA, SIDE) W/ I TRIMMER im EA, SIDE) X=OPERATING O=FIXED I i FIRE RATED SEPARATION WALL X=OPERATING O=FIXED VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR SEE DETAIL 1 t 2 ON PAGE A6 VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR U 1 6 i FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS U LIVING ROOM ° oz DINING ROOM ° a I VAULTED CEILING u W `Q W 1 8'-I�° PLT HEIGHT W DINING ROOM W VAULTED CEILING N 0 1 CARPET FLOORING 3 LIVING ROOM VAULTED CEILING N ° `n_� 8'-4" PLT HEIGHT 0 1 11'-5" X 13'-l" VAULTED CEILING 8'412," PLT HEIGHT a O W O x CARPET FLOORING W I o = = N 5'-%" PLT HEIGHT CARPET FLOORING 13'-5" X I1'-1" W a I - N _ II WW j N .4 O u CARPET FLOORING 13'-5 X 11'-I w Q Z } I c' "' Il' -5" X 13'-�" Z > �n FIRE RATED SEPARATION WALL z o z W SEE DETAIL 1 d 2 ON PAGE A6 FOR °1 I SHEETROCK CAP "�' w N F CONSTRUCTION DETAILS I CLOSET ® 48" A N ABOVE LIVING ROOM , 11'-43/4" 3'-10"1 S9 4'-0" 12'-23/4" 6UBFLooR I 12'-23/4" 3'-11" 3 -10" I I -9" 5' -13/4u - I CHANGE IN I CHANGE IN FLOORING LINE ,i I �j,�e� �`JHi.F` `,ROD`�;5i-iLF`, ii FLOORING LINE , SHEETROGK GAP 12 OVERHANG - -- - c -- - CLOSET 4s" 12 OVERHANG CENTER LINE OF I , i--------------- " ---------------- VAULTED _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - VAULTED CEILING SUBFLOOR 3 3" X 36, X 0 i + _ n 111 ISLAND I WALL 10 42" HT, - - - ` i2 WALL e 42" HT. ISLAND ' " H T M�IO Oo x �___ i _______? N oZKITCHEN KITCHEN o V4 G QJN�c`A +' -cO(kf')ZCENTER LINE O 8-ia,PLT HEIGHT CEILING o S U i 8'-/„ PLT HEIGHT a w 152 VAULTED CEILING U I�- NQVINYL FLOORING VINYL FLOORING W 11'-3" X 11'-3" X 9'-9" J /2 WALL a 3'- 10!44 f 15 I -rO 3'-9 RANGE w/ 63RANGE CROHOOD42HEIGHT MICRO HOOD PANTRY *1404' 6'-43/4643/4PANTRY REFRGERATOR ISE S UN -1'RI E ON �I tnFl 6, 4 24" _� 5 -24" ENTRY N ENTRY SHELVES SHELVES _Q VAULTED CEILING VAULTED CEILING 13'-9�e" P]14r=IG14T*NOTE-2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION FRAME UP FIRST PANTRY SHELF VINYL VINYL FLOORING FRAM£ UP FIRST PANTRY SHELF *NOTE -2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION TO BE FLUSH WI+H TOP OF SECOND FLOOR - 5'-5" TO BE FLUSH WITH TOP OF SECOND FLOOR 5'-5" x 10'-II"W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL (3'-2 3/8" A50gE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) irel - (3'-2 3/8" ABOVE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS FOR MECHANICAL CHASE N + Q FOR MECHANICAL CHASE ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS 1FIRE RATED STEEL c1 c FIRE RATED STEEL DOOR 20 MIN, RATING N N DOOR 20 MIN. RATING VERIFY R.O, PRIOR TO CONST, i 61 TVERIFY R.O. PRIORTO CONST. (2 PLY 2X10'5) Lll NN(2 PLY 2X10'6) 3'-O" STEEL ENTRY D OR 3'-O" TEEL ENTRY DOOR VERIFY R.O, PRIOR TO VERIFY R.O. PRIOR TO 1CONST. CONST, 1 O OZ N O(2 PLY 2X10'5) COVERED (2 PLY 2X10'5) 0 U 1 GONG. PORCH , U OI -~°--------- ------------ @ GAR4GE I - 10" GONG. STEP 10" GONG, STEP � GARAGE _ cp TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR 1 TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR : 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 1 @ N 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH I 4'-3" I'-6" 4'-3" L 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL 1 10'-O" COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL IX SLOPE CONC. TOWARDS DOOR W' 3 PLY 2XIC'S SPF 02 ' W- SLOPE GONG. TOWARDS DOOR O 1/8" PER FT I DROPPED BEAM ON N Q as 1/8" PER FT Q 6X(. TREATED POST Q INSIDE TAPERED CEDAR COLUMN 1 O ON I5"XIS"X36" HIGH STONE BASE ILwillO 1 PORCH ROOF TO BE BASED OFF 1 `N' EDGE OF CONC. PORCH `N I p p I � S I _ _ I I I I I I I6' -O" X t -o" O.N. GARAGE DOOR I III X '1'-O" O.H. GARAGE DOOR (3 PLY 13/4" X 18" MIGROLLAM LVL 1,9E 1 1 PLY 13/q" X 18" MICROLLAM LVL 1,9E W/ 3 TRIMMERS a EA, SIDE) II I I W/ 3 TRIMMERS -9D EA. SIDE) -0" c_ 7T -- -- -- -- - I C NT B E I AB v -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --I -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --J - —DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE/ I DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE ADD OR SUB, 6 FOR CORNER F SECTION � ADD OR SUB, 6" FOR CORNER OF GARAGE DIMENSION \PAGE A5 OF GARAGE DIMENSION 3'-O" 2'-6" 13'-O" 13'-6" 13'-6" 13'-0" 2'-'l!/:2" 2'-I0i2" 2'-IOiz" 2'--l! lie 26'-6" (21-0" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) 26'-6" (21-0" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) 5'-6" 5'-6" 32'-0" 32'-0" ol NOTE... ,ALL D IMENS ION ING IS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE SHEATHING DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE ADD OR SUB, 6" FOR CORNER OF GARAGE DIMENSION 13'-0" 32'-0" j -- -- -- -- -� 1 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A3 SC,4LE: 1/4" = 11-011 SQ, FT, PER UNIT - 125 13'-(0" 26'-6" (21-O" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) UTA/VER � O LU lu 3d(X'4ZL(1 }Oz�tL W OLU LLI :zLU O U(LLO W LU LU J: O3: LU LU LU LU > M WOO Q (k V W IV CL z �1 W O Z W 3: KOC T II-- WN=0 ADO -;5z LU WI�fc� O Q O � 3:W w OcpO(YLU� Z W Q O W 0 0 0 oZ� z uzo LU LU 0 � N w�zz-1- �O�l�fIIO z ��udz U � W 1JJ Q d � � O (KZO�Jcn W � � Z IYQW(L/WW W�LY44� IL - LU M d) d) d) Q N 3'-0" 6� 3'_O STEEL ENTRY DOOR U PORCH ROOF TO VERIFY R,O. PRIOR TO `4 BE BASED OFF CONST. N N (2 PLY 2XIO'S)pw Q EDGE OF CONIC, PORCH COVERED Z'0c tK GONG, d O � BEAM TO i ORCH P N EXTEND PAST ' O — 6X6 POST 3 PLY 2XIO'S SPF •2 10" GONG, STEP DROPPED BEAM ON 6X6 TREATED POST 3'-6" INSIDE TAPERED CEDAR COLUMN ON 18"XIS"X36" HIGH STONE BASE GARAGE TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR : 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH Q COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL SLOPE GONG. TOWARDS DOOR a 1/8" PER FT (2 PLY Viz" MICROLLAMS) I6' -O" X -1'-0" O.H. GARAGE DOOR (2 PLY 13/q" X 18" MIGROLLAM LVL 1.9E W/ 3 TRIMMERS a EA. SIDE) 12'-0" FUTURE DECK 3'-O" NOTE,,, ALL WINDOWS 4 PATIO DOORS SPECIFIED ON THIS PRINT ARE- SILVERLINE ALL BEAMS/HEADERS ON THIS PLAN ARE TRUS JOIST ENGINEERED WOOD PRODUCTS IF DIFFERENT BRAND IS USED, VERIFY SIZE 4 DEPTH PRIOR TO CONST, TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY THAT ALL BEAMS AND HEADERS WILL SUPPORT ROOF AND FLOOR TRUSS LOADS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 12'-0" X 8'-0" - - 12'-0" X 8'-0" /SECTION I E.,PAGE 451 R.O, 6'-03/e" X 6'-8V2"8 I I " I " s'� R.O. 8'-OV2" x 3'-11/2" R.O. 6'-03/e" X (0'-&V2" 5 -100 -PATIO -6068-2 (XO) I 2803 SL DER -8040 2803-5LIDER-8040 500 -PATIO -6068-2 (OX) (3 PLY 2X10'5 SPF #2 1 1 PLY 9i2" TIMBERSTRAND (2 PLY 9V2" TIMBERSTRAND (3 PLY 2X10'S SPF *2 W/ I TRIMMER e EA, SIDE) W/ 2 TRIMMERS -a EA SIDE) W/ 2 TfRIMMERS Q EA, SIDE) W/ I TRIMMER im EA, SIDE) X=OPERATING O=FIXED I i FIRE RATED SEPARATION WALL X=OPERATING O=FIXED VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR SEE DETAIL 1 t 2 ON PAGE A6 VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR U 1 6 i FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS U LIVING ROOM ° oz DINING ROOM ° a I VAULTED CEILING u W `Q W 1 8'-I�° PLT HEIGHT W DINING ROOM W VAULTED CEILING N 0 1 CARPET FLOORING 3 LIVING ROOM VAULTED CEILING N ° `n_� 8'-4" PLT HEIGHT 0 1 11'-5" X 13'-l" VAULTED CEILING 8'412," PLT HEIGHT a O W O x CARPET FLOORING W I o = = N 5'-%" PLT HEIGHT CARPET FLOORING 13'-5" X I1'-1" W a I - N _ II WW j N .4 O u CARPET FLOORING 13'-5 X 11'-I w Q Z } I c' "' Il' -5" X 13'-�" Z > �n FIRE RATED SEPARATION WALL z o z W SEE DETAIL 1 d 2 ON PAGE A6 FOR °1 I SHEETROCK CAP "�' w N F CONSTRUCTION DETAILS I CLOSET ® 48" A N ABOVE LIVING ROOM , 11'-43/4" 3'-10"1 S9 4'-0" 12'-23/4" 6UBFLooR I 12'-23/4" 3'-11" 3 -10" I I -9" 5' -13/4u - I CHANGE IN I CHANGE IN FLOORING LINE ,i I �j,�e� �`JHi.F` `,ROD`�;5i-iLF`, ii FLOORING LINE , SHEETROGK GAP 12 OVERHANG - -- - c -- - CLOSET 4s" 12 OVERHANG CENTER LINE OF I , i--------------- " ---------------- VAULTED _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - VAULTED CEILING SUBFLOOR 3 3" X 36, X 0 i + _ n 111 ISLAND I WALL 10 42" HT, - - - ` i2 WALL e 42" HT. ISLAND ' " H T M�IO Oo x �___ i _______? N oZKITCHEN KITCHEN o V4 G QJN�c`A +' -cO(kf')ZCENTER LINE O 8-ia,PLT HEIGHT CEILING o S U i 8'-/„ PLT HEIGHT a w 152 VAULTED CEILING U I�- NQVINYL FLOORING VINYL FLOORING W 11'-3" X 11'-3" X 9'-9" J /2 WALL a 3'- 10!44 f 15 I -rO 3'-9 RANGE w/ 63RANGE CROHOOD42HEIGHT MICRO HOOD PANTRY *1404' 6'-43/4643/4PANTRY REFRGERATOR ISE S UN -1'RI E ON �I tnFl 6, 4 24" _� 5 -24" ENTRY N ENTRY SHELVES SHELVES _Q VAULTED CEILING VAULTED CEILING 13'-9�e" P]14r=IG14T*NOTE-2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION FRAME UP FIRST PANTRY SHELF VINYL VINYL FLOORING FRAM£ UP FIRST PANTRY SHELF *NOTE -2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION TO BE FLUSH WI+H TOP OF SECOND FLOOR - 5'-5" TO BE FLUSH WITH TOP OF SECOND FLOOR 5'-5" x 10'-II"W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL (3'-2 3/8" A50gE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) irel - (3'-2 3/8" ABOVE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS FOR MECHANICAL CHASE N + Q FOR MECHANICAL CHASE ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS 1FIRE RATED STEEL c1 c FIRE RATED STEEL DOOR 20 MIN, RATING N N DOOR 20 MIN. RATING VERIFY R.O, PRIOR TO CONST, i 61 TVERIFY R.O. PRIORTO CONST. (2 PLY 2X10'5) Lll NN(2 PLY 2X10'6) 3'-O" STEEL ENTRY D OR 3'-O" TEEL ENTRY DOOR VERIFY R.O, PRIOR TO VERIFY R.O. PRIOR TO 1CONST. CONST, 1 O OZ N O(2 PLY 2X10'5) COVERED (2 PLY 2X10'5) 0 U 1 GONG. PORCH , U OI -~°--------- ------------ @ GAR4GE I - 10" GONG. STEP 10" GONG, STEP � GARAGE _ cp TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR 1 TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR : 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 1 @ N 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH I 4'-3" I'-6" 4'-3" L 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL 1 10'-O" COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL IX SLOPE CONC. TOWARDS DOOR W' 3 PLY 2XIC'S SPF 02 ' W- SLOPE GONG. TOWARDS DOOR O 1/8" PER FT I DROPPED BEAM ON N Q as 1/8" PER FT Q 6X(. TREATED POST Q INSIDE TAPERED CEDAR COLUMN 1 O ON I5"XIS"X36" HIGH STONE BASE ILwillO 1 PORCH ROOF TO BE BASED OFF 1 `N' EDGE OF CONC. PORCH `N I p p I � S I _ _ I I I I I I I6' -O" X t -o" O.N. GARAGE DOOR I III X '1'-O" O.H. GARAGE DOOR (3 PLY 13/4" X 18" MIGROLLAM LVL 1,9E 1 1 PLY 13/q" X 18" MICROLLAM LVL 1,9E W/ 3 TRIMMERS a EA, SIDE) II I I W/ 3 TRIMMERS -9D EA. SIDE) -0" c_ 7T -- -- -- -- - I C NT B E I AB v -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --I -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --J - —DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE/ I DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE ADD OR SUB, 6 FOR CORNER F SECTION � ADD OR SUB, 6" FOR CORNER OF GARAGE DIMENSION \PAGE A5 OF GARAGE DIMENSION 3'-O" 2'-6" 13'-O" 13'-6" 13'-6" 13'-0" 2'-'l!/:2" 2'-I0i2" 2'-IOiz" 2'--l! lie 26'-6" (21-0" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) 26'-6" (21-0" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) 5'-6" 5'-6" 32'-0" 32'-0" ol NOTE... ,ALL D IMENS ION ING IS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE SHEATHING DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE ADD OR SUB, 6" FOR CORNER OF GARAGE DIMENSION 13'-0" 32'-0" j -- -- -- -- -� 1 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A3 SC,4LE: 1/4" = 11-011 SQ, FT, PER UNIT - 125 13'-(0" 26'-6" (21-O" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) UTA/VER � O LU lu 3d(X'4ZL(1 }Oz�tL W OLU LLI :zLU O U(LLO W LU LU J: O3: LU LU LU LU > M WOO Q (k V W IV CL z �1 W O Z W 3: KOC T II-- WN=0 ADO -;5z LU WI�fc� O Q O � 3:W w OcpO(YLU� Z W Q O W 0 0 0 oZ� z uzo LU LU 0 � N w�zz-1- �O�l�fIIO z ��udz U � W 1JJ Q d � � O (KZO�Jcn W � � Z IYQW(L/WW W�LY44� IL - LU M d) d) d) Q N 6� U q W n 1 N N tK O � N Q O lL �\ O N GARAGE TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR : 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH Q COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL SLOPE GONG. TOWARDS DOOR a 1/8" PER FT (2 PLY Viz" MICROLLAMS) I6' -O" X -1'-0" O.H. GARAGE DOOR (2 PLY 13/q" X 18" MIGROLLAM LVL 1.9E W/ 3 TRIMMERS a EA. SIDE) 12'-0" FUTURE DECK 3'-O" NOTE,,, ALL WINDOWS 4 PATIO DOORS SPECIFIED ON THIS PRINT ARE- SILVERLINE ALL BEAMS/HEADERS ON THIS PLAN ARE TRUS JOIST ENGINEERED WOOD PRODUCTS IF DIFFERENT BRAND IS USED, VERIFY SIZE 4 DEPTH PRIOR TO CONST, TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY THAT ALL BEAMS AND HEADERS WILL SUPPORT ROOF AND FLOOR TRUSS LOADS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 12'-0" X 8'-0" - - 12'-0" X 8'-0" /SECTION I E.,PAGE 451 R.O, 6'-03/e" X 6'-8V2"8 I I " I " s'� R.O. 8'-OV2" x 3'-11/2" R.O. 6'-03/e" X (0'-&V2" 5 -100 -PATIO -6068-2 (XO) I 2803 SL DER -8040 2803-5LIDER-8040 500 -PATIO -6068-2 (OX) (3 PLY 2X10'5 SPF #2 1 1 PLY 9i2" TIMBERSTRAND (2 PLY 9V2" TIMBERSTRAND (3 PLY 2X10'S SPF *2 W/ I TRIMMER e EA, SIDE) W/ 2 TRIMMERS -a EA SIDE) W/ 2 TfRIMMERS Q EA, SIDE) W/ I TRIMMER im EA, SIDE) X=OPERATING O=FIXED I i FIRE RATED SEPARATION WALL X=OPERATING O=FIXED VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR SEE DETAIL 1 t 2 ON PAGE A6 VIEWED FROM EXTERIOR U 1 6 i FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS U LIVING ROOM ° oz DINING ROOM ° a I VAULTED CEILING u W `Q W 1 8'-I�° PLT HEIGHT W DINING ROOM W VAULTED CEILING N 0 1 CARPET FLOORING 3 LIVING ROOM VAULTED CEILING N ° `n_� 8'-4" PLT HEIGHT 0 1 11'-5" X 13'-l" VAULTED CEILING 8'412," PLT HEIGHT a O W O x CARPET FLOORING W I o = = N 5'-%" PLT HEIGHT CARPET FLOORING 13'-5" X I1'-1" W a I - N _ II WW j N .4 O u CARPET FLOORING 13'-5 X 11'-I w Q Z } I c' "' Il' -5" X 13'-�" Z > �n FIRE RATED SEPARATION WALL z o z W SEE DETAIL 1 d 2 ON PAGE A6 FOR °1 I SHEETROCK CAP "�' w N F CONSTRUCTION DETAILS I CLOSET ® 48" A N ABOVE LIVING ROOM , 11'-43/4" 3'-10"1 S9 4'-0" 12'-23/4" 6UBFLooR I 12'-23/4" 3'-11" 3 -10" I I -9" 5' -13/4u - I CHANGE IN I CHANGE IN FLOORING LINE ,i I �j,�e� �`JHi.F` `,ROD`�;5i-iLF`, ii FLOORING LINE , SHEETROGK GAP 12 OVERHANG - -- - c -- - CLOSET 4s" 12 OVERHANG CENTER LINE OF I , i--------------- " ---------------- VAULTED _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - VAULTED CEILING SUBFLOOR 3 3" X 36, X 0 i + _ n 111 ISLAND I WALL 10 42" HT, - - - ` i2 WALL e 42" HT. ISLAND ' " H T M�IO Oo x �___ i _______? N oZKITCHEN KITCHEN o V4 G QJN�c`A +' -cO(kf')ZCENTER LINE O 8-ia,PLT HEIGHT CEILING o S U i 8'-/„ PLT HEIGHT a w 152 VAULTED CEILING U I�- NQVINYL FLOORING VINYL FLOORING W 11'-3" X 11'-3" X 9'-9" J /2 WALL a 3'- 10!44 f 15 I -rO 3'-9 RANGE w/ 63RANGE CROHOOD42HEIGHT MICRO HOOD PANTRY *1404' 6'-43/4643/4PANTRY REFRGERATOR ISE S UN -1'RI E ON �I tnFl 6, 4 24" _� 5 -24" ENTRY N ENTRY SHELVES SHELVES _Q VAULTED CEILING VAULTED CEILING 13'-9�e" P]14r=IG14T*NOTE-2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION FRAME UP FIRST PANTRY SHELF VINYL VINYL FLOORING FRAM£ UP FIRST PANTRY SHELF *NOTE -2X6 STUD CONSTRUCTION TO BE FLUSH WI+H TOP OF SECOND FLOOR - 5'-5" TO BE FLUSH WITH TOP OF SECOND FLOOR 5'-5" x 10'-II"W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL (3'-2 3/8" A50gE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) irel - (3'-2 3/8" ABOVE MAIN FLR. SUBFLOOR) W/ FIRE RATED TYPE X DRYWALL ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS FOR MECHANICAL CHASE N + Q FOR MECHANICAL CHASE ON ALL HOUSE/GARAGE CONNECTIONS 1FIRE RATED STEEL c1 c FIRE RATED STEEL DOOR 20 MIN, RATING N N DOOR 20 MIN. RATING VERIFY R.O, PRIOR TO CONST, i 61 TVERIFY R.O. PRIORTO CONST. (2 PLY 2X10'5) Lll NN(2 PLY 2X10'6) 3'-O" STEEL ENTRY D OR 3'-O" TEEL ENTRY DOOR VERIFY R.O, PRIOR TO VERIFY R.O. PRIOR TO 1CONST. CONST, 1 O OZ N O(2 PLY 2X10'5) COVERED (2 PLY 2X10'5) 0 U 1 GONG. PORCH , U OI -~°--------- ------------ @ GAR4GE I - 10" GONG. STEP 10" GONG, STEP � GARAGE _ cp TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR 1 TYPICAL GARAGE FLOOR : 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 1 @ N 3 1/2" CONCRETE SLAB W/ 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH I 4'-3" I'-6" 4'-3" L 11 10/10 WELDED WIRE MESH COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL 1 10'-O" COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL IX SLOPE CONC. TOWARDS DOOR W' 3 PLY 2XIC'S SPF 02 ' W- SLOPE GONG. TOWARDS DOOR O 1/8" PER FT I DROPPED BEAM ON N Q as 1/8" PER FT Q 6X(. TREATED POST Q INSIDE TAPERED CEDAR COLUMN 1 O ON I5"XIS"X36" HIGH STONE BASE ILwillO 1 PORCH ROOF TO BE BASED OFF 1 `N' EDGE OF CONC. PORCH `N I p p I � S I _ _ I I I I I I I6' -O" X t -o" O.N. GARAGE DOOR I III X '1'-O" O.H. GARAGE DOOR (3 PLY 13/4" X 18" MIGROLLAM LVL 1,9E 1 1 PLY 13/q" X 18" MICROLLAM LVL 1,9E W/ 3 TRIMMERS a EA, SIDE) II I I W/ 3 TRIMMERS -9D EA. SIDE) -0" c_ 7T -- -- -- -- - I C NT B E I AB v -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --I -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --J - —DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE/ I DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE ADD OR SUB, 6 FOR CORNER F SECTION � ADD OR SUB, 6" FOR CORNER OF GARAGE DIMENSION \PAGE A5 OF GARAGE DIMENSION 3'-O" 2'-6" 13'-O" 13'-6" 13'-6" 13'-0" 2'-'l!/:2" 2'-I0i2" 2'-IOiz" 2'--l! lie 26'-6" (21-0" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) 26'-6" (21-0" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) 5'-6" 5'-6" 32'-0" 32'-0" ol NOTE... ,ALL D IMENS ION ING IS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE SHEATHING DIMENSIONS TO CORNER OF HOUSE ADD OR SUB, 6" FOR CORNER OF GARAGE DIMENSION 13'-0" 32'-0" j -- -- -- -- -� 1 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A3 SC,4LE: 1/4" = 11-011 SQ, FT, PER UNIT - 125 13'-(0" 26'-6" (21-O" TO CORNER OF GARAGE) UTA/VER � O LU lu 3d(X'4ZL(1 }Oz�tL W OLU LLI :zLU O U(LLO W LU LU J: O3: LU LU LU LU > M WOO Q (k V W IV CL z �1 W O Z W 3: KOC T II-- WN=0 ADO -;5z LU WI�fc� O Q O � 3:W w OcpO(YLU� Z W Q O W 0 0 0 oZ� z uzo LU LU 0 � N w�zz-1- �O�l�fIIO z ��udz U � W 1JJ Q d � � O (KZO�Jcn W � � Z IYQW(L/WW W�LY44� IL - LU M d) d) d) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 61-IIEEr NO UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENTO CONTACT l63153 616 63 ICJ Q U q n 1 N r ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 61-IIEEr NO UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENTO CONTACT l63153 616 63 ICJ '9NV7d 343H1 NO 9NO1991W0 ONV 11IO2i b01 37914NOd9,9I ION 91 0-Tl 'u61a®a i✓o�6u)> p- an�i�✓n /Q /Ibh9! pua B _,c an�y�u�ial0 "93000 9N m'. lVOOl ONV 31V19 TV 9133W 3SfIOH A312 A Ol .J Nf1103WOH f '(9)NO0 0V61N00 WSaN39 '2 ClInG 'VINV1S Noul r i19N00 3x0336 erol'6Lrm -XVj 6LL8'£6Y'OLE - 1o33'/Q t59E'bYl'E9L- Zvjj 86£59 NW N7'W2l3WW /Z ado sv msinaa ua panorddv WWW _ 103x.00 3aV SN01S91W0 ONV SNONNa'9NOISNEWIO'S310N 71V aNnS 3>IVW 01 SNVId WI2i 031V3231 1101��3 3�OOIN BXL Aid 3�'JNI9 'i 393HL MAi;b n7rOH9 h'3Nm03WOH a'M6010V2UNOO �Va'3N39'233Q11f19'.lVo 1ba'� y� »7'u!J PUP 6ui- j��ap�il�1 7,l�I�$;JQ ILI-II ° N _ NI 103NNOO 321V 9NV7d 393H1 32if19 3>IVW 01 3OVW N339 9V4 1230333 la3/3 -isap • 1.03YOd'd '.(9 K�lVD'Q ' a w ry d u N L w w U F N u' IL z Lu M iL Lu Y •u rc a z o' °s z I� II Z > Q d w. a,' (w/ w K Q IL 111 �dd 4 J mtt� Iw/V�/ U 0 z 0 � O w n V 3 0-4 IL�� Vl 0 rc� zo -yOa rcQZ� o>o`� owQaB as °LL °i O �i g °was >�Z.9 �mw _ LL as i U1 � ai�0 Q - a O •1! <V Z (K N z� N x z _� z O _ ° z4 V J w d DN I � 0 �0 z� F N x z w -y '^ WI2i 031V3231 BXL Aid 3�'JNI9 'i Z ° O a ON ap O ' d 61610f 031V3ML 9XL ', � w w w k Z w ea U UU ��mu N w� y 'xn XF ii, ��ry �u, WIb O31V3b1 BXL .lid 3�9N19 q6 -L ', L „o-,B J a�12 rca= I °ate I X v_z E ,p 4 5 o goo u z o w a <_ ryary am Xd x� w U w \ W a w ry d u N L w w U F N u' IL z Lu M iL Lu Y •u rc a z o' °s z I� II Z > Q d w. a,' (w/ w K Q IL 111 �dd 4 J mtt� Iw/V�/ U 0 z 0 � O w n V 3 0-4 IL�� Vl 0 rc� zo -yOa rcQZ� o>o`� owQaB as °LL °i O �i g °was >�Z.9 �mw _ LL as i U1 � ai�0 Q - a O •1! <V Z (K N z� N x z _� z O _ ° z4 V J w d DN I � 0 �0 z� F N x z w -y '^ WI2i 031V3231 BXL Aid 3�'JNI9 'i am O ' d 61610f 031V3ML 9XL ', � V ° w� O L a ri WIb O31V3b1 BXL .lid 3�9N19 q6 -L ', a di 3 � a „o-,B 0 8 °da a�12 rca= I °ate X v_z E ,p 4 e /�� .� � � \�� dkwwmmmmdkm� in . . 1.0 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/15 2B. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an Accessory Building in a M -H (Manufactured Home Park) District, as per Chapter 5.3(D) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Applicant: Kiellberg's Inc. /Kiellberg, Kent (AS) Property: Legal: Lengthy Legal, See Attached Address: 9127 State Highway 25 NE PID: 155500154402 Planning Case Number: 2015 -040 A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND Request(s): Deadline for Decision: Land Use Designation: Zoning Designation: Overlays /Environmental Regulations Applicable: Current Site Use: Surrounding Land Uses: The proposal is for a conditional use permit to expand the existing accessory structure on the site. November 7t', 2015 Places to Live M -H (Manufactured Home Park) District The purpose of the "M -H" manufactured home park district is to provide for manufactured home users and directly related uses. NA Manufactured home park North: Manufactured home park (zoned M -H), and private single - family residence (Monticello Township) East: Existing accessory structure, TH 25 South: Manufactured home park (zoned M -H), including sales lot West: Manufactured home park (zoned M -H), including manufactured home residences Project Description: The applicant proposes to construct an accessory structure enclosure to an existing accessory structure on the west manufactured home park site. Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/15 ANALYSIS The applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of 625 square foot accessory storage building on the Kjellberg's Inc. West Manufactured Home Park site, a 62.23 acre parcel on the west side of TH 25. Section 5.3(D)(3) - Accessory Building — Major requires the following for major attached accessory structures in the M -H District: (b) In the M -H district, the following shall apply: i. Accessory storage buildings in manufactured home parks, if not reviewed and approved as part of a PUD, shall be conditionally permitted subject to the following additional requirements: 1. The storage building and any accompanying outdoor storage area shall be for the sole use of the residents of the manufactured home park and shall not be used by non - residents. 2. Accompanying outdoor storage areas shall be fully screened from surrounding manufactured home units and adjacent properties. As such, a conditional use permit for the proposed structure is required. The building proposed is a 25' by 25' cold storage building. The structure will be attached to the existing detached accessory building located directly to the east. The proposed structure will enclose a set of existing fuel storage containers, which are currently unenclosed and located in an existing adjacent outdoor storage area. The 625 square foot structure will be enclosed on three sides. The south - facing side will remain open to provide for adequate and required ventilation. The height of the structure, at 14', is consistent with the height of the adjacent building and consistent with code requirements, which state that detached structures may not exceed 15' in height. The building will include a concrete floor and steel siding to match the existing structure. No changes are proposed to existing site access, landscaping, signage or other building components. The existing fence in the location of the expansion will be adjusted to accommodate the expansion. Conditional Uses are considered to be an approved use of property, provided the conditions required by the Ordinance and other reasonable conditions required by the City are met. In regard to the ordinance requirements, the applicant's narrative states that the fuel tanks are used for service needs related to the property. The pumps are not accessible to the public. Exhibit Z of the staff report therefore requires that the storage be for the sole use of the manufactured home park and its residents. Further, the enclosure of the fuel tanks will create greater compliance as related to the provision for screening of outdoor storage on the site. No other changes are proposed to the existing outdoor storage area. 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/15 The proposed expansion presents no issues with building or lot square footage requirements or setback requirements as set by ordinance. The proposed accessory structure will meet the required 6' setback from other properties. The applicant has discussed the fire code requirements for the structure with the Chief Building Official and a condition relating to fire code compliance is included in Exhibit Z. City records do not include a reference to a conditional use permit for the existing detached accessory structure to which this expansion will be added. In 2009, the City approved a conditional use permit for the construction on a new 30' x 36' cold storage building in the same area; this structure is located adjacent to the existing structure to the south. As part of this conditional use permit, the City recognizes the location and existence of each of these structures. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for 9127 State Highway 25 for an Accessory Building in a Manufactured Home Park (M -H) District, based on findings in Resolution PC- 2015 -014 and subject to the conditions as listed in Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for 9127 State Highway 25 for an Accessory Building in a Manufactured Home Park (M -H) District, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission. C. STAFF RECOMMWNDATION Staff recommends Alternative 1; the application materials supplied demonstrate consistency with code requirements for accessory structures in the M -H district. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution PC- 2015 -014 B. Aerial Site Image C. Applicant Narrative D. Site Images /Site Plan E. Elevation Example Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/15 EXHIBIT Z Conditional Use Permit — Accessory Structure 9127 State Highway 25 NE Kjellberg's Inc /Kjellberg. Kent 1. The approval is subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer regarding grading and drainage at the time of building permit. 2. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Chief Building Official for the construction of the accessory structure and for enclosure of the existing fuel storage tanks, including building code permit and listing requirements, and all applicable codes and standards such as NFPA 58. The storage building and any accompanying outdoor storage area shall be for the sole use of the residents of the manufactured home park and shall not be used by non- residents. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -014 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN A M -H (MANUFACTURED HOME PARK DISTRICT WHEREAS, Kjellberg's Inc/Kjellberg, Kent has requested a Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Structure at the property located at 9127 State Highway 25, which is located in a M -H (Manufactured Home Park) District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application for Conditional Use Permit pursuant to the regulations of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 6, 2015 on the application 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: The application is consistent with the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan for Places to Live. 2. The proposed major accessory building will meet both the intent and the specific standards of the zoning ordinance. 3. The parcel is of adequate size to support the proposed major accessory building. 4. The use is not expected to be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or welfare of persons residing near the use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota: Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.357, the application for Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Structure in a M -H District is hereby recommended to the City Council for approval. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -014 2. The recommendation for approval is subject to those Conditions as follows: a) The approval is subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer regarding grading and drainage at the time of building permit. b) The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Chief Building Official for the construction of the accessory structure and for enclosure of the existing fuel storage tanks, including building code permit and listing requirements, and all applicable codes and standards such as NFPA 58. C) The storage building and any accompanying outdoor storage area shall be for the sole use of the residents of the manufactured home park and shall not be used by non- residents. ADOPTED this 6"' day of October 2015, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Un ATTEST: Brad Fyle, Chair Angela Schumann, Community & Economic Development Director 2 0 v u s� 2 a �i +j u •L +j N 2 Ci G C O C U v LL N L •O IT C� Ln G Q Ln Ln C Ln � Q •� a m LL Z Ln O cV N a N ro v 3 u u . Q = L � O ro U o• Kjellberg's, Inc. Property Management Division Fuel Pump Canopy Narrative Conditional Use Permit Kjellberg's is requesting the required CUP for the purposes of extend the existing structure with a Canopy to provide weatherization for its Fuel Storage area. Currently the fuel storage and pumps are exposed to weather elements, such as rain and snow. This exposure has allowed moisture to seep into the barrels and compromise the fuel. The Canopy Enclosure would ensure increased safety and proper storage for these items as well as decreasing hazards during fueling. The fuel and its dispensing are strictly utilized fleet vehicles ONLY. Access is permitted to Kjellberg's, Inc. employees for community maintenance purposes. Kjellberg's Mobile Home Park is required to maintain the community's streets, utilities, and commons property which require access to onsite bulk. fuel. To further ensure security and safety; the Pumps are NOT utilized or accessible by the Public. This area is strictly restricted, secured by fencing, and monitored by 24 hour surveillance systems. Restricting the view of these materials would further deter the danger of vandals and/or theft. Building t4pprifications: The Canopy addition will be added to the existing structure and consistent with the Existing Building dimensions and elevations. The Canopy is a simple addition to the existing structure which will share the West Exterior wall. The current building is 36' feet long x 25' foot depth x 14' height and the Canopy dimensions will coordinate within these dimensions and elevations. The Canopy will measure 25' feet in length x 25' feet deep x 14' , for a Square Footage of 625. These dimensions are consistent with Fire and Building Code requirements. The Structure will be enclosed on (3) Three Sides, with open air front South Access. Canopy will be constructed of ALL Steal non combustible materials in compliance with Code. Including 4" Steel Posts, 8 — 12" I Beam Frame, Load bear 100 Ibs per square inch, footings 42" deep, T' Concrete Floor, and Pre Finished Steal Siding to match current structure. The South side or "Front" of Canopy will remain Open without enclosure. This open area will allow Fueling access and Code Required proper ventilation. The Canopy will cover the existing (see photo) Fuel Tank area of 24' x 9' concrete platform, which includes (4) Barrels. The remaining space of approximately 200 Square feet of maybe utilized for other similar types of storage as allowable by Safety Standards set forth by Fire and Building Code. Required safety standards and fire code signage requirements are currently present and will remain (see photo). Please see attached Design Drawing & Photos. r t 1 4 M r i � 1 �'' ��• r _ r ` str Ilk � 4 1 -h p r +I - pk j v Ir ♦- � I r 171. yIM,,:�i. dw r„ i � w At A3 • . ri :! ,.,I 1 r1 1 At do 77. w r 0 mm I WIS. L i i qol .*# 4 • .+ Y It dk 44V LV r rt OF v� OA i + / • • �_. y JN Y - `* �` •µ'hr. f4+* ILY� ti Air. 4L ,. �4 s r � �•4 4 M r+` r � r T { 4 f t ' 1 lei r ' 4 1 Kz i 1 v � r fL i .3 - r I • + • �,- Fa • - it - - vt do 1x965. -� ` �. t I 3 x96 9 Li 6d 6 Mwn.r 1..�✓-wv� , jvv�•./`P ' f� 'r"'"Y' L�'� F � ti� ,� \� ,.` l..•,/�Y'fJT. V�'�n*eY � , � j ,�f `� /�y� f// r1 . ✓4 a IIJjI ` /r . Y �... � . J ti..r l • !,1 ,' • 1'1 / ! rWYY ti ,P, � X97p. 1 �f I c �y X X969,2 �1 f 7 96P. 2 / 5 #� � 970.8 1 I % 9 7 a i f ff X9 91,3 1� �� f ,.ai�. ; li X9 71; 4,0 cm 7 1X � Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 2C. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Taco Bell, for building addition in the Central Community District (CCD), as per Chapter 2.4(0)(10) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Applicant: Border Foods (AS) A. Property: Legal: Lengthy Legal, See Attached Address: 124 7t' Street East PID: 155010003060 Planning Case Number: 2015 -039 REFERENCE & BACKGROUND Request(s): The proposal consists of an amendment to an existing CUP for PUD regulating the Taco Bell and adjacent hotel property, by permitting the building expansion of the Taco Bell facility to the south to accommodate an exterior cooler unit. Deadline for Decision: November 7t', 2015 Land Use Designation: Downtown Zoning Designation: CCD, L -8 — Freeway Retail The purpose of the "CCD ", Central Community District, is to provide for a wide variety of land uses, transportation options, and public activities in the downtown Monticello area, and particularly to implement the goals, objectives, and specific directives of the Comprehensive Plan, and in particular, the Embracing Downtown Monticello report and its Design Guidelines. As stated in the Embracing Downtown Plan, the L -8 District is a "Key anchor to the south of Downtown district. Freeway oriented shopping drives regional traffic to the area. Convenient and safe pedestrian and vehicular connections through Walnut Street is critical." Overlays /Environmental Regulations Applicable: Freeway Bonus Sign District Current Site Use: Taco Bell restaurant Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 Surrounding Land Uses: North: Cemetery East: Cedar Street; Burger King restaurant — zoned B -4 South: AmericINN - zoned CCD, L -8 and included within subject PUD West: Perkins restaurant - zoned CCD, L -8 Project Description: The applicant proposes to add an exterior cooler unit as a building addition to the rear (south) side of the existing building. ANALYSIS The subject property is part of a Planned Unit Development which was originally approved in 1993. The PUD accommodated the construction of the hotel property without public street frontage, a condition which still exists between the two sites. Access to the hotel site is accommodated from 7t' Street through the Taco Bell property. With this application, the applicant, Border Foods, is seeking to expand the existing Taco Bell building to add an exterior cooler unit. The 129.4 square foot structure will be added to the south side of the building, with interior remodeling to accommodate the expansion. The square footage of the expansion represents a 7% increase in the building's square footage. Zoning Ordinance section 2.4(0)(10)(b) requires that to "Increase the gross floor area of non - residential buildings by more than three percent or increase the gross floor area of any individual building by more than five percent " requires a PUD amendment process. The zoning ordinance requires that restaurants under 10,000 square feet in the L Districts of the CCD be approved under a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit for this site is incorporated within the original PUD approval. In the past, the City approved Planned Unit Developments under a conditional use permit. As such, the amendment to CUP is also incorporated within the amendment to PUD. Overall, the addition of the cooler unit has very little impact on the existing PUD. The addition will have no impact to the existing shared access with the AmericINN property to the south. The interior remodel associated with the expansion does not include the addition of seating; rather the expansion serves only to add additional capacity for kitchen service needs. As such, the expansion will not create any additional parking demand for the site and no impact to the existing parking on the site is proposed. The expansion will not disturb the sidewalk leading from the Taco Bell site to the AmericINN site, which was part of the original PUD approval. The site plans for the 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 project indicate that other areas of the sidewalk adjacent to the building's south side will be replaced with construction. No changes are proposed to existing site access, landscaping, signage or other building components. The addition will not impact the existing drive - through configuration or stacking. In terms of ordinance compliance, the proposed expansion presents no issues with building or lot square footage requirements or setback requirements. The cooler unit will meet the required 5' setback from other properties in the CCD for L -8 areas. In addition, the site will continue to meet both minimum and maximum lot coverage requirements of the CCD. Based on the provided plans, no external roof -based mechanical equipment is proposed with this addition. The site will be required to meet all City codes related to noise with the addition of the proposed structure. Much of the existing area on which the proposed expansion will occur is existing impervious surface. The site impervious surface will increase by approximately 50 square feet, creating no concerns for drainage. The City Engineer will review proposed grading and drainage modifications at building permit. One item of note relates to the proposed building materials, which do not meet ordinance requirements. The cooler unit exterior is metal with a stipple finish to mimic a stucco treatment, then painted to match the existing building exterior. Zoning Ordinance 4.11(D) does not allow for metal finishes in Business Districts, further stating that "Metal exterior finishes shall be permitted only where coordinated into the overall architectural design of the structure, such as in window and door frames, mansard roofs or parapets, and other similar features, and in no case shall constitute more than 15% of the total exterior finish of the building." Planned unit developments allow flexibility from the standards of the ordinance, but this flexibility is intended to be offset by companion improvements in other areas of the design or site. The cooler unit will not be visible from the 7t' Street right of way to the north, as it will be blocked by the existing building. In addition, a majority of the proposed cooler addition will be screened from the west and partially from the south by the existing trash enclosure, and partially from the east by an existing electrical transformer structure and the drive through order board. However, the cooler unit will be partially visible from the hotel to the south and the property to the east. The applicant has therefore proposed a landscaping plan to accommodate additional screening on the south and east sides, including a mix of Arborvitae located between the Karl Foerster Grass Pardon Daylily and Sedum. Planning Commission will need to determine whether the additional landscaping proposed offsets the metal material condition as an acceptable flexibility via a PUD. If Planning Commission is inclined to allow the material, it would be doing so under the unique conditions of this PUD and site, and recognizing the additional landscaping treatments. 3 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 No further improvements or changes are expected to the property as a part of the current application, and all previous conditions of PUD approval appear to be met and in compliance. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2015 -013 recommending approval of an Amendment to Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Taco Bell, for a building addition in the Central Community District (CCD), as per Chapter 2.4(0)(10) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, subject to the conditions in the resolution as identified in Exhibit Z 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 2015- 013 recommending approval of an Amendment to Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Taco Bell, for a building addition in the Central Community District (CCD), as per Chapter 2.4(0)(10) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amendment per Alternative 91 above. The proposed expansion is consistent with the zoning ordinance with the exception of the building materials. The flexibility in materials can be accommodated through the intensification of landscaping materials on the site as proposed. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution PC- 2015 -013 B. Aerial Site Image C. Site Plans, including: a. Title Sheet b. Existing Site Plan c. Proposed Site Plan d. Existing Exterior Elevations e. Proposed Exterior Elevations f. Landscaping Plan D. Comment Letter, AmericINN Z. Conditions of Approval 2 Planning Commission Agenda — 10/06/2015 EXHIBIT Z Amendment to Planned Unit Development Border Foods —124 7 t Street East The approval is subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer regarding grading and drainage at the time of building permit. 2. The applicant shall specify details of any exterior lighting, which shall comply with Monticello Zoning Ordinance section 4.4. 3. The cooler unit shall comply with all City codes for noise. 4. The applicant shall enter into an amendment to development agreement with the City specifying the terms of the PUD. 5 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -013 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT RELATING TO A BUILDING EXPANSION FOR THE TACO BELL /BORDER FOODS SITE WHEREAS, the applicant has a property interest in the property located at 124 East 7t' Street; and WHEREAS, the subject property is a part of an approved Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development (PUD) governing the uses and development of the parcel; and WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to amend the PUD to accommodate a building expansion on the proposed site; and WHEREAS, the property is zoned Central Community District (CCD), in which the proposed store is a conditional use; and WHEREAS, the proposed development amendment is consistent with the intent of the applicable zoning regulations, subject to additional landscaping to address screening of the proposed building expansion; and WHEREAS, the proposed development amendment is consistent with the intent of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed development amendment is consistent with the general intent of the previous PUD approvals; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the matter at its regular meeting on October 6th, 2015 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: 1. The proposed planned unit development amendment is consistent with the intent of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed development amendment is consistent with the intent and approvals of the original PUD. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2015 -013 3. The proposed development amendment will not create undue burdens on public systems, including streets and utilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota that the proposed subdivision amendment is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions found in Exhibit Z as follows. 1. The approval is subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer regarding grading and drainage at the time of building permit. 2. The applicant shall specify details of any exterior lighting, which shall comply with Monticello Zoning Ordinance section 4.4. 3. The applicant shall enter into an amendment to development agreement with the City specifying the terms of the PUD. ADOPTED this 6th day of October, 2015, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION R-A ATTEST: Brad Fyle, Chair Angela Schumann, Community & Economic Development Director 2 0 u w U c v u L 0. 'u C �L 0 +j c 0 Q v 0 u H Ln Ln o$ a � o EL a i w t L En cu C � N Q �--I 7 f. } .-mock Ij IF eA, `n rP,A .' OwnF t tik- % I ol. N W O I z W W V W 'o a 0,Q _ �I o s 1111111 r d = i ° N LL; O o- JJ ° - s �i�s o w �° o 3 w o y w o o,- , �a o 000080000 1 o �a G� z N�o z€ y� €y - o y €z on $ o -oa o -' Z o €6 V as o o ° € - o o�w mow- ° a 30 ° uai F z oo Naa E u u o a yy u � ■ ❑ F 0 � - ��d�wd3d ■�■ �� W W N N W O I z W W V W 'o a = i ° N a o O o- JJ ° - s �i�s o w �° o 3 w o y w o z mao �a o 000080000 ¢� o zLLw yg ' G� Vw oo N�o z€ y� €y - o y €z on $ o -oa o -' Z o €6 V as o o ° € - o o�w mow- ° a 30 ° uai om =° d3a�° =o N W O I z W W V W 'o a a o o o- _ ag=o € =a° =o` €¢ %oho - a po F s= ooa =o _o - w ° - o o wo w =V w ¢� o zLLw yg ' G� Vw oo N�o z€ y� €y - o y €z on $ o -oa o -' Z €6 V as o ° € - o o�w mow- ° a 0 C4 °o� 3 D W W N °3ow`_3 =LLO �3 = a `° w a °`° o 0 0 N °z as �° o off° .� 3 ova =a �oo� wzo o o ff° " H �Fo`.o a Z °€ w� ° "'R a� ° °° 9w— ww ms = m N 3 o o° o 0 o o o�m �w�- w� o o = a o�_�_ oa . _LLm ooa as .o oN . °m oN W OW W j J 6 6 6 R� P M �a� �6 El a W— - 6 - 6 d 6 s d 8 - d - 6 s; d 5 �- W6d Z � a �� 6 �� - ® a E 6 a � C4 0 6� �Ej Eb -� -�� 0 � 6 a�6 -�- 0 _a�ove A� 8 H_ �:E a_ =�r °er O - 8 d' d d d d® 6 6 & Ea d d, - P �- -6 e Un�UnI - S m �a d b�E E2 E �8� 6 �a boW IUJ i3 Na�zb 6 m a o o N W O I z W W V W 'o a H U) w w LU U) k HiGIM E 0 Ob ++1 Lo z C �♦ °m �N z - R 11 °Q3 "_ N o oQoo F Ex 3.s o Who Wy� y Y ao�r �L m�y i�o � ro�oo 0o��3W o�soGii P. W8 W°y°o °o o�i °og °omLi fl>oH 0= o o j no, b–A °oho > I 0 °° _ 030000 0 0� O oll 8woi, -o° oI - �o�o o U .. o o�H 30- a�a�6V} m \- a s �? av — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- - -- / J J co / O o g 3� +I z � xs y I t 1 t L- --------- - - - - - - - ❑ (n 0- 0 O W e cwn0 a = w a Q J � 0 +I k C) � z O wN vw a d Q - �ro w0 a 0 Z Z O B o 6 F vni N "' y x Z Z O B C0 F N m LL Q F co :5 �LL - - - - - J - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - a K lo H U) w w LU U) k HiGIM E 0 Ob ++1 Lo z C �♦ °m �N z - R 11 °Q3 "_ N o oQoo F Ex 3.s o Who Wy� y Y ao�r �L m�y i�o � ro�oo 0o��3W o�soGii P. W8 W°y°o °o o�i °og °omLi fl>oH 0= o o j no, b–A °oho > I 0 °° _ 030000 0 0� O oll 8woi, -o° oI - �o�o o U .. o o�H 30- a�a�6V} m \- a s �? av — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- — -- - -- / J J co / O o g 3� +I z � xs y I t 1 t L- --------- - - - - - - - ❑ (n 0- 0 O W cwn0 a = w Q J � 0 +I k C) � of wN vw a d Q - �ro w0 O F Z Z O B o 6 F vni N "' y x Z Z O B C0 F N m o Q F co :5 �LL - - - - - J - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 5 a N J O a a z W C) m = ®g 3 U) w LU LU U) K HiGIM E 0 Ob o C e LL oGg a on /\ N z LLI z o i_ N z zoo ' - F � u z OQ� = .a =a a P a OU 0o��3W o'osoG,� r000 � ooNo a 0 N omH > °�w rG, °G,�� „z o Z o j a oa° HA woo. b—A _ -� off o 0 00 ~0 �� MIo o 03000,0 000 PH o �wz �� on rl - oaWaz�w�� o V oo M r - - O a °g K o lo - - - 3 - U) w LU LU U) K HiGIM E 0 Ob p 3s 3 oo N3 / ❑ J Q 00 I 0 F ^� Ev o 3� +I z � xs y 1 t 1 t J 0 J 0 N 0 N O Q W Z (n O N +I z wa kww� C,° H U �I z C) +ol z� co �wFv�i ao IQQ = ~Fv'ni ro w O Z Z o F x Z Z �S y Fm FOB co y, Q FOB 0:5 o 0:5 L------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ------------ - - - - - -J 5 U) N J O z a W F N W O O a o C e LL oGg w on /\ N z LLI z o i_ N z zoo ' - F � u r OQ� = .a =a a P a OU p 3s 3 oo N3 / ❑ J Q 00 I 0 F ^� Ev o 3� +I z � xs y 1 t 1 t J 0 J 0 N 0 N O Q W Z (n O N +I z wa kww� C,° H U �I z C) +ol z� co �wFv�i ao IQQ = ~Fv'ni ro w O Z Z o F x Z Z �S y Fm FOB co y, Q FOB 0:5 o 0:5 L------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ------------ - - - - - -J 5 U) N J O z a W F N W O O a o oGg Goa _o o o �3 N z zoo ' - �o o =a a P a V 0o��3W o'osoG,� r000 � ooNo N omH > °�w rG, °G,�� „z o Z o j a oa° HA woo. b—A _ -� off o 0 00 ~0 �� MIo o 03000,0 000 PH o �wz �� on rl �w¢�V�� oaWaz�w�� o V oo M r -.o a�a�� p 3s 3 oo N3 / ❑ J Q 00 I 0 F ^� Ev o 3� +I z � xs y 1 t 1 t J 0 J 0 N 0 N O Q W Z (n O N +I z wa kww� C,° H U �I z C) +ol z� co �wFv�i ao IQQ = ~Fv'ni ro w O Z Z o F x Z Z �S y Fm FOB co y, Q FOB 0:5 o 0:5 L------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ------------ - - - - - -J 5 U) N J O z a W F N W O O a I I C4 I ti « 0 lk e A e Lou, ;L%## v 41 - %_ 1 12 & pri "R_ 0 _. it rEj m F* I- #' 7)b 0' vo� '* IN iz n --, e EL & 46 db 11 Scm m , 71: 5�: 111 151- -141 -__ 1 a j:__ 1 - - - "I xy ■ of � .� � � �\ 2 - � ƒq MM............................................................ ...................................... v - q'&F M" F 3 " "�' 'F. m . (" —o" '� -!r_ o ®I ®ool�io� ese� ®� xtiao +,a��Q��el' ®�c�lo�e o A� . a , • �ti � <n.» ti i,�., i �a.�si,�,.,i �o_a a i,� .3i �ma,oi,�. �- ��m.ni �. -s i ��.,�i � _ , i �..a -a � �• ,. �. ,o�vi �,� ,�� %i. r ® . . W .. �- Planning Commission Agenda: 10/06/15 3A. Update — November Hearing for Amendments to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance as related to Brew Pubs, Brewer Taprooms and Microdistilleries (AS) A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND: On September 28th, the City Council adopted an amendment to City Code to allow for Brew Pubs, Brewer Taprooms and Microdistilleries under liquor license ordinance provisions. See attached information for reference. To further support the potential for such businesses in the city, companion zoning ordinance amendments are necessary. At present, the zoning ordinance language does not include specific language for these types of uses. The Council therefore acted to call for a public hearing by the Planning Commission for zoning ordinance amendments related to the uses. Amendments will address the districts in which the uses would be allowed, specific use regulations and standards, and use definitions. Staff would be prepared to present ordinance language at the November regular Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission's recommendation would then be brought forward to the City Council. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: No action is required by the Planning Commission at this time. The City Council acted to call for the hearing by the Commission in November. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Staff Report regarding Brew Pubs, Brewer Taprooms and Microdistilleries, City Council Meeting of 9/28/15 City Council Agenda: 09/28/15 2I. Consideration of adopting Ordinance #625 amending city liquor ordinances by amending Sunday on -sale intoxicating liquor hours, adding Section 3 -1 -13: Brew Pubs, Brewer Taprooms and Microdistilleries, and amending the Fee Schedule (JS /AS) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: City Council is asked to adopt an ordinance which provides for changes to the City's current liquor ordinance. There are three amendments for consideration: 1) Sale of Sunday on -sale liquor; 2) The addition of section 3 -1 -13: Brew Pubs, Brewer Taproom and Microdistilleries; and 3) Amendment to the Fee Schedule. This first ordinance amendment is amending Section 3, Chapter 1 — Beer; Section 3 Chapter 2 — Liquor; Section 3, Chapter 4 — Liquor by the Drink; and Section 3, Chapter 11 — On Sale Wine License. This amendment is being prompted by recent changes to Minnesota Statutes relating to times when intoxicating liquor may be sold on Sundays. Currently, Monticello's Liquor Ordinance for Sunday on -sales of intoxicating liquor cannot begin until 10 a.m. The omnibus tax bill of 2015 gives cities the authority to extend hours for these sales so that they begin at 8 a.m. There has been support from some local establishments for this change. The second ordinance amendment is the addition of Section 3 -1 -13: Brew Pubs, Brewer Taproom and Microdistilleries. In 2011, Minnesota Statutes §340A.301 was amended to add a brewer taproom license. The amendment made it legal for smaller brewers (those that produces not more than 250,000 barrels of malt liquor annually) to sell their beer for consumption on the brewery site. (Note that one barrel equals 31 gallons). In addition, State Statue was also amended in 2015 to allow for the Sunday sale of growlers. A copy of the state law that applies is attached. Our current intoxicating liquor ordinance does not contemplate these types of establishments. City staff consulted with City Attorney Joel Jamnik regarding the proposed amendment relating to brew pubs, taprooms and distilleries and the recommended changes in the document follow State Statute. To better understand each of these establishments: • Brew Pub is a brewer who also holds one or more retail on -sale license and who manufactures fewer than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor in a year, at any one licensed premises, the entire production of which is solely for consumption on tap on any licensed premises owned by the brewer, or for off -sale from those premises. • Taproom is a brewer (licensed by State) who sells for consumption malt liquor they produce on their premises. A brewer cannot brew more than 250,000 barrels of malt liquor annually. • Microdistillery is a distillery operated within the state producing premium, distilled spirits in total quantity not to exceed 40,000 proof gallons in a calendar year. City Council Agenda: 09/28/15 Some areas of consideration for the City Council: • The language drafted would allow but not require growler licenses for taprooms or brewpubs. It is up to the City Council on whether establishments are allowed an off -sale license. In addition, in 2015 the statute was amended to allow growler sales on Sundays. A growler is a 64 -ounce container of malt liquor. • The Zoning Ordinance will need to be updated to allow for such establishments. The third amendment is an amendment to Chapter 20, Section 1 by adding the licenses to the fee schedule. There were three license fees added: the Brew -Pub Off -sale; the Taproom; and the Microdistillery. (See attached document). Amendments have been prepared for the affected ordinance sections. Please refer to supporting data for the proposed amendments. It should be noted that these ordinance amendments, once approved, will go into effect on the date they are published in the official newspaper. Al. Budget Impact: There will be minimal cost for publishing the summary ordinance amendments. A2. Staff Workload Impact: Staff time to prepare and update the City Ordinances. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Approve Ordinance 9625 (three amendments) in separate motions: A. Motion to adopt amendment 1 - Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.11 to change Sunday on -sales of intoxicating liquor to begin at 8 a.m. B. Motion to adopt amendment 2 - to add Section 3.1.13 Brew Pubs, Brewer Taproom and Microdistilleries. C. Motion to adopt amendment 3 — Amendment to the fee schedule. 2. Deny Ordinance 9625 amendments in separate motions: A. Deny amendment 1 to change Sunday on -sales of intoxicating liquor to begin 8 a.m. B. Deny amendment 2 to add Brew Pubs, Brewer Taprooms, and Microdistrilleries. C. Deny amendment 3 — amendment to fee schedule. City staff recommends Alternative #1 to adopt Ordinance 9625 amending Section 3. 1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.11 to change Sunday on -sales of intoxicating liquor to begin at 8 a.m. and adding Section 3.1.13 Brew Pubs, Taproom and Microdistilleries, and amending Chapter 20, Section 1 by adding to the fee schedule. D. SUPPORTING DATA: • Draft Ordinance 625 City Council Agenda: 09/28/15 • Fee Schedule • State Statues §340A301 ORDINANCE 625 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY LIQUOR ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: • SUNDAY ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR HOURS; • ADDING SECTION 3.1.13: BREW PUBS, BREWER TAPROOM AND MICRODISTILLERIES • FEE SCHEDULE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELL0, MINNESOTA HEREBY ORDAINS. L Chapter 3, Section 1(9), Beer — Days and Hours of Sale is hereby amended as follows: No sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor may be made between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on the days of Monday through Saturday inclusive, nor between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Sundays. An establishment serving 3.2 percent malt liquor on Sundays must obtain a Sunday license from the City. Chapter 3, Section 2 (9) (B), Liquor — Days and Hours of Sale is hereby amended as follows: No sale of intoxicating liquor for consumption on the licensed premises may be made between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Monday through Saturday inclusive, or between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Sundays. Chapter 3, Section 4 (5) (B), Liquor by the Drink — Days and Hours of Sale is hereby amended as follows: No sale of intoxicating liquor by the drink for consumption on the licensed premises may be made between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Sundays. Chapter 3, Section 11 (10) (A), On -Sale Wine License — Days and Hours of Sale is hereby amended as follows: No sale of wine under this license shall be made on the premises between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m., Monday through Saturday inclusive, or on any Sunday between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. II. Chapter 3, Section 1, Beer is hereby amended to add the following: 3.1.13: Brew Pub, Brewer Taproom or Microdistillery License 1) A brew pub, brewer taproom, or microdistillery as defined and made eligible under state law may be issued on -sale and off -sale licenses subject to the terms and conditions established by state law and this Code, and to any limitations imposed by the Council. 2) The license issued by the City must specify whether off -sale is permitted, the hours of operation, whether Sunday sales are permitted and other conditions. The fees established by ordinance may reflect various license options authorized by law. III Chapter 20, Section 1, Fee Schedule — Liquor Licenses is hereby amended to add the following: Brew Pub Off -Sale $200 Taproom $500 Microdistillery $500 ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council the 281h day of September, 2015. Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: Jeff O'Neill, Administrator AYES: NAYS: Liquor Administrative Fines: First violation Second violation, within 2 years Third violation, within 2 years Liquor Licenses: 1 -Day Consumption & Display Temporary On -Sale (Beer) Wine, On -Sale Wine /Strong Beer Comb. On -Sale Wine /3.2 Beer Com. On -Sale 3.2 Beer, On -Sale 3.2 Beer, Off -Sale Liquor, On -Sale Liquor, Sunday Sales Liquor, Setups Liquor,Ciub (Veteran's Org). Membership 200 or less 201 -500 501 -1000 1001 -2000 2001 -4000 Over 4000 Brew - Pub Off -Sale Taproom Microdistrilleries Monticello Fee Schedule - 2015 $500 $1,000 $2,000 (no mandatory revocation of license) $25 $10 /day $275 /per year $1,200 /per year $500 /per year $275 /year $100 /per year $3,750 /per year $200 (Statutory limit) $250 /year $300 (Statutory limit) $500 (Statutory limit) $650 (Statutory limit) $800 (Statutory limit) $1,000 (Statutory limit) $2,000 (Statutory limit) $200 $500 $500 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 340A.22 Subd. 27. Table or sparkling wine. "Table or sparkling wine" is a beverage made without rectification or fortification and containing not more than 25 percent of alcohol by volume and made by the fermentation of grapes, grape juice, other fruits, or honey. Subd. 27a. Theater. "Theater" means a building containing an auditorium in which live dramatic, musical, dance, or literary performances are regularly presented to holders of tickets for those performances. Subd. 28. Wholesaler. "Wholesaler" is aperson who sells alcoholic beverages to persons to whom sale is permitted under section 340A.310, from a stock maintained in a warehouse in the state. Subd. 29. Wine. "Wine" is the product made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of grapes, including still wine, sparkling and carbonated wine, wine made from condensed grape must, wine made from other agricultural products than sound, ripe grapes, imitation wine, compounds sold as.wine, vermouth, cider, perry and sake, in each instance containing not less than one -half of one percent nor more than 24 percent alcohol by volume for nonindustrial use. Wine does not include distilled spirits as defined in subdivision 9. Subd. 30. MS 2008 [Renumbered subd I Oa] History: 1985 c 117 s 3; 1985 c 305 art 3 s 1; 1Sp1985 c 16 art 2 s 3 subd 1; 1987 c 152 art 1 s 1; 1987 c 381 s 2; 1988 c 443 s 1; 1990 c 554 s 2,3; 1991 c 249 s 31; 1992 c 486 s 5,6; 1993 c 350 s 4 -6; 1994 c 611 s 6; 1995 c 198 s 1 -3; 2000 c 440 s 2; 2003 c 726 s 1; 2006 c 210 s 1,2; 2009 c 120 s 1; 2011 c55s1,2; 2014 c 240 s 3,4; 2015c9 art I s DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 340A.201 LIQUOR CONTROL AUTHORITY. Subdivision 1.1976 successor. The commissioner of public safety is the successor to the commissioner of liquor control with respect to the powers and duties vested in the latter as of February 6, 1976, except for those powers and duties transferred to the commissioner of revenue. Any proceeding, court action, prosecution, or other business undertaken or commenced as of February 6, 1976, by the commissioner of liquor control is assigned to the commissioners of public safety and revenue as appropriate and may be completed by them. Subd. 2. Delegation; 1996 consolidation; division director. Effective October 1, 1996, the duties and powers vested previously in the commissioner of public safety and delegated to the department's Division of Liquor Control are delegated and transferred to, and consolidated with, the Division of Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement of the Department of Public Safety, under the supervision of a director appointed by the commissioner and serving in the unclassified service at the pleasure of the commissioner. History: 1985 c 305 art 4 s 1; 1987 c 152 art I s 1; 1997 c 129 art 2 s 13 MANUFACTURERS, WHOLESALERS, IMPORTERS 340A.22 MICRODISTILLERIES. Subdivision 1. Activities. (a) A microdistillery licensed under this chapter may provide on its premises samples of distilled spirits manufactured on its premises, in an amount not to exceed 15 milliliters per variety per person. No more than 45 milliliters may be sampled under this paragraph by any person on any day. (b) A microdistillery can sell cocktails to the public, pursuant to subdivision 2. Copyright 0 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 340A.22 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 6 Subd. 2. Cocktail room license. (a) A municipality, including g-a city with a municipal liquor store, may issue the holder of a microdistillery license under this chapter a microdistillery cocktail room license. A microdistillery cocktail room license authorizes on -sale of distilled liquor produced by the distiller for consumption on the premises of or adjacent to one distillery location owned by the distiller. Nothing in this subdivision precludes the holder of a microdistillery cocktail room license from also holding a license to operate a restaurant at the distillery. Section 340A.409 shall apply to a license issued under this subdivision. All provisions of this chapter that apply to a retail liquor license shall apply to a license issued under this subdivision unless the provision is explicitly inconsistent with this subdivision. (b) A distiller may only have one cocktail room license under this subdivision, and may not have an ownership interest in a distillery licensed under section 340A.301, subdivision 6, paragraph (a). (c) The municipality shall impose a licensing fee on a distiller holding a microdistillery cocktail room license under this subdivision, subject to limitations applicable to license fees under section 340A.408, subdivision 2, paragraph (a). (d) A municipality shall, within ten days of the issuance of a license under this subdivision, inform the commissioner of the licensee's name and address and trade name, and the effective date and expiration date of the license. The municipality shall also inform the commissioner of a license transfer, cancellation, suspension, or revocation during the license period. (e) No single entity may hold both a cocktail room and taproom license, and a cocktail room and taproom may not be co- located. Subd. 3. License; fee. The commissioner shall establish a fee for licensing microdistilleries that ad- equately covers the cost of issuing the Iicense and other inspection requirements. The fees shall be deposited in an account in the special revenue fund and are appropriated to the commissioner for the purposes of this subdivision. All other requirements of section 340A.301 apply to a license under this section. Subd. 4. Off-sale license. A microdistillery may be issued a license by the local licensing authority for off -sale of distilled spirits. The license may allow the sale of one 375 milliliter bottle per customer per day of product manufactured on -site, subject to the following requirements: (1) off -sale hours of sale must conform to hours of sale for retail off -sale licensees in the licensing municipality; and (2) no brand may be sold at the microdistillery unless it is also available for distribution by wholesalers. History: 2014 c 240 s 5; 2015 c 9 art I s 2; art 2 s I 340A.24 BREW PUBS. Subdivision 1. On-sale license. A brew pub may be issued an on -sale intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor license by a municipality for a restaurant operated in the place of manufacture. Subd. 2. Off -sale license. Notwithstanding section 340A.405, a brew pub that holds an on -sale license issued pursuant to this section may, with the approval of the commissioner, be issued a license by a mu- nicipality for off -sale of malt liquor produced and packaged on the licensed premises. Off -sale of malt liquor shall be limited to the legal hours for off -sale at exclusive liquor stores in the jurisdiction in which the brew Copyright C 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 340A.26 pub is located, and the malt liquor sold off -sale must be removed from the premises before the applicable off -sale closing time at exclusive liquor stores, except that malt liquor in growlers only may be sold at off - sale on Sundays. Sunday sales must be approved by the licensing jurisdiction and hours may be established by those jurisdictions. Packaging of malt Iiquor for off -sale under this subdivision must comply with section 340A.285. Subd. 3. Total retail sales. A brew pub's total retail sales at on- or off -sale under this section may not exceed 3,500 barrels per year, provided that off -sales may not total more than 500 barrels. Subd. 4. Interest in other license. (a) A brew pub may hold or have an interest in other retail on -sale licenses, but may not have an ownership interest in whole or in part, or be an officer, director, agent, or employee of, any other manufacturer, brewer, importer, or wholesaler, or be an affiliate thereof whether the affiliation is corporate or by management, direction, or control. (b) Notwithstanding this prohibition, a brew pub may be an affiliate or subsidiary company of a brewer licensed in Minnesota or elsewhere if that brewer's only manufacture of malt liquor is: (1) manufacture licensed under section 340A.301, subdivision 6, clause (d); (2) manufacture in another state for consumption exclusively in a restaurant located in the place of manufacture; or (3) manufacture in another state for consumption primarily in a restaurant located in or immediately adjacent to the place of manufacture if the brewer was licensed under section 340A.301, subdivision 6, clause (d), on January 1, 1995. Subd. 5. Prohibition. A brew pub licensed under this chapter may not be Iicensed as an importer under section 340A.302. History: 2015 c 9 art i s 3,8; art 2 s 3 340,0,26 BREWER TAPROOMS. Subdivision 1. Brewer taproom license. (a) A municipality, including a city with a municipal liquor store, may issue the holder of a brewer's license under section 340A.301, subdivision 6, clause (c), (i), or 0), a brewer taproom license. A brewer taproom license authorizes on -sale of malt liquor produced by the brewer for consumption on the premises of or adjacent to one brewery location owned by the brewer. Nothing in this subdivision precludes the holder of a brewer taproom license from also holding a license to operate a restaurant at the brewery. Section 340A.409 shall apply to a license issued under this subdivision. All provisions of this chapter that apply to a retail liquor license shall apply to a license issued under this subdivision unless the provision is explicitly inconsistent with this subdivision. (b) A brewer may only have one taproom license under this subdivision, and may not have an ownership interest in a brew pub. Subd. 2. Prohibition. A municipality may not issue a brewer taproom license to a brewer if the brewer seeking the license, or any person having'an economic interest in the brewer seeking the license or exercising control over the brewer seeking the license, is a brewer that brews more than 250,000 barrels of malt liquor annually or a winery that produces more than 250,000 gallons of wine annually. Copyright 0 2015 by the Revisor of statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 340A.26 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 Subd. 3. Fee. The municipality shall impose a licensing fee on a brewer holding a brewer taproom license under this subdivision, subject to limitations applicable to license fees under section 340A.408, subdivision 2, paragraph (a). Subd. 4. Municipality to inform commissioner. A municipality shall, within ten days of the issuance of a license under this subdivision, inform the commissioner of the licensee's name and address and trade name, and the effective date and expiration date of the license. The municipality shall also inform the commissioner of a license transfer, cancellation, suspension, or revocation during the license period. Subd. 5. Sunday on -sale. Notwithstanding section 340A.504, subdivision 3, a taproom may be open and may conduct on -sale business on Sundays if authorized by the municipality. History: 2015 c 9 art l s 4 340A.28 SMALL BREWER OFF -SALE. Subdivision 1. License; limitations. A brewer licensed under section 340A.301, subdivision 6, clause (c), (i), or 0), may be issued a license by a municipality for off -sale of malt liquor at its licensed premises that has been produced and packaged by the brewer. The license must be approved by the commissioner. A brewer may only have one license under this subdivision. The amount of malt liquor sold at off -sale may not exceed 500 barrels annually. Off -sale of malt liquor shall be limited to the legal hours for off -sale at exclusive liquor stores in the jurisdiction in which the brewer is located, and the malt Iiquor sold off -sale must be removed from the premises before the applicable off -sale closing time at exclusive liquor stores, except that malt liquor in growlers only may be sold at off -sale on Sundays. Sunday sales must be approved by the licensing jurisdiction and hours may be established by those jurisdictions. Packaging of malt liquor for off -sale under this subdivision must comply with section 340A.285. Subd. 2. Prohibition. A municipality may not issue a license under this section to a brewer if the brewer seeking the license, or any person having an economic interest in the brewer seeking the license or exercising control over the. brewer seeking the license, is a brewer that brews more than 20,000 barrels of its own brands of malt liquor annually or a winery that produces more than 250,000 gallons of wine annually. Subd. 3. Fee. The municipality shall impose a licensing fee on a brewer holding a license under this sub- division, subject to limitations applicable to license fees under section 340A.408, subdivision 3, paragraph (a). History: 2015 c 9 art I s 5,8; art 2 s 2 340A.285 GROWLERS. (a) Malt liquor authorized for off -sale pursuant to section 340A.24 or 340A.28 shall be packaged in 64- ounce containers commonly known as "growlers" or in 750 milliliter bottles. The containers or bottles shall bear a twist -type closure, cork, stopper, or plug. At the time of sale, a paper or plastic adhesive band, strip, or sleeve shall be applied to the container or bottle and extended over the top of the twist -type closure, cork, stopper, or plug forming a seal that must be broken upon opening the container or bottle. The adhesive band, strip, or sleeve shall bear the-name and address of the brewer. The containers or bottles shall be identified as malt liquor, contain the name of the malt liquor, bear the name and address of the brew pub or brewer selling the malt liquor, and shall be considered intoxicating liquor unless the alcoholic content is labeled as otherwise in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rules, part 7515.1100. Copyright 0 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 9 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 340A.301 (b) A brew pub or brewer may, but is not required to, refill any container or bottle with malt liquor for off -sale at the request of the customer. A brew pub or brewer refilling a container or bottle must do so ^ at its licensed premises and the container or bottle must be filled at the tap at the time of sale. A container or bottle refilled under this paragraph must be sealed and labeled in the manner described in paragraph (a). History: 2013 c 9 art I s 6 340A.301 MANUFACTURERS, BREWERS, AND WHOLESALERS LICENSES. Subdivision 1. Licenses required. No person may directly or indirectly manufacture or sell at wholesale intoxicating liquor, or 3.2 percent malt liquor without obtaining an appropriate license from the com- missioner, except where otherwise provided in this chapter. A manufacturer's license includes the right to import. A licensed brewer may sell the brewer's products at wholesale only if the brewer has been issued a wholesaler's license. The commissioner shall issue a wholesaler's license to a brewer only if (1) the com- missioner determines that the brewer was selling the brewer's own products at wholesale in Minnesota on January 1, 1991, or (2) the brewer has acquired a wholesaler's business or assets under subdivision 9, paragraph (c) or (d). A licensed wholesaler of intoxicating malt liquor may sell 3.2 percent malt liquor at wholesale without an additional license. Subd. 2. Persons eligible. (a) Licenses under this section may be issued only to a person who: (1) is of good moral character and repute; (2) is 21 years of age or older; (3) has not had a license issued under this chapter revoked within five years of the elate of license application, or to any person who at the time of the violation owns any interest, whether as a holder of more than five percent of the capital stock of a corporation licensee, as a partner or otherwise, in the premises or in the business conducted thereon, or to a corporation, partnership, association, enterprise, business, or firm in which any such person is in any manner interested; and (4) has not been convicted within five years of the date of license application of a felony, or of a willful violation of a federal or state law, or local ordinance governing the manufacture, sale, distribution, or possession for sale or distribution of alcoholic beverages. The Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division may require that fingerprints be taken and may forward the fingerprints to the Federal Bureau of Inves- tigation for purposes of a criminal history check. (b) In order to determine if an individual has a felony or willful violation of federal or state law governing the manufacture, sale, distribution, or possession for sale or distribution of an alcoholic beverage, the applicant for a license to manufacture or sell at wholesale must provide the commissioner with their signed, written informed consent to conduct a background check. The commissioner may query the Minnesota criminal history repository for records on the applicant. If the commissioner conducts a national criminal history record check, the commissioner must obtain fingerprints from the applicant and forward them and the required fee to the superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. The superintendent may exchange the fingerprints with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for purposes of obtaining the applicant's national criminal history record information. The superintendent shall return the results of the national criminal history records check to the commissioner for the purpose of determining if the applicant is qualified to receive a license. Subd. 3. Application. An application for a license under this section must be made to the commissioner on a form the commissioner prescribes and must be accompanied by the fee specified in subdivision 6. Copyright 0 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 340A.301 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 10 If an application is denied, $100 of the amount of any fee exceeding that amount shall be retained by the commissioner to cover costs of investigation. Subd. 4. Bond. The commissioner may not issue a license under this section to a person who has not filed a bond with corporate surety, or cash, or United States government bonds payable to the state. The proof of financial responsibility must be approved by the commissioner before the license is issued. The bond must be conditioned on the licensee obeying all laws governing the business and paying when due all taxes, fees, penalties and other charges, and must provide that it is forfeited to the state on a violation of law. This subdivision does not apply to a Minnesota farm winery, licensed under section 340A.315, that is in existence as of January 1, 2010. Bonds must be in the following amounts: Manufacturers and wholesalers of intoxicating liquor except as provided in this subdivision $ 10,000 Manufacturers and wholesalers of wine up to 25 percent alcohoI by weight $ 5,000 Manufacturers and wholesalers of beer of more than 3.2 percent alcohol by weight $ 1,000 Manufacturers and wholesalers of fewer than 20,000 proof gallons $ 2,000 Manufacturers and wholesalers of 20,000 to 40,000 proof gallons $ 3,000 Subd. 5. Period of license. Licenses issued under this section are valid for one year except that to coordinate expiration dates initial licenses may be issued for a shorter period. Subd. 6. Fees. The annual fees for licenses under this section are as follows: (a)Manufacturers (except as provided in clauses (b) and (c)) $ 30,000 Duplicates $ 3,000 (b)Manufacturers of wines of not more than 25 percent alcohol by $ 500 volume (c)Brewers who manufacture more than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor $ 4,000 in a year (d)Brew pubs. A brew pub licensed under this clause must obtain a $ 500 separate license for each licensed premises where the brew pub produces malt liquor (e)Wholesalers (except as provided in clauses (f), (g), and (h)) $ 15,000 Duplicates $ 3,000 (f)Wholesalers of wines of not more than 25 percent alcohol by $ 3,750 volume (g)Wbolesalers of intoxicating malt liquor $ 1,000 Copyright 0 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.