Planning Commission Agenda 09-20-2011 (Special Meeting)
AGENDA- SPECIAL MEETING
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011
6:00 PM
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Commissioners: Rod Dragsten, Brad Fyle, Charlotte Gabler, William Spartz, and
Barry Voight
Council Liaison: Lloyd Hilgart
Staff: Angela Schumann
1. Call to order.
2. Citizen Comments.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use Permit for
Planned Unit Development for the West Metro Auto Dealership.
Applicant: West Metro Auto Dealership
5. Planned Unit Development Ordinance Workshop
6. Adjourn.
*The City Council has been invited to attend the PUD Workshop.
4.
A.
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
Public Hearing - Consideration of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit
for Planned Unit Development for the West Metro Auto Dealership. (AS)
Property: Legal: Lot 1, Block 2, Carcone Addition, City of
Monticello
Address: 103 Sandberg Road
The subject site is located in the southwest quadrant of the
intersection area of I-94 and State Highway 25
Planning Case Number: 2011-026
REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Consideration of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit
for Planned Unit Development for the West Metro Auto
Dealership.
Deadline for Decision: November 7th, 2011
Land Use Designation: Places to Shop
Zoning Designation: B-3, Highway Business
The purpose of the "B-3", Highway Business district,
provide for and limit the establishment of motor vehicle
oriented or dependent commercial and service activities.
Current Site Use: The principal use of the 1.21 acre site is as an auto
dealership.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Interstate 1-94
East: Second parcel of the West Metro Auto dealership
South: Playhouse Childcare, a daytime childcare facility
West: Vacant
Project Description: The applicant is seeking an amendment to the existing Planned
Unit Development for the West Metro Auto dealership site, which would accommodate
1
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
the addition of a private accessory car wash facility on the westernmost parcel of the
PUD.
Analysis
In April of 2010, the City approved a replatting and amendment to PUD for the Carcone
Addition. This action consolidated nineteen (19) properties located north of Chelsea
Road, south of Interstate 94, east of Marvin Road and west of Highway 25, and included
the current West Metro site.
The amendment to PUD extinguished all previous CUP and PUD approvals for the
parcels included within the plat due to non-use, with the exception of West Metro. West
Metro, an active dealership, retained its PUD approval, which included all site uses and
the site configuration as it existed in April, 2010.
At this time, West Metro is seeking to amend the PUD to accommodate the addition of a
car wash facility along the western elevation of their building located on Lot 1, Block 2.
The use would be accessory to their principal use as an auto dealership.
In considering the request, staff has noted that automotive car wash facilities are not
listed as a separately identified accessory use in the B-3 district. Similarly, minor auto
repair is not listed as an accessory use. However, if this were a new vehicle sales
development request, a conditional use permit would be required in the B-3 district and
these two common accessory uses to vehicle sales facilities would be reviewed within the
context of the CUP review. In the case of this request, the status of the property as an
existing PUD requires that any substantial modification to the property or site requires a
formal amendment and may include this accessory use consideration.
The car wash facility is proposed at approximately 1570 square feet. It will be developed
along the west -facing elevation of the current building. It is important to note that this
car wash is a private facility, and would be utilized only for servicing vehicles being
serviced or sold at the West Metro dealership. The car wash would not be open to the
general public.
The proposed addition consists of concrete block construction, with glass block windows
on the west elevation. The roof will be constructed of metal panels. These materials and
colors of the proposed structure are consistent with the existing structure.
An existing sidewalk along the west elevation is proposed for removal and the site plan
does not illustrate its replacement. The drive aisle for the entrance and exit to the car
wash is proposed adjacent to an existing drive aisle separating the building from the car
inventory parked along the west edge of the property.
2
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
The applicant is proposing no changes to the site landscaping, lighting, or signage with
this application.
The southern portion of the West Metro site is adjacent to a commercial child care
facility. With the Carcone replat and amendment, additional landscaping material was
added in the area between the West Metro and child care sites. Additionally, because this
is a private car wash use, no menu board with audio is proposed. Therefore, staff is not
recommending any additional landscape buffering in conjunction with the expansion.
A grading and drainage plan is in development and will be reviewed by the City Engineer
is conjunction with a building permit application.
For the purpose of evaluating the proposed addition, staff would also refer the
Commission to the standards established for principal use automotive car wash facilities
as a baseline for review. As this is a private -use accessory car wash facility, many of the
standards are not directly applicable to this accessory use.
• Magazining or stacking space is constructed to accommodate that number of vehicles
which can be washed during a maximum thirty (30) minute period and shall be
subject to the approval of the Community Development Department.
Not applicable, private wash facility. Stacking area will not impact right of way.
• When abutting a residential use, the property shall be screened with at least a semi-
opaque buffer (Table 4-2, Buffer Type —CII) in accordance with section 4.1(G) of
this ordinance.
Not applicable.
• All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 4.4 of this ordinance.
Photometric plan required at building permit.
• Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened from view of abutting
residential districts in compliance with Section 4.1(F) of this ordinance.
Not applicable.
• The entire area other than occupied by the buildings or plantings shall be surfaced
with material which will control dust and drainage which is subject to the approval of
the Community Development Department.
Entire area is paved to control dust.
• The entire area shall have a drainage system which is subject to the approval of the
Community Development Department.
Grading and drainage plan are required to be submitted at building permit.
3
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
• Vehicular access points shall be limited, shall create a minimum of conflict with
through traffic movement, and shall be subject to the approval of the Community
Development Department. Access points to the car wash area have been previously
set.
• All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in
compliance with Section 4.5 of this ordinance.
Not applicable, private wash facility requires no additional signage.
• Provisions are made to control and reduce noise.
Not applicable, private wash requires no exterior control box with voice commands.
• Car wash facility shall have direct access to major thoroughfare via driveway or
frontage road. Compliant.
• Intermittent sounds produced by car wash operation such as the sound of a vacuum or
warning signal shall not be audible to adjoining residential.
Assigned as a conditional of approval.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Decision 1: Resolution of Recommendation
1. Motion to approve Resolution 2011-87 recommending the amendment to
Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development based on findings of fact
as stated in said resolution.
2. Motion to deny Resolution 2011-87, based on findings of fact to be made by the
Planning Commission.
3. Motion to table action on the request for further study.
C. STAFF RECOMMNDATION
Staff recommends Alternative 1. The proposed accessory car wash use is consistent
with the intent of the zoning district, and consistent with the uses in the exiting Planned
Unit Development. The accessory use is also compliant with the applicable conditions
assigned by the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for such accessory uses.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Resolution 2011-87
B. Aerial Parcel Image
C. Applicant Narrative
D. Site Plan/Survey
E. Plat Reference
4
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
F. Building Elevations
G. Carcone PUD Staff Report —City Council, April 2010
H. B-3 District Regulations
Z. Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval
The proposed car wash shall be for the private use of West Metro Auto Dealership and
shall not be made available for the use of the general public without approval of a new
amendment to the Planned Unit Development.
2. The entire area shall have a drainage system which is subject to the approval of the
Community Development Department.
3. All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 4.4 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance.
4. Intermittent sounds produced by car wash operation such as the sound of a vacuum, dryer
system, or warning signal shall not be audible to adjoining residential.
0
Date: September 20th, 2011
Motion By: Commissioner
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 —87
Resolution No. 2011-87
Seconded By: Commissioner
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR
WHEREAS, West Metro Auto Dealership has requested an Amendment to Planned Unit
Development for West Metro Auto Dealership, legally described as Lot 1, Block 2 of the
Carcone Addition; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with this application, the Planning Commission has found it
appropriate to review the City's previous approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Planned
Unit Development; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application for Amendment to
Conditional Use Permit pursuant to the regulations of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 20th, 2011 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 application is consistent with the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan for Places to
Shop.
2. The applications are consistent with the Monticello Zoning Ordinances regulating the B-2
(Highway Business) District, the Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit,
subject to conditions as outlined.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota:
1. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.357, the application for Amendment to Conditional Use
Permit for Planned Unit Development is hereby recommended to the City Council for
approval.
2. The recommendation for approval is subject to those Conditions as follows:
a) The proposed car wash shall be for the private use of West Metro Auto Dealership
and shall not be made available for the use of the general public without approval of a
new amendment to the Planned Unit Development.
b) The entire area shall have a drainage system which is subject to the approval of the
Community Development Department.
c) All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 4.4 of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance.
d) Intermittent sounds produced by car wash operation such as the sound of a vacuum,
dryer system, or warning signal shall not be audible to adjoining residential.
ADOPTED this 20th day of September 2011, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota.
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Rod Dragsten, Chair
ATTEST:
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
izh-140331] JI
007
. .Or
t"
Q ar P, ip
Rr 3
T
1g
p,n
N P hb'?.•
sit! !,4 fb Pine StT JI ft
lfRll r �.Y F d. t `M1
fa
5
fs11111
_m €i R aSy n < cl 4 •
tIr
is
\ O° w
SIP
y y POn
��I. I���r-``�lII��N•�5, • r,Ylli jly~. r y,A f
' 3A
Y
IF�lOF I• �N�y'y���
1 e ♦ %t, �X • fl�lYh .
OF
September 7, 2011
City of Monticello
Community Development
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Planning Commission Members:
This narrative is in support of our Conditional Use Permit Application to add a car wash
on the west side of our building at 103 Sandberg Road.
The proposed car wash will be operational only during our normal business hours,
Monday thru Thursday 7:00 — 8:00, Friday 7:00 — 6:00 and Saturday 7:00 — 5:00. The
car wash will function only to keep our inventory of new and used vehicles clean for the
display lot. It will not be open to the public.
All of the criteria used for approval of the Conditional Use Permit will be met as follows:
• The conditional use will not substantially diminish or impair property values within
the immediate vicinity of the subject property;
• The conditional use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, or
welfare of persons residing or working near the use;
• The conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of
surrounding property for permitted uses predominant in the area;
• The conditional use will not pose an undue burden on public utilities or roads,
and adequate sanitary facilities are provided;
• The conditional use can provide adequate parking and loading spaces, and all
storage on the site can be done in conformance with City code requirements;
• The conditional use will not result in any nuisance including but not limited to
odor, noise, or sight pollution;
• The conditional use will not unnecessarily impact natural features such as
woodlands, wetlands, and shorelines; and all erosion will be properly controlled;
• The conditional use will adhere to any applicable additional criteria outlined in
Chapter 5 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance for the proposed use.
P.O. BOX 130 • 1001 HWY 25 SOUTH • MONTICELLO, MN 55362
LOCAL: 763-271-7800 • TOLL FREE: 1-800-501-4497 • FAX: 763-271-7850
www.westmetroauto.com
Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeff ell
President
OU TL OT A �o""o H'
�3ar�
N 4N 9 �Qo. Ilge gy0 `mgr'
.lrv4rs ANn ✓n 1111 c 1
7S)F d< s
N 577255" Es ��.?xsb, IDA. .
Tocz'ae .8 s ip S i 0�
0
P nee
\I' P�o qi Ss
@£�O o F2l'oOL\ la' ASH
W Gy\ P
s
OUTLOT 11
PcicEt'� ^ OR o
SL Y LINE OF LANO DESCRIBED N "+ \
IN QUIT CLAIM OLEO 713463 - \
AND OUT' CLAIM DEED 690068 b 3a 1
N \
NEW CAR mCC U' „ 12
WASH ApornoN G 0 o
in
N C
q N 3 Ec ad
n
METER
�m 2 ELL
ECT.,;
2\0
10 (81a SURFACE)
rzlaz ACRes liz
kms 2
LP
lu"EaER AREA —
6 .; INSIDE WaCC EENCE
4' W 171.03
S 88_%6
N.H f) o�
SE�FCa{INCRE55
&EGRESS £ASEMENr
EXISTING
BUILDING
-- PROPOSED INGRESS &
EGRESS EASEMENT
3 I
C'\vl
y
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
I
213 ME Broadway P C Box 179
Monticello, MN 55'362
Phone J 763-295 -3388 Fox ,fr 763--295-3405
W
IM
MH4p
10
AT!
CORNER OF SANDBERG LANE
P !Itib �`>
A
O'P�y fC
tl S� c. qo
Poo` o \LPCo
9� my0 O'P9 \ .06
V0�p
92"1ogd \
�Tu�� 9
uo(
Tado r^ \
09�"O
�Ik f/r��I�/
5� /V
1
—6a,y– - XS
METER
EXISBNG
`F
9
(8/E SURFACE)
E
2.3534 ACRES
A 1
$ a
_ iSEP
0 -
BUILDING �
3n
P
6a
e nz c•
4y ...Tisa _ —_ ._ _ _ N 1859'2
26 03" W
(DID
ED = S "".,6E P9 53
PH yry01)
no
2
EXISTING
pjull
BUILDING
�CE
ALTA /ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 60 120 180
DENOTES:
• IRON MONUMENT FOUND
(T IRON MONUMENT SET & CAPPED RLS 15233
i9X.YN^.7Vi1CiPIHi�lGl.9�ll4t�l�
Lot 1, Block 2, PLAZA PARTNERS, aboarding to the recorded plat thereof, Wright
County, Minnceolo,
Also:
That part of Outlet B of PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Wright County, Minnesota described as follows; Beginning at the northeast comer of
aid Outlet B; thence as as assumed bearing of South 3 degrees 07 minutes 48 seconds
East along the east line of said Outlet B, a distance of 104.06 feet; thence North 29
degrees 57 minutes 48 seconds West, a distance of 125.20 feet: thence North 55 degrees
12 minutes 12 seconds East a distance of 19.34 feel to the southeasterly corner of Outlet
A in said PLAZA PARTNERS: thence North 42 degrees 39 minutes et seconds East
along the corner
of saidfly line et said Outlethence A, a distance to g a feet to the most
northerly corner of said Outlet B; thence southeasterly along a non-tangential curve
concave to the southwest being the northeasterly line of sold recon , having a radius .0
feet to feet and a central angle e 3 degrees id minutes 25 seconds, o distance of minutes feet to the point of beginning, the chord of said curve bears South 49 degrees 03 minutes
51 seconds Eos{.
Also
That part of Lot A of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and that port of Lot
A or the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 121,
Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota lying east of the east line of Sandberg Road of
PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the
outherl right of line of Interstate highway No. 94 in ester) f the wester)
s y ly i way t g y lying westerly o y
right be way line of Minnesota Stale highway rth st and lying northerly er o line
PLAZA
described as follows: Commencing s the nearing of corner of Sandberg Roadminutes
of said
PLAZA PARTNERS; thence on line
assumed bearing of South 1 degree f minutes 06
seconds West along the east line be saitl Sandberg Road, a South
73 distance of es 57 feet to the
point of beginning st said line to 1 described; thence 63 d re degrees ut minutes 12
Seconds East, a distance of let; feel: Thence South 83 degrees to minutes d seconds
East, a distance f et to feet; thence South 86 degrees in minutes 54 seconds East, a
distance of 2line feet to sold westerly right of way line of Minnesota Stale Highway No.
25 and sold line there terminating.
Once CARCONE ADDITION is retarded the above description will chance as follows
Lot 1, Block 1 End Lot I Block 2 LARCONE ADDITION accord ng to the recorded
plot thereof, Wright County, Minnesota
I hereby certify to Sell Real Estate Holdings, LLC, Bremer Bonk and Commonwealth
Land Title Insurance Company and to their heirs, successors and assigns, that I have
surveyed the property legally described hereon; that this survey is a true, correct and
accurate drawing and representation of said property and the boundaries thereof: that this
map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with "Minimum
Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/AGSM Land Title Surveys," jointly established
and adopted by ALTA and NOES in 2005, and includes items, 1, 4, 5, ]a, 8, 9, 10, and
110 of Table A thereof. Pursuant to the Accuracy Standards as adopted by ALTA and
NSPS and in effect on the date of this certification, undersigned further certifies that as a
land surveyor registered in the Stale of Minnesota, the maximum Relative Pamllanal
Accuracy of this survey does not exceed that which is specified therein. In locating or
'dentifyiny recorded easements or other recorded documents I have relied upon lie
Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Commonwealth Land The Insuroace Company
having an effective date of Anrl 29. 2010 .Commlmenl No 219100
Dated
NDoran
V. Taylor, Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 15233
TAYLOR I AND SURVEYORS, INC.
�WQ
213 West Broadway, P. 0. Box ^79,
Monticello, Mindoei a 55362
�Fb
Property is zored PUD Planned Lart Development) and the preliminary plat was
reviewed and approved by the City of variable Setbacks. Hd:gbt restricliors and
su-foce covsm, was all oprroved.
DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: BOOK / PACE
B TAYLOR C. -AY-CR F-393 / 12
SHEET OK SCALE DATE DRAWN: PILE NO.
1 1 ilk.=6OFT. 06-02-10 10068
( \N U
OUTLOT A
AV
aenuuPrc aw umm Ex., R2b3� P \
0
rucm < N 5gy1z �) V\ "moo
a:
\ ^o
a,
'ws aD i I PM
£ � r
OU R OT B
SLY LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED N
IN QUIT CLAIM DEED 71J463
ANO OLIT CLAIM DEED 6900`6688 b
L N
L
NF
C
W
N
NF
10
\ a L
s
L'
E
y0
9
(J
Y CPR u U 12
SH ADI 2 Z a
y O �
W LLl N_ —B5.
h
� 31 Jr CCC ^ 1.
� EiE
�4LLEC1^: j;
IN/F SURFACE) \ a
1.2102 ACRES 12
2
.UMP51ER AREA \
INSIDE WOOD FENCE _ —
r :: S 86'16 15 W 1_Oa
CDs CCRL[CRESS LOT EAS£MENI
77
ENISPNG
BUILDING I
zzzZ1z
2
PROP05E0 INGRESS &
EGRESS EASEMENT
� 6 I
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
213 W. Sroodwoy P.O. Box 179
Monticello, Al 55362
Phonc- # 763-295-3388 Fox // 763-295-3408
Q
F
MITT
CORNER OF SANDBERG'LANE
9 ! S6 O L
pnos2o Py \ ,�'
y
a
2
O
o rI/
I r"
IQ
-O
y LP `OGY -9\ .a
00 1'2„91! JFK\ Q
IVAf \
LP GlO
ns9 a
IA o \
--so.3 L
i�
h
(SIT. SURFACE) \
LP -
99 v1S
N Fy
0
..2DIsPt ACRES \2
tRO
EER �.
EXISTING y'TLP
� u
BUILDING
LP
P 11PN0
2
— — N 185974'
T✓ 842603" fy _ -
( DEED = s e3'sobe' p9.53 W', a
BUILDING'
ALTA /ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY
I
iBB 1E
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 60 120 180
DENOTES:
IRON MONUMENT FOUND
IRON MONUMENT SET & CAPPED RLS 15233
T]�.YeLNf71G7R4]'at7aF9717G1➢1�
Lot 1, Block 2, PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright
County, Minnesota,
Also:
That part of Outlet B of PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plot thereof,
Wright County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of
sold outlet B' thence on on assumed hearingof Sou3 degrees 07 minutes 48 seconds
East along the east line of said Outlet B, a ith stance of 104.06 feel; thence North 29
degrees 57 minutes 48 seconds West a distance of 125.20 feet: thence North 55 degrees
9 9
A minutes 12 seconds East a distance of 19.34 feet to the sous 22 se corner of Outlet
Y
A of soil PLAZA PARTNERS; thence North 42 degrees 39 minutes et seconds East
Clang the southeasterly line et soitl Outlet A, o distance of g a feet to the most
concave Corner of said Outlet B; thence southeasterly along a non-tangential curve
concave to the Southwest
centra being the northeasterly line to said Outlet , having a radius .0
feet to feet and a central angle of 3 degrees id minutes 25 seconds, a distance of minutes feet to the paint of beginning, the chortl of sold curve bears South 49 degrees 03 minutes
51 seconds East.
A so
That part of Lot A of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and that part of Lot
A of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 121,
Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota lying east of the east line of Sandberg Road of
PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the
watt erly right of way line of Interstate Highway No. 94, lying westerly of the westerly
right of way line of Minnesota Slate Highway No. 25 and lying northerly of a line
described as follows: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of Sandberg Road of said
PLAZA PARTNERS; thence an an assumed bearing of South / degree 29 minutes 06
seconds West along the east line of sold Sandberg Read, a distance of 413.71 feet to the
point of beginning of said line to be described; thence South 73 degrees 57 minutes 1Z
second. Eos t, a distance of 130.51 feel; thence South 53 degrees 50 minutes 06 seconds
East, a distance of 209.53 feet; thence South 86 degrees 39 minutes 54 seconds East, o
distance at 24.54 feet to sold westerly right of way line of Minnesota State Highway No.
25 and Card line there terminaling.
Once CABOOSE ADDITION is recorded the above description w1I change as follows:
Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2 CARCONE ADDITION accord ng to the retarded
plat thereof, Wright County Mumesota
I hereby certify to Sell Real Estate Holdings, LLC, Bremer Bonk and Commomedollh
Land Title Insurance Company and to their heirs, successors and assigns, that I have
surveyed the properly legally described hereon; that this survey Is a true, correct and
accurate drawing and represenlotion of said property and the boundaries thereof, that this
map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made In accordance with 'Minimum
Starters! Retail Requirements far ALTA/ACSM Land TIB. Surveys.' Iontly established
and adopted by ALTA and NSPS in 2005, and includes items, 1, 4, 6, 7a, , 8, 9, 10, and
110 of Table A thereof. Pursuant to the Accuracy Standards as pilloried by ALTA and
NAPS aid in effect on the date of this certification, undersigned further certifies that as o
Had surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota, the maximum Relative Factional
Accuracy of this survey does not exceed that which is specified therein. In locating or
certifying recorded easements or other recorded documents I have relied upon lire
Concernment for Title Insurance issued by Commonwealth Land Title Insurance C,mumi
having on effective dale of A 11 29 2010 .Commitment No 219100
Dated
�N b Deanls V. Taylor, Land Surveyor
ti Minnesota Licence No 15233
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
213 'Nest Broadway, P. O Box '79,
��Q' Mon Pcello, Minnesota 55362
Property 's zoned DUD 'Plarmed Fruit Development) and the p efiminery plat was
reviewed are FP a eJ by Inc City of Mon Ecellc Setbacks, heght restrc6ors and
surface C.vC,.,e was all oprroved-
DRAWN BY CHECKED BY: BOOK / PACE
3JAYLCR D. AY_OR r-303 / 12
SLIEST OE: SCALE DATE DRAWN: PILE NO.
I I 11 N. = 60F T. 06-02-10 10068
N
Y CPR u U 12
SH ADI 2 Z a
y O �
W LLl N_ —B5.
h
� 31 Jr CCC ^ 1.
� EiE
�4LLEC1^: j;
IN/F SURFACE) \ a
1.2102 ACRES 12
2
.UMP51ER AREA \
INSIDE WOOD FENCE _ —
r :: S 86'16 15 W 1_Oa
CDs CCRL[CRESS LOT EAS£MENI
77
ENISPNG
BUILDING I
zzzZ1z
2
PROP05E0 INGRESS &
EGRESS EASEMENT
� 6 I
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
213 W. Sroodwoy P.O. Box 179
Monticello, Al 55362
Phonc- # 763-295-3388 Fox // 763-295-3408
Q
F
MITT
CORNER OF SANDBERG'LANE
9 ! S6 O L
pnos2o Py \ ,�'
y
a
2
O
o rI/
I r"
IQ
-O
y LP `OGY -9\ .a
00 1'2„91! JFK\ Q
IVAf \
LP GlO
ns9 a
IA o \
--so.3 L
i�
h
(SIT. SURFACE) \
LP -
99 v1S
N Fy
0
..2DIsPt ACRES \2
tRO
EER �.
EXISTING y'TLP
� u
BUILDING
LP
P 11PN0
2
— — N 185974'
T✓ 842603" fy _ -
( DEED = s e3'sobe' p9.53 W', a
BUILDING'
ALTA /ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY
I
iBB 1E
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 60 120 180
DENOTES:
IRON MONUMENT FOUND
IRON MONUMENT SET & CAPPED RLS 15233
T]�.YeLNf71G7R4]'at7aF9717G1➢1�
Lot 1, Block 2, PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright
County, Minnesota,
Also:
That part of Outlet B of PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plot thereof,
Wright County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of
sold outlet B' thence on on assumed hearingof Sou3 degrees 07 minutes 48 seconds
East along the east line of said Outlet B, a ith stance of 104.06 feel; thence North 29
degrees 57 minutes 48 seconds West a distance of 125.20 feet: thence North 55 degrees
9 9
A minutes 12 seconds East a distance of 19.34 feet to the sous 22 se corner of Outlet
Y
A of soil PLAZA PARTNERS; thence North 42 degrees 39 minutes et seconds East
Clang the southeasterly line et soitl Outlet A, o distance of g a feet to the most
concave Corner of said Outlet B; thence southeasterly along a non-tangential curve
concave to the Southwest
centra being the northeasterly line to said Outlet , having a radius .0
feet to feet and a central angle of 3 degrees id minutes 25 seconds, a distance of minutes feet to the paint of beginning, the chortl of sold curve bears South 49 degrees 03 minutes
51 seconds East.
A so
That part of Lot A of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and that part of Lot
A of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 121,
Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota lying east of the east line of Sandberg Road of
PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the
watt erly right of way line of Interstate Highway No. 94, lying westerly of the westerly
right of way line of Minnesota Slate Highway No. 25 and lying northerly of a line
described as follows: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of Sandberg Road of said
PLAZA PARTNERS; thence an an assumed bearing of South / degree 29 minutes 06
seconds West along the east line of sold Sandberg Read, a distance of 413.71 feet to the
point of beginning of said line to be described; thence South 73 degrees 57 minutes 1Z
second. Eos t, a distance of 130.51 feel; thence South 53 degrees 50 minutes 06 seconds
East, a distance of 209.53 feet; thence South 86 degrees 39 minutes 54 seconds East, o
distance at 24.54 feet to sold westerly right of way line of Minnesota State Highway No.
25 and Card line there terminaling.
Once CABOOSE ADDITION is recorded the above description w1I change as follows:
Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2 CARCONE ADDITION accord ng to the retarded
plat thereof, Wright County Mumesota
I hereby certify to Sell Real Estate Holdings, LLC, Bremer Bonk and Commomedollh
Land Title Insurance Company and to their heirs, successors and assigns, that I have
surveyed the properly legally described hereon; that this survey Is a true, correct and
accurate drawing and represenlotion of said property and the boundaries thereof, that this
map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made In accordance with 'Minimum
Starters! Retail Requirements far ALTA/ACSM Land TIB. Surveys.' Iontly established
and adopted by ALTA and NSPS in 2005, and includes items, 1, 4, 6, 7a, , 8, 9, 10, and
110 of Table A thereof. Pursuant to the Accuracy Standards as pilloried by ALTA and
NAPS aid in effect on the date of this certification, undersigned further certifies that as o
Had surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota, the maximum Relative Factional
Accuracy of this survey does not exceed that which is specified therein. In locating or
certifying recorded easements or other recorded documents I have relied upon lire
Concernment for Title Insurance issued by Commonwealth Land Title Insurance C,mumi
having on effective dale of A 11 29 2010 .Commitment No 219100
Dated
�N b Deanls V. Taylor, Land Surveyor
ti Minnesota Licence No 15233
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
213 'Nest Broadway, P. O Box '79,
��Q' Mon Pcello, Minnesota 55362
Property 's zoned DUD 'Plarmed Fruit Development) and the p efiminery plat was
reviewed are FP a eJ by Inc City of Mon Ecellc Setbacks, heght restrc6ors and
surface C.vC,.,e was all oprroved-
DRAWN BY CHECKED BY: BOOK / PACE
3JAYLCR D. AY_OR r-303 / 12
SLIEST OE: SCALE DATE DRAWN: PILE NO.
I I 11 N. = 60F T. 06-02-10 10068
PERPARED FOR: CUSHMAN & WAKEFCELD
C/O BRENT WOLD
J800 AMER/CAN BL W. WEST SUOE 920
BLOOMINGTON MN 55440
7EL: 952-2]11-D/4J
FEE OWNER: JACOB HOLDINGS OF SANDBERG ROAD
500 FORD ROAD,
MINNEAPOUS MN 55426
PRELIM/NARY PLAT OF: CARCONE ADDITION
CITY OF MONTICELLO, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
P F1 of C Y14^ E .
\'0�!!__1\\{
_l(,V
/
rr
Lgss�_. zs
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
MCPERTY DESCRIPTION:
That Part ofLot A of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest Oumler and that part of
Lot A of the Southwest Quarter of the Sw\hweal Warier of 5eollon 11, Township
121, Range 25, Wright cal Mlnnezoto described as follows: Commencing at the
whweat w1f wk Let A AT me S.Ith-el Send' of Ice Southwest Social
thence an an onsuma] bearing of Norm 0 degrees 53 minute, 09 second¢ East
,on, \Ne weal INe of sold Lat A el Iba Southeast Quarter o! the Southwest Quarter.
tan
A disce of d).E9 lest a Ica westerly right of way line of Th nk HNh m No. 25 and
Me oc\ud paint I be a,. tM1ence North 19 tlO'"'A Eoal along cold aght °I way
Ilne, o dlalmee of AV6 feet; thence North 14 degrem 26 minutes West along sold
ri,h1 of way line, a d lanm al 166.84 feel P, the zthiy right of way lire of
lot ..let. Hlghwa 1-94, lhmae North 47 do,... 5fiauminutes Weal along Bold
e uthary ITS,t aYwe line, a distance of 42846 feet: (comer South 0 degrees 53
minutes me ae .Hgo West a diel°Ace of 780.49 feel to o Ilne Parallel with and distant
33.00 feel north of the south line of Lot A .1 the S-RIT st Quarte- of the SauNwast
puatleq thence North 89 degrem 14 minotes 03 zecolde Seat °long sold pCmIHN
Ines o a".a, of 2..]9 Teel to 0e westerly right al way line of sold Track Hlghwoy
Numbs 2S; thence North 19 degrem fent olwI sold right of xoy line, o diztonm 1
15.48 feet to \he path of be91n°mg.
AISO
Lots I and 2, Block 1. SANGBERG SOUTH, according to the norm. plat thereat,
Wright Countto Minnasoh,
Al.;
Late 2. 3. a. 6. ]. B. 9 and 10. Book 3 Lot 1. Block 1. L°( 1. Black x. Balla( A. cutlet
B and OsMol C. PLAZA PARTNERS, according to the recorded plot thereof, might
Courcy. ,,an ... to.
Mo.
let par\ 1 Lot U. Black 1, SANOBERD SWM doo0c inq 1d the n -I. plot
there.,. *,LI, County, Mlnne¢olo described re lolloxz: Beginnln at the nwNemf
c I a Id Lal 3; lhance vaulherly along fhI eaaelly ,Ina oT Into Lot C, a di.n.e
115 P.IA - .a. I'. / - � ! 6.99 (eaQ thenen s Nwe,lerly dellocBn9 47 o Ganz 27 minutes 16 a tls
M' Try SIgFI, d'ntanca g1 T0.36 feel; thence w lerly de0ec\ing 4] degrees 20,miutm W
GRAPTIoncPLE:NPEET q �' / 'AaW NdOM05 I VI M. I AT dl¢\ante of IOAo Leel: Vence weefedy ]8.T0 feel along ° fany Uol
1"o Or \ J I I� 6r (� cum to the 1.11, M1oring o ...... of brh,5 .at. ° control -,In of ] reined 1] zn
o menu(.. d4 ,eeand, to the n.dhmy lens I sold Lot A, then[. austany ° dl,tence o1
o a0 120 mo // / ktis.n nePts I I3 ' G)A ' e�-ggRS„-4\` 124.50 teal along said northerly line to the Point of be,must.
SCALE70
7 /Npl = 60 FEET°' a >\a\'
DENOTES; �1G .
• I= MONUMENT TO NO
O IRON MONUMENT SET h CAPPED RLS 15233 9� / Ip .�+ `�`.11 nI I EASRNC ^ III `� �
-°-0-0- UNU IED ACCESS t1 EAiSANG $ ,: "'oval 1 Li• 4t� \' $ 667fi 393 H'
STILL
z Ta9r caNTOure LINE Fp / / ;A BUYPIAY. I w ARa)A6E9 U �
9n.z s+QT ELEvgn9n / (mi �a Aa, b I�de�. 1,., 0. I �
ls
BEARING ORIENTATION DIE wmI U Blau OF sum THE GT �A. d/( / T // We b�
„as 0 A3950IMEDgTO HANW A 9EAMN0 K / / ` C(/ O� e•LV / PA.
SE go FO�ECRFES 59 MINU25 39 /J,/L/1 p/ / �m ( (.1 k \ /'1 /� /b") 2 I (0L SVRFPQ) y,.1y / MCOB NOLOINGS InRO rw^
TOTAL PLAT AREA = ew�cw z...lA.i M,,a,ACRES v= Y' / 0`�/S\'C�`7�•� l qd I l �.� +.M1 P
TOTAL . 14.,0)0 A.. S J � w I 6
/ = 1 r dmwom - - _ a T I I
/ N 03/09' £ r 62 w a Lxu6 ( - - I 9•eso O I 3 ��
BENCHMARK: EIEVATON HI PSTER i° Ti
TOP OE CONCRETE PAD
FOR OUHPSTER AT CMN® ,c�,A1L M19 ,S-4;DDJ,RG' Mag ROAD DO ryli/ Rm2J•F '" <. _ aI �� {kw
BLOCK 2. CORNER OF PROPOSE➢ LOT 1, $ qa3jBPW 700.9 5%h/ry99ry Mnlg[ J7� 40°cv .p _ I r
/ B - a a = w L J0.J! Phos - Issoslmeolo xw p Aawl - - _ `ad7zd-
IV A / ^l77..32((µ - C/0 PIAYr10Wx OIYD G N //,, APIE a MMLE aAi - ` 1 a C[W ^�yTT `��N °GV 0 -IB CpyC, GCB9 AG !
/ (MlSNR ACE) SMTFA4 NNB 56]P I ma 6•\\ 1 M 4 M� Be, IRROA Q
A y
8 2 J I 4!'Nor
Am- $ 1 _
I B'AEIdO]M°
v'crvsTxJc 2 I . L I I G L,RusT L 96e M.I.°.n.. ACTUBLI... Th.
6u1tOMc Ca TOdo swnnxN r..
2a OBLA,mW sen., V
7 .� I tE• ^� RI b I .A, WMIE6TGI. 28403 \Li.
/ O W I EXISANG "g `
�9I AUXONG TNE
/ ^
b ,sag Aar, + 1.AK a (eIiS NNACE) (el4 SICO, s
ROCa] I a E I PI '
/ NJ'AIfJYW 16112 b L 1 5 I 1
Ana
725102 £
12530 ' A I , Ld I tell. AIBFxE, I 1.1�\LC i
96e--� 1�l^ O1 e V
/ h I ExlsnNc I f
G yS-0, AM1h O BIOT A H \/ I r A9R I w AfnlwNc 1
9r A -h. 6.eda4 Amts /J�y .Loa, I.
�tj�� s 8 I / 6T�
6 nJL pill 153WIddW2O
/ / I JACOB HOLDINGS I g T.
lJ/ ph n`R��tl 1rS
Vicinity Map
IE[
IRC
xo xAle
St/2 SecllQR 11, Township 121, Range 25 AND
N1/2 Section 14, Township 121, Range 25
51TIy
J4
I
-�-
- 9fY.
N N +o 4
xE /4
I
Fr
m 1 /+ C I. WO MAGE AND ULUTY EASEMENTS ANE SHOWN MUS
�- ssmfi - 6 l�
i
9ai^a ��952� - - I S 6
Urz r a - ---- -
_-
_ _ '-
/....� oio H oa `` aw L 96 . �'�sae-I-
45e
xN. /� ✓' RM- D _ ^ - - LINES, ANDEIZI to
IN'WCM AND AALDONING SITREEETT LINES, q9 SHOWN oN
MS1ftVfN�-=_ s x_ e _ccc� PLAT.
1�-- G4AK SYFFAG£ a - b £A rEJn PIO.=ISIonomm.
1.
a. Dae 3 LSI PBOPFAn6. '
\ _ _ 9`A RWRCELLTOIN tL. a PA. A, ,
_ &4 BUILAING M HEREBY CTMEY THAT MI5 SURVEY PLAN OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDRECIB
UNBER Mlff ME BUPERNSUN AND THAI IAM LATTLYMINNESOTA. flEg51PtE0
aH
LAND SIIR4EYOfl VNOER TIE LAWS OF ME STATE IF NINNESDTA
PAD sstd.0
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS, INC. °Me"!"' A' PC.._1.HBIH' -DA -
A Imill NANAWAWL DENNIS V. iAVLQ4 ROC. N0.152]]
2W NNN She 5., Rf . OU PZ/A7 - CITY COMA/ENJS PER (EP£R CARO QT/AP/10
217 W. BROADWAY, PO BOX i]9 Si. MIaIAa, in, AQ S PRAWN 8N CHECKED OT BODY / PACE: SHEET Oi' SCACE DA 7E DRAWN.' FlLE ND.
MONOCELLO, MJNNESOiA 5536?
B. tAYLOR 0. TAl1M E-]83. 12 1 2 11N.= fi0 R. 6-01-09 U9055
PH 763 295 3388 FAX 76J -295-J408
1.1.1.1.1.1. I
:• ,•
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
5. Public Hearing: Consideration of a preliminary plat for Carcone Addition (formerly
Monticello Ford). Applicant: Chrysler Financial (NAC)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Jacob Holdings, a parent/financial company of Denny Hecker, is seeking preliminary plat
of nineteen (19) properties located north of Chelsea Road, south of Interstate 94, east of
Marvin Road and west of Highway 25. These properties, referred to as the Carcone
Addition, are comprised of West Metro Buick Pontiac GMC, the former Monticello Ford,
the former Dunlo Motors (currently West Metro expansion site), and the former
Monticello Ford sales/storage lot. The submitted preliminary plat indicates that the
current 19 properties are proposed to be consolidated into four (4) properties.
The properties are located in the B-3, Highway Business District and total approximately
14.17 acres. It should be noted that the Playhouse Child Care property located within this
vicinity is not included in this preliminary plat.
Previous applications have been processed with these properties throughout the past ten
years including, but not limited to;
• Planned unit development (PUD) approval,
• Conditional use permits (CUP) for outdoor sales and car wash,
• Variances to the sign ordinance, minimum building size requirements for auto
sales, allow directional signage in the right-of-way
• PUD amendments to allow off-site auto sales/storage lot, larger electronic
signage, expansion of auto sales/storage lot
• Interim use permit (IUP) to accommodate temporary automobile display and
storage
• IUP amendment for temporary automobile storage
For the purposes of this preliminary plat, each proposed property is listed below with
various development review criteria analyzed for each. In all cases, any existing internal
drainage and utility easements shall be vacated to accommodate the proposed preliminary
plat. This vacation is intended to be processed in a parallel action concurrent with the
Final Plat.
The proposed application indicates reestablishing one (1) thirty (30) foot drainage and
utility corridor running east/west through Lot 2, Block 2 between Lot 1, Block 2 and the
Playhouse Child Care facility and any easements at the property lines.
In the material that follows, a summary of the site conditions on each of the four
proposed parcels is provided. Following that, a consolidation of the issues to address as
part of the Plat request is included as a part of the Alternative Actions section of the
report.
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
I. Lot 1, Block 1 - PID: 155500113413, 2.3534 acres
Sandberg South, Jacob Holdings, West Metro Buick Pontiac GMC
Previously Comprised Of:
(1) Portion of unplatted PID: 155500113413
General Comments: Property will continue to be accessed via two (2) ingress/egress
points from Sandberg Road. One (1) access point will become shared with the property
located directly south (former Monticello Ford). Shared access agreements must be
coordinated between the two properties.
Development Review B-3 Requirements Compliance
B-3 Highway Business
New and used automobile sales
Compliant
District
permitted
Currently utilized as used automobile sales.
Parcel Size, Lot
More than 2 acres to 4 acres, 10%,
Coverage Percent,
10,000 s.f.
Compliant
Minimum Building
2.3534 acres, 12%, 11,940 s.f. building
Size
Lot Width
100 feet
Compliant
410 feet
Building Height
2 stories
Compliant
1 story
Compliant
Front Yard: 30 feet
Front Yard: 60.5 feet
Setbacks
Side Yard: 10 feet
North Side Yard: 91.1 feet
Rear Yard: 30 feet
South Side Yard: 17.2 feet
Rear Yard: 130 feet
Off -Street Parking
Required number for auto sales is
dependent on percentage of office,
Submitted plans do not detail building configuration
sales space etc.
for parking calculations.
Minimum of one (1) internal
landscaped area/island delineator
for each 5,000 s.f. of off street
Submitted plans do not detail parking
Landscaping
parking; such island must measure
configurations.
180 s.f. (one parking space). Buffer
yards not required in adjacent
commercial uses.
Total Area of all Signs: Total area
Non -Compliant
Signage
of all signs shall not exceed 15% of
Existing Total Area of all Signs
the total building fagade fronting not
(with known measurements): 1,345 s.f
more than 2 public streets.
(1) Two sided 30' (? Documents state 38 or 36')
Allowable
high, 16'x 16' (256 s.f. each side) pylon located
Sandberg Frontage:
south of 1-94 and west of Highway 25 at the
122'x 20' = 2,440 s.f.
northeast corner of the property; "Buick Pontiac
1-94 Frontage:
GMC West Metro GM" Variance requested
190'x 20' = 3,800 s.f.
previously
Highway 25 Frontage: 60'x 20' s.f.
= 1,200 s.f.
(1) Two sided 2'x 4'(8 s.f. each side) illuminated
Total x 15% = 1,116 s.f.
directional off -premise sign located on the
northeast corner of Sandberg and Chelsea Roads;
(1) Freestanding (pylon) sign per
"West Metro Buick Pontiac GMC (arrow) Red White
lot, not exceeding 100 s.f. each
Blue Building" Variance requested previously
side, max height 22 feet. (in the
Freeway Corridor — freestanding
(1) Two sided 2'x 4' (8 s.f. each side) directional
sign may not exceed 200 s.f. each
sign "West Metro Sales and Service (arrow)"
side with a max height of 32 feet)
Variance requested previously
(1) Changeable copy sign allowed,
(1) Two sided 2'x 4' (8 s.f. each side) directional
not to exceed 25% of allowable
sign "West Metro Buick Pontiac GMC (arrow)"
sign area or 50 s.f. whichever is
Variance requested previously
less.
(1) 5' x 25' (125 s.f.) wall banner located on the
Wall, canopy or marquee signs
principle building; 'West Metro Sales and Service"
shall be consistent with total area of
all signs above.
(1) Bay window signage, measurements unknown;
2
Signage (cont'd)
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
"We service all makes and models. Hours open 7-7
M -F 7-3 S"
(1) Car wash wall signage; "Car Wash" 2' x 12' (24
s.f)
(1) Marquee; "Buick, Pontiac and GMC logos" 25'x
18' (450 s.f.)
(1) Marquee; "West Metro" 10' x 25' (250 s.f.)
(1) Wall signage; "West Metro" 2'x 10'(20 s.f.)
(1) Wall signage; "West Metro" 2'x 16'(32 s.f.)
(1) Wall signage; " Service" 1' x 8' (8 s.f.)
(3) Wall signage; "Buick Pontiac GMC" 2'x 10' total
(20 s.f.)
(1) Changeable copy sign, currently reading; "3.9
60 mo. OAC on all GM certified G6S 763-271-7800"
8'x 12' (96 s.f.)
(1) Portable sign (signage printed on van),
unknown measurements, currently reading; "We
service all makes & models. We'll meet or beat
anyone's sale's or service price. Free loaners 763-
271-7800. Ser Hrs. 7-7 M -F Sat 7-3.
II. Lot 2, Block 1 - PID: 155027001010, 4.2947 acres
Sandberg South, Jacob Holdings, former Monticello Ford
Previouslyprised Of:
(1) Portion of unplatted - PID: 155500113413
(2) Outlot C — PID: 155051000030 (Plaza Partners)
(3) Lot 1, Block 1 — PID: 155027001010 (Sandberg South)
(4) Lot 2, Block 1 — PID: 155027001020 (Sandberg South)
(5) Part of Lot 3, Block 1 — PID: 155027001032 (Sandberg South)
General Comments: Although currently vacant, it is assumed that the property will
continue to be accessed via two (2) ingress/egress points from Sandberg Road. One (1)
access point will become shared with the property located directly north (West Metro
Buick Pontiac GMC). Shared access agreements must be coordinated between the two
properties.
Development Review B-3 Requirements Compliance
B-3 Highway Business
New and used automobile sales
Compliant
District
permitted
Formerly utilized as automobile sales.
Compliant
Parcel Size, Lot
4.2947 acres, 19%, 35,199 s.f. building , plus
Coverage Percent,
More than 4 acres, 15%, 40,000 s.f.
mezzanine
Minimum Building
Minimum building size meets the district
Size
requirements when mezzanine square footage is
considered.
Lot Width
100 feet
Compliant
630 feet
Building Height
2 stories
Compliant
1 story
Front Yard: 30 feet
Compliant
Setbacks
Side Yard: 10 feet
Front Yard: 29.8 feet (rounded to 30)
Rear Yard: 30 feet
North Side Yard: 11.5 feet
South Side Yard: 410 feet
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
III. Lot 1, Block 2 - PID: 155051002010, 1.2102 acres
Plaza Partners, Jacob Holdings, the former Dunlo Motors (currently West Metro
expansion site)
Previously Comprised Of:
(6) Lot 1, Block 2 — PID: 155051002010 (Plaza Partners)
General Comments: Property will continue to be accessed via two ingress/egress points
from Sandberg Road. One (1) access point directly south of the building, will be entirely
accessed via Lot 2, Block 2 (former Monticello Ford Sales/Storage Lot). Shared access
agreements must be coordinated between the two properties. Of worth note, Ordinance
does not require any buffering/screening between adjacent commercial land uses.
Development Review Requirements Compliance
B-3 Highway Business
New and used automobile sales
Rear Yard: 60.9 feet
Off -Street Parking
Required number for auto sales is
dependent on percentage of office,
Submitted plans do not detail building configuration
Parcel Size, Lot
sales space etc.
for parking calculations.
Coverage Percent,
Minimum of one (1) internal
Compliant
Landscaping
landscaped area/island delineator
for each 5,000 s.f. of off street
Submitted plans do not detail parking
Lot Width
parking; such island must measure
configurations.
180 s.f. (one parking space).
265 feet
Building Height
Total Area of all Signs: Total area of
Compliant
all signs shall not exceed 15% of
Total Area of all Signs
the total building fagade fronting not
(with known measurements): 260 s.f.
Setbacks
more than 2 public streets.
West Side Yard: 70 feet
Rear Yard: 30 feet
(2) Wall signage; "Monticello" Tx 30' each (180
Allowable
s.f.)
Off -Street Parking
Sandberg Frontage:
Submitted plans do not detail building configuration
184' x 30' = 5,520 s.f.
(1) Wall signage; "Monticello" 2'x 20' (40 s.f.)
Signage
Chelsea Frontage: 180 'x 30' =
Submitted plans do not detail parking
5,400 s.f.
(1) Wall signage; Showroom/Delivery" 2' x 10' (20
Highway 25 Frontage: 168 x 30' s.f.
s.f.)
= 5,040
Total x 15% = 2,394 s.f.
(2) Wall signage; "Service" 2'x 10' total (20 s.f.)
Wall, canopy or marquee signs shall
be consistent with total area of all
signs above.
III. Lot 1, Block 2 - PID: 155051002010, 1.2102 acres
Plaza Partners, Jacob Holdings, the former Dunlo Motors (currently West Metro
expansion site)
Previously Comprised Of:
(6) Lot 1, Block 2 — PID: 155051002010 (Plaza Partners)
General Comments: Property will continue to be accessed via two ingress/egress points
from Sandberg Road. One (1) access point directly south of the building, will be entirely
accessed via Lot 2, Block 2 (former Monticello Ford Sales/Storage Lot). Shared access
agreements must be coordinated between the two properties. Of worth note, Ordinance
does not require any buffering/screening between adjacent commercial land uses.
Development Review Requirements Compliance
B-3 Highway Business
New and used automobile sales
Compliant
District
permitted
Currently utilized as used automobile sales.
Parcel Size, Lot
Coverage Percent,
Up to 2 acres, 5%, 2,500 s.f.
Compliant
Minimum Building Size
1.2102 acres, 5%, 2,444 s.f. building
Lot Width
100 feet
Compliant
265 feet
Building Height
2 stories
Compliant
1 story
Compliant
Front Yard: 30 feet
Front Yard: 37.2 feet
Setbacks
Side Yard: 10 feet
West Side Yard: 70 feet
Rear Yard: 30 feet
East Side Yard: 65.6 feet
Rear Yard: 110 feet
Off -Street Parking
Required number for auto sales is
dependent on percentage of office,
Submitted plans do not detail building configuration
sales space etc.
for parking calculations.
Landscaping
Minimum of one (1) internal
Submitted plans do not detail parking
landscaped area/island delineator
configurations.
In
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
IV. Lot 2, Block 2 - PID: 155051000020, 6.3094 acres
for each 5,000 s.f. of off street
parking; such island must measure
180 s.f. (one parking space).
Buffer yards not required in
adjacent commercial uses.
Principal Issue: Required buffer at south property
boundary adjacent to Daycare business not in
place.
Holdings, former Monticello Ford Sales/Storage Lot
Total Area of all Signs: Total area
Compliant
Outlot A —PID:
of all signs shall not exceed 15%
Total Area of all Signs
Outlot B — PID:
of the total building fagade fronting
(with known measurements): 328 s.f.
Lot 1, Block 1 —
not more than 2 public streets.
(10)
Lot 1, Block 2 —
PID: 155051002010 (Plaza Partners)
(1) Two sided 30' (? Documents state 38 or 36')
Lot 1, Block 3 —
Allowable
high, 16'x 16' (256 s.f. each side) pylon located
Lot 2, Block 3 —
Sandberg Frontage:
south of 1-94 and west of Sandberg Road at the
Signage
77' x 21' = 1,611 s.f.
northwest corner of the property; "GM Certified
Lot 4, Block 3 —
1-94 Frontage: 30'x 21' = 630 s.f.
Used Vehicles West Metro GM"
Lot 5, Block 3 —
Total x 15% = 336 s.f.
(16)
Lot 6, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003060 (Plaza Partners)
(1) Wall signage; 'West Metro" 6'x 12' (72 s.f.)
Lot 7, Block 3 —
(1) Freestanding (pylon) sign per
(18)
Lot 8, Block 3 —
lot, not exceeding 100 s.f. each
(19)
Lot 9, Block 3 —
side, max height 22 feet. (in the
(19)
Lot 10, Block 3
Freeway Corridor — freestanding
sign may not exceed 200 s.f. each
side with a max height of 32 feet)
(1) Changeable copy sign allowed,
Signage (cont'd)
not to exceed 25% of allowable
sign area or 50 s.f. whichever is
less.
Wall, canopy or marquee signs
shall be consistent with total area
of all signs above.
IV. Lot 2, Block 2 - PID: 155051000020, 6.3094 acres
Plaza
Partners, Jacob
Holdings, former Monticello Ford Sales/Storage Lot
Previouslyprised Of:
(7)
Outlot A —PID:
155051000010
(8)
Outlot B — PID:
155051000020 (Plaza Partners)
(9)
Lot 1, Block 1 —
PID: 155051001010 (Plaza Partners)
(10)
Lot 1, Block 2 —
PID: 155051002010 (Plaza Partners)
(11)
Lot 1, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003010 (Plaza Partners)
(12)
Lot 2, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003020 (Plaza Partners)
(13)
Lot 3, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003030 (Plaza Partners)
(14)
Lot 4, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003040 (Plaza Partners)
(15)
Lot 5, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003050 (Plaza Partners)
(16)
Lot 6, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003060 (Plaza Partners)
(17)
Lot 7, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003070 (Plaza Partners)
(18)
Lot 8, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003080 (Plaza Partners)
(19)
Lot 9, Block 3 —
PID: 155051003090 (Plaza Partners)
(19)
Lot 10, Block 3
— PID: 155051003100 (Plaza Partners)
Development Review Requirements Compliance
B-3 Highway Business
Outdoor storage CUP
Compliant
District
Formerly utilized as outdoor auto storage lot.
Parcel Size, Lot
Coverage Percent,
More than 4 acres, 15%, 40,000
N/A— No principle building
Minimum Building
s.f.
6.3094, no building
5
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
Size
Lot Width
100 feet
Compliant
300.98 feet
Building Height
2 stories
N/A
Front Yard: 30 feet
Setbacks
Side Yard: 10 feet
N/A
Rear Yard: 30 feet
Off -Street Parking
N/A
N/A
Minimum of one (1) internal
landscaped area/island
delineator for each 5,000 s.f. of
Landscaping
off street parking; such island
N/A
must measure 180 s.f. (one
parking space). Buffer yards not
required in adjacent commercial
uses.
Total Area of all Signs
Total Area of all Signs: Total
(with known measurements): 24 s.f.
area of all signs shall not
exceed 15% of the total building
(1) Directional signage; "Ford Factory Authorized
fagade fronting not more than 2
Sales Event on Now (arrow), 2' x 4' (8 s.f.)
Signage
public streets.
"Fresh.....
(1) Directional signage; Used Cars &
No principle building to base
Trucks," 2' x 4 (8 s.f.)
measurements from.
(1) Directional signage; "As -Is Row Wholesale Lot,"
2'x4 (8 s.f.)'
Summary of Issues to Resolve:
Lot 1, Block 1 (Main Metro West site):
• Signage reduction to meet code by 229 square feet, including removal of nonconforming
temporary signage. (Removal of 125 square foot banner, 96 square foot changeable copy
temp sign, temporary signage on display van, and one 8 square foot directional sign
would create compliance on this parcel).
• Requires cross access easement under PUD Amendment with Lot 2, Block 1.
Lot 2, Block 1 (Former Ford site):
• No zoning compliance issues.
• Requires cross access easement under PUD Amendment with Lot 1, Block 1.
• Will require future PUD Amendment and/or Conditional Use Permit(s) to reinstate use of
the property as previous approvals have lapsed.
Lot 1, Block 2 (Sandberg Road West Metro site):
• Requires reinstatement of landscape buffer at southern boundary, or PUD Amendment to
resolve previous requirements for buffering with abutting Daycare property.
• Requires cross access easement by Conditional Use Permit or PUD with Lot 2, Block 2.
Lot 2, Block2 (Former Ford storage lot site):
• No zoning compliance issues.
2
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
• Requires cross access easement by Conditional Use Permit of PUD with Lot 1, Block 2.
• Will require future PUD Amendment and/or Conditional Use Permit(s) to reinstate use of
the property as previous approvals have lapsed.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Decision 1. Preliminary Plat for Carcone Addition and Amendment to Planned Unit
Development approval.
Motion to recommend approval of Preliminary Plat of the Carcone Addition for Lots 1
and 2 of Block 1 and Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2, along with an amendment to the Planned
Unit Development permits for the subject parcels, with one of the following options.
Each of the approval options would include the incorporation of the conditions listed in
Exhibit Z.
a. Approve preliminary plat and PUD amendment, and bring all signage into
compliance, as well as the previously required buffering adjacent to the Daycare
building as noted above.
b. Approve the preliminary plat and PUD amendment, incorporating all of the
existing signage and current site conditions into the revised PUD approval.
C. Approve the preliminary plat and PUD amendment, requiring compliance with
signage and site conditions as enumerated by the Planning Commission following the
public hearing.
2. Motion to recommend denial of the preliminary plat of the Carcone Addition for Lots 1
and 2 of Block 1 and Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2, due findings to be identified following the
public hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD Amendment under Option
l.a. above, specifying that existing signage be brought into conformance with the current sign
regulations, and reinstatement of the required landscaped buffer between the Sandberg Road
expansion site of West Metro and the Daycare building. It appears from staff's review of the
available file information that a significant amount of signage has been added to the site,
including temporary signage, that was not part of any previous PUD approval.
Since the time of the last approval, the City has revised its Sign regulations to increase flexibility
for business signage in the area. As such, the removal of temporary signage and a current banner
would be very close to meeting the current requirements. It should be noted that these estimates
are based on the staff's analysis of the available submissions by the applicant, which do not
7
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
include detailed site plan conditions nor detailed architectural dimensions. Planning staff's
recommendation includes the incorporation of the additional conditions stated in Exhibit Z.
The Planning Commission should choose between Options La., Lb., or l.c. if a recommendation
of approval is the preferred course of action. If Option l .c. is chosen, a specific list as to which
improvements are or are not required should be made.
If a denial recommendation is forthcoming under Option 2, the Planning Commission should
specify its Findings of Fact supporting the denial recommendation.
SUPPORTING DATA
Exhibit A: Existing Site Conditions Survey
Exhibit B: Proposed Preliminary Plat
Exhibit C: Supplemental Plat w/Additional Drainage & Utility Detail
Exhibit D: Summary of Previous Applications and Approvals
Exhibit E: Site Photos
Exhibit Z: Conditions of Approval for Carcone Addition
Planning Commission Agenda 4/7/10
Exhibit Z — Conditions of Approval
Carcone Addition Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development Amendment
1. The applicant enters into a Development Agreement specifying the current and approved
conditions relating to site plans, signage, and other details mentioned in the staff reports.
2. Conditions of the City Engineering staff are incorporated into the approval.
3. Previous approvals for Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permits, and other
zoning approvals are extinguished, requiring submission of new applications for future
changes as required by ordinance on all lots in the plat.
4. Existing easements for utilities and drainage are vacated by separate document no later
than at the time of final plat approval.
5. A landscape plan is submitted for City approval relating to any required buffer
installation as noted in the staff report.
6. Cross access easements are prepared and filed no later than at the time of final plat as
noted in this report.
0
Section 3.5 (E)
B-3 Highway Business District
The purpose of the `13-3" highway business district is to
provide for and limit the establishment of motor vehicle
oriented or dependent commercial and service activities.
Base Lot Area
• No minimum
Base Lot Width
0 Minimum= 100 ft.
Typical B-3 Lot Configuration
CHAPTER 3: ZONING DISTRICTS
Section 3.S Business Base Zoning Districts
Subsection (E) B-3: Highway Business District
Typical B-3 Building Types
4.
4
90
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 107
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
5. Planned Unit Development Workshop. (AS)
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
This workshop is designed to allow the Planning Commission and City Council to review and
discuss the newly formatted Planned Unit Development ordinance. A complete review of the
code by the two bodies is needed as a precursor to any formal applications for new Planned Unit
Developments.
Council and the Commission will recall that at the beginning of the zoning ordinance amendment
process, one of the primary goals of the City was to strengthen the Planned Unit Development
standards. This goal was identified as a means to achieve a higher -quality development product
than what had been realized through previously approved PUDs.
In fact, this goal is the principal purpose and intent of the PUD itself. The City offers flexibility
to the developer in exchange for a more creative development that better meets the values of the
community.
The PUD workshop will help the Planning Commission and Council understand how the new
code is designed to help achieve this goal.
During the workshop, staff will provide an overview of the ordinance process, including the items
listed below. Staff will also request direction from the Planning Commission and Council on
specific items, such as the appointment of a Collaborative Review Team.
• Goals/Expectations of the PUD Process
• PUD Areas of Flexibility
• Establishment of PUD Collaborative Review Team
• Application Requirements
• Amendment Process
• Development of an Application Timeline Scenario
Staff will also discuss how the new ordinance departs from the previous code requirements in a
variety of substantial ways. These differences include:
• Rezoning Action
• Collaborative Application
o Collaborative Team
o Neighborhood Meeting Requirement
• Joint Worksessions
• Platting
• Application Requirements
At the conclusion of the workshop, the Council and Commission will have a thorough
understanding of the new ordinance, its requirements and its process.
Planning Commission Agenda — 09/20/11
B. SUPPORTING DATA
Planned Unit Development Staff Summary
Planned Unit Development Ordinance, 2.4(P)
Planned Unit Development Ordinance, previous code, Chapter 20
Monticello Planned Unit Development Application & Review Process
Under the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, approval of a rezoning to Planned Unit Development is a four -
step application process. It is designed to create a win-win relationship between the City and the
applicant from the start of the process, ultimately resulting in a development that meets the intended goals
of the City and the applicant. The ordinance for Planned Unit Development follows this summary,
providing additional detail on specific application requirements and process for each step.
Step 1: Collaborative Application
The first step is the collaborative application process, which is intended to allow the applicant to meet
with appointed and elected City officials to gain an understanding of the long-term development goals for
the subject site. One of key components of the collaborative step is a concurrent worksession with
policymakers of the city (representatives from Planning Commission, Parks Commission, Council and
possibly the IEDC or Economic Development Authority) to discuss the desired objectives for
development on the site.
The feedback received during the collaborative meeting provides both the applicant and the City with a
set of clear expectations for the development of the site. The end goal is a formal statement of
development goals/values.
A second component of the collaborative step is a neighborhood meeting. The purpose of the meeting is
to inform the neighborhood of the proposed PUD, discuss the concepts, the basis for the plan being
developed, and to obtain comments from the neighborhood.
Formal City action at Collaborative Stage: Consideration to adopt a statement of goals/public values for
the development site.
Step 2: Concept Plan Application
The applicant's next step is to present a conceptual plan for development to a joint session of the Planning
Commission and City Council. The purpose of the worksession is to determine if the concept represents
an intention to meet the goals/values approved under the collaborative step.
The City's collaborative team will forward a formal recommendation to the Planning Commission and
City Council. The two bodies will review the PUD rezoning request, and take action to approve or deny
the application based on the site's proposed layout, design, density, uses, and performance to the
goals/values adopted in the collaborative stage.
Formal City action at Concept Plan Stage: Consideration to approve a concept stage plan for Planned
Unit Development.
Step 3: Development Plan Application
The third step in the PUD process is the development stage plan, which includes City action to formally
rezone the development property to PUD. It may also include a preliminary plat application, if the
property is not already platted. If the PUD is proposed to develop over a timeframe exceeding two years,
a PUD Master Plan for the entire project (to be completed in phases) may also be submitted at this point.
The development plan application is highly detailed and provides specific information and plans relating
to site development, including utilities, architecture, landscaping, lighting, signage, etc.
In this step, the Planning Commission considers the development plan's consistency with the intent and
purpose of the PUD and comprehensive plan goals. The Planning Commission then makes a formal
recommendation to the City Council on the plan and the proposed rezoning. Council then takes formal
action to approve a rezoning to PUD based on the development stage plans.
Formal City action taken at Development Plan Stage: Consideration to approve a development stage
plan for Planned Unit Development and rezoning to Planned Unit Development.
Step 4: Final Plan StaEe
The intent of the fourth and last step, the final plan stage, is to formalize and finalize all agreements and
documents supporting the development plan approval.
In this step, the PUD Development Plan is updated to incorporate all changes required by the
development stage/rezoning approvals. A document clearly showing all deviations from standard zoning
is provided.
Lastly, the City and applicant prepare a development agreement which references all PUD plans, specifies
permitted uses, allowable densities, development phasing, required improvements, completion dates for
improvements, and other relevant information.
If platting is required, a final plat application is submitted and reviewed by the City Council concurrent
with the development agreement.
Formal City action taken at Final Plan Stage: Consideration to approve a development agreement and
final plat (if applicable).
PLANNED UNIT
DEYELOPMENT
Process
(Staff, applicable
Commissions &
(Stuff, applicable
Commissions &
Council)
or
(Staff, applicable
Commissions &
Council)
PUD Final Plat
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(P) Planned Unit Developments
(1) Purpose and Intent
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide
greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non-residential areas
in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development
outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved
by undertaking a collaborative process that results in a development outcome
exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning
district. If a development proposal does not demonstrate significant public value
benefits above and beyond those achievable under a conventional zoning district,
the City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to
re -apply under the standard applicable zoning district.
(2) Initiation of Proceedings
Applications for a PUD shall be initiated by application of the property owner or
other person having authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B),
Authority to File Applications.
(3) Reflection on the Official Zoning Map
(a) PUD provisions provide an optional method of regulating land use which
permits flexibility in allowed uses and other regulating provisions. In some
circumstances, however, rules and regulations governing the underlying
zoning district may apply within the PUD. As such, approval of a Planned
Unit Development and execution of a PUD agreement shall require the
property in question be rezoned to PUD, but the denotation on the official
zoning map shall also illustrate the underlying zoning district. Once a PUD
has been granted and is in effect for a parcel, no building permit shall be
issued for that parcel which is not in conformance with the approved PUD
Plan, the current Minnesota State Building Code and all associated
documents, and with all other applicable City Code provisions.
(b) All PUD rezonings approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall
retain their zoning classifications of R -PUD, and shall continue to be
governed by the ordinance and resolutions which created these areas.
(4) Permitted Locations for PUD rezoning
A rezoning to PUD may be requested for any residential, commercial, or
industrial zoned area.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 65
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(5) Minimum PUD size
Rezonings to PUD will not be considered for areas less than 8 acres of land in
single ownership or control, except in the following circumstances:
(a) Natural features of the land are such that development under standard zoning
regulations would not be appropriate in order to conserve such features;
(b) The land is intended to be developed in accordance with a prior PUD adjacent
to or across the street from the subject property; or
(c) The PUD process is desirable to ensure compatibility and careful
consideration of the effect of a development on surrounding land uses.
(d) The proposal is in the CCD in which case there shall be no minimum land
area requirement.
(6) Permitted Uses Within PUDs
Uses within a PUD shall be governed by the ordinance establishing the PUD and
by the conditions, if any, imposed by the City in the approval process and PUD
documents. If a specific use is not established or addressed by a PUD ordinance,
said use shall be governed by the underlying zoning district regulations.
(7) Expectations of a Development Seeking a Rezoning to PUD
The provisions of this section are intended to achieve the following public values
within a PUD zoning district and associated subdivision:
(a) Ensure high quality construction standards and the use of high quality
construction materials;
(b) Promote a variety of housing styles which include features such as side or rear
loaded garages, front porches, varying roof pitches, and four sided
architecture/articulation;
(c) Eliminate repetition of similar housing types by encouraging a housing
mixture which separates the same/similar model of homes by a minimum of
two lots;
(d) Promote aesthetically -pleasing design which fosters a sense of place within
the neighborhood and appears attractive and inviting from surrounding
parcels;
(e) Incorporate extensive landscaping in excess of what is required by code;
Page 66 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(f) Provide high-quality park, open space, and trail opportunities that meet or
exceed the expectations established in the Comprehensive Plan;
(g) Provide a convenient and efficient multi -modal transportation system to
service the daily needs of residents at peak and non -peak use levels, with high
connectivity to the larger community.
(h) Minimize the extent of the development footprint and impervious surfaces to
the extent possible to reduce initial infrastructure costs and long-term
maintenance and operational costs;
(i) Maximize the use of ecologically -based approaches to stormwater
management, restore or enhance on-site ecological systems, and protect off-
site ecological systems including the application of Low Impact Development
(LID) practices;
(j) Foster in inclusive community by providing a complementary mix of lifecycle
housing;
(k) Preserve and protect important ecological areas identified on the City's
natural resource inventory (NRI);
(8) Areas of Flexibility
(a) The City shall consider an increase in the number of overall units and
associated reductions in lot width and size if the PUD provides substantially
more site amenities and public values, as outlined in Section 2.4(P)(7), than
could be achieved in a conventional residential development for the
applicable zoning district.
(b) The City shall consider a decrease in the amount of road width required or
right-of-way requirements if the PUD provides substantially more site
amenities, as outlined in Section 2.4(P)(7), than are found in a conventional
residential development for the applicable zoning district. Specifications and
standards for streets, utilities, and other public facilities shall be at the
discretion of City Council and must protect the health, safety, comfort,
aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the city.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 67
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(c) The City shall consider flexibility with regard to lot size, width, and depth
when reviewing a PUD rezoning request. Specifications and standards for
lots shall be at the discretion of City Council, and shall encourage a desirable
living environment which assists in achieving the goals set out for PUDs.
(d) The City shall consider flexibility in the phasing of a PUD development.
Changes to the proposed staging or timing of a PUD may be approved by the
City Council when necessary or on the showing of good cause by the
developer.
(9) PUD Procedure
All requests for rezoning to Planned Unit Development shall follow the steps
outlined below.
(a) Collaborative process and project goal setting
The collaborative process and project goal setting step is intended to allow the
applicant to meet with members of the Community Development Department
and appointed and elected officials to gain an understanding of the public
values related to development of the subject site. The feedback received
during this step will provide guidance to the applicant on things to incorporate
into a future concept plan.
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
A request for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be initiated by
application of the property owner or other person having authority to file
an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for a PUD Collaborative process and project goal
setting session shall be in accordance with Section 2.3, Common
Review Requirements.
2. In addition to common review requirements, a site analysis shall be
submitted in anticipation of the pre -application activities which
includes the following information:
a. Location of wooded areas or significant features (environmental,
historical, cultural) of the parcel;
b. Indicate the base flood elevation level (if applicable) and show
the general location of floodways and/or flood fringe areas;
c. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies;
d. Delineation of the shoreland district boundary (if applicable);
Page 68 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
e. General locations of wetlands (if applicable);
f. Calculation of gross acres on the site proposed for development;
g. Indication of neighboring land uses surrounding the proposed
development site.
(iii) Collaborative Process and Project Goal Setting Process
1. The applicant shall meet with the city staff for a pre -application
conference prior to submittal of a concept plan to the city. The
primary purpose of the conference is to allow the applicant and staff
an opportunity to review the comprehensive plan and to snake a
preliminary determination if the proposal is conducive to a PUD
rezoning.
2. City staff and the applicant shall work together to schedule a
concurrent worksession with policymakers of the city (applicable
commissions and City Council) to discuss the public values on the
site using the established public values in Section 2.4(P)(7) as a
guideline. The result of this meeting will be a public values
statement.
At an appropriate point during the process, the applicant shall hold a
neighborhood meeting. The city and all owners of property within
1,000 feet of the proposed PUD (or a larger area as determined by the
Community Development Department) shall be given notice of the
meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to inform the neighborhood
of the proposed PUD, discuss the concepts and basis for the plan
being developed and to obtain information and suggestions from the
neighborhood.
4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs incurred by the city
for attorney, engineering, or other consultant fees during these pre -
concept plan activities.
(b) PUD Concept Plan
Prior to submitting fonnal preliminary plat and rezoning applications for the
proposed development, the applicant shall prepare an informal concept plan
and present it to the appropriate commissions and City Council at a
concurrent worksession, as scheduled by the Community Development
Department. The purpose of this meeting is to detennine if all parties are on a
common track and if the development reflects the stated public values;
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 69
CHAPTER 2. APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
A request for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be initiated by
application of the property owner or other person having authority to file
an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for a PUD Concept Plan Review shall be in
accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements.
2. In addition to common review requirements, applications for a PUD
Concept Plan Review shall also include at least the information in
Section 2.4(P)(9)(b)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as
exempted by the Community Development Department).
(iii) Specific PUD Concept Plan Submittal Requirements
An applicant shall provide the following infonnation unless waived by
staff:
1. A listing of contact information including name(s), address(es) and
phone number(s) of: the owner of record, authorized agents or
representatives, engineer, surveyor, and any other relevant associates;
2. A listing of the following site data: Address, current zoning, parcel
size in acres and square feet and current legal description(s);
3. An updated site analysis incorporating any additional features or
requested changes identified during the collaborative process and
project goal setting session;
4. A narrative explaining how the identified public values for the site are
addressed by the concept plan;
5. A listing of general information including the number of proposed
lots and a calculation of gross land area;
6. Calculation of the proposed density of the project and the potential
density under standard zoning regulations.
7. Outline a development schedule indicating the approximate date
when construction of the project, or stages of the same, can be
expected to begin and be completed (including the proposed phasing
of construction of public improvements and recreational and common
space areas).
8. A Concept PUD Plan illustrating the nature and type of proposed
development. At a minimum, the plan should show:
a. Area calculations for gross land area
Page 70 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
b. Existing zoning district(s)
c. Layout of proposed lots and proposed uses. Denote outlots
planned for public dedication and/or open space (schools, parks,
etc.)
d. Area calculations for each parcel
e. General location of wetlands and/or watercourses over the
property and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision
parcel
f. Location of existing and proposed streets within and immediately
adjacent to the subdivision parcel
g. Proposed sidewalks and trails
h. Proposed parking areas
i. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements
(indicate public vs. private if applicable)
j. General location of wooded areas or significant features
(environmental, historical, cultural) of the parcel
k. Location of utility systems that will serve the property
1. Other: An applicant may submit any additional information that
may explain the proposed PUD.
(iv) PUD Concept Plan Review
1. Upon receiving a complete PUD concept plan application, the
Community Development Department shall review the proposal and
generate a staff report analyzing the proposal against the expectations
for PUDs. The report shall be forwarded to the appropriate
commissions—as determined by the Community Development
Department—and the City Council for review.
2. Commissions receiving the report shall review the PUD rezoning
request, and make a recommendation to the City Council with regard
to the plat layout, design, density, uses, deviations, and achieved
public values of the concept plan;
3. The Council shall consider the recommendations of the commissions
that have conducted a review, and provide feedback to the applicant
on the proposed public values, proposed deviations, and any other
aspect of the application. The Council shall either snake a motion that
the applicant—if they choose to proceed—move forward with the
PUD preliminary plat and rezoning requests, or direct the applicant to
submit a development application using conventional zoning district
standards
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 71
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
4. After the City policymakers have reviewed and commented on the
Concept PUD plan, city staff shall meet with other agencies, as
applicable, to explore opportunities of partnership to enhance the
stated public values.
(c) PUD Preliminary Plat and Rezoning
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
1. Concurrent applications for rezoning to PUD and a Preliminary Plat
shall be submitted to the City within one year of the City Council's
recommendation on the PUD Concept Plan. Failure to submit
applications for rezoning to PUD and a Preliminary Plat within the
one year timeframe will require the applicant to begin the process
anew from that point forward.
2. The requests for rezoning to PUD and Preliminary Plat shall be
initiated by application of the property owner or other person having
authority to file an application pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority
to File Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for rezoning to PUD and Preliminary Plat shall be in
accordance with Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements.
2. The application for rezoning to PUD shall be in accordance with
Section 2.4(B), Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map
Amendments.
3. The application for Preliminary Plat shall be in accordance with City
Code Title 11, Chapter 4, Data Required for Preliminary and Final
Plats; and shall include the additional information requirements listed
in Section 2.4(P)(9)(c)(iii) below to be considered complete (except
as exempted by the Community Development Department).
4. If the PUD is proposed to develop over a timeframe exceeding two
years, a PUD Master Plan for the entire project (to be completed in
phases) may be submitted. Subsequent PUD Final Plan applications
would only grant approval for an individual phase.
Page 7 L City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(iii) Specific PUD Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements
An applicant shall provide a separate PUD Development Plan clearly
delineating the proposed development and all features not consistent with
underlying zoning regulations (e.g. setback deviations). At a minimum,
the plan should show:
1. Administrative information (including identification of the drawing as
a "Preliminary PUD Development Plan," the proposed name of the
subdivision, contact information for the developer and individual
preparing the plan, signature of the surveyor certifying the document,
date of plan preparation or revision, and a graphic scale and true north
arrow);
2. Area calculations for gross land area, wetland areas, wetland buffers,
right-of-way dedications, conservation areas, and proposed public and
private parks;
3. Existing zoning district(s);
4. Layout of proposed lots with future lot and block numbers. The
perimeter boundary line of the subdivision should be distinguishable
from the other property lines. Denote outlots planned for public
dedication and/or open space (schools, parks, etc.);
5. Area calculations for each parcel;
6. Proposed setbacks on each lot (forining the building pad) and
calculated buildable area;
7. Proposed gross hardcover allowance per lot (if applicable);
8. Existing contours at intervals of two feet. Contours must extend a
minimum of 200 feet beyond the boundary of the parcel(s) in
question;
9. Delineation of wetlands and/or watercourses over the property and
within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subdivision parcel;
10. Delineation of the ordinary high water levels of all water bodies;
11. Location, width, and names of existing and proposed streets within
and immediately adjacent to the subdivision parcel;
12. Easements and rights-of-way within or adjacent to the subdivision
parcel(s);
13. The location and orientation of proposed buildings;
14. Proposed sidewalks and trails;
15. Proposed parking areas;
16. Proposed parks, common areas, and preservation easements (indicate
public vs. private if applicable);
City of Monticelio Zoning Ordinance Page 73
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific. Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
17. Any other information as directed by the Community Development
Department.
(iv) PUD Preliminary Plat and Rezoning to PUD Review
1. The application for rezoning to PUD shall be reviewed in accordance
with Section 2.4(B), Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map
Amendments.
2. The application for Preliminary Plat shall be reviewed in accordance
with City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 2, Preliminary Plat
Procedure.
3. As part of the review process for both applications, the Community
Development Department shall generate an analysis of the proposal
against the expectations for PUDs and the previously established
public values statement to formulate a recommendation regarding the
rezoning to the planning commission and City Council.
4. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing and consider the
application's consistency with the intent and purpose of the PUD and
comprehensive plan goals. The planning commission shall make
recommendations to the City Council on the merit, needed changes,
and suggested conditions of the proposed rezoning, preliminary plat
and PUD development plan.
5. In approving or denying the ordinance to rezone the subject property
to PUD, the City Council shall snake findings on the following:
a. The PUD plan is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan;
b. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site
and achieves a higher quality of site planning and greater public
benefits than would be achieved under conventional provisions of
the ordinance;
c. The PUD plan addresses the purpose and intent of the PUD
rezoning laid out in Section 2.4(P)(1), and the public values
statement established at the beginning of the process
d. The PUD plan addresses the expectations of a PUD laid out in
Section 2.4(P)(7);
e. The PUD plan maintains or improves the efficiency of public
streets, utilities, and other public services;
f. The PUD plan results in development compatible with existing
adjacent and future guided land uses;
g. How the PUD plan addresses the purpose and intent of the PUD
rezoning laid out in Section 2.4(P)(1), and the public values
statement established at the beginning of the process.
Page 74 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(d) PUD Final Plat
(i) Initiation of Proceedings
1. A final plat that conforms with the preliminary plat and associated
PUD rezoning ordinance shall be submitted within 180 days of
approval of the ordinance and preliminary plat approval, unless
otherwise extended by the City Council. If the applicant fails to
submit a final plat application or extension request within this time
period, the zoning shall revert back to the underlying zoning district
through a rezoning ordinance adopted by the City Council.
2. The request for PUD Final Plat shall be initiated by application of the
property owner or other person having authority to file an application
pursuant to Section 2.3(B), Authority to File Applications.
(ii) Application
1. All applications for PUD Final Plat shall be in accordance with
Section 2.3, Common Review Requirements.
2. The application for PUD Final Plat shall be in accordance with City
Code Title 11, Chapter 4, Data Required for Preliminary and Final
Plats.
3. In addition to general city code requirements, applications for a PUD
Final Plat shall also include at least the information in Section
2.4(P)(9)(d)(iii) below to be considered complete (except as exempted
by the Community Development Department).
(iii) Specific PUD Final Plat Submittal Requirements
1. If a PUD Master Plan for the entire project was submitted and
approved as part of the preliminary plat review, an updated Master
Plan shall be submitted incorporating all changes required by the
preliminary plat approval.
2. The PUD Development Plan shall be updated to incorporate all
changes required by the preliminary plat and rezoning approvals.
This document must clearly show all deviations from standard zoning
being approved as part of the PUD.
3. The City and applicant shall prepare a developer's agreement which
references all PUD plans, specifies permitted uses, allowable
densities, development phasing, required improvements, completion
dates for improvements, the required letter of credit, all required
development fees, escrows, and warranties, and any other information
deemed necessary by the City.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 75
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
4. Up-to-date title evidence for the subject property in a form acceptable
to the City shall be provided as part of the application for the PUD
Final Plat.
5. Developer shall provide warranty deeds for Property being dedicated
to the City for all parks, outlots, etc., free from all liens and
encumbrances except as otherwise waived by the City.
6. Developer shall provide all easement dedication documents for
easements not shown on the final plat including those for trails,
ingress/egress, etc., together with all necessary consents to the
easement by existing encumbrancers of the property.
(iv) PUD Final Plat Review
The application for PUD Final Plat shall be reviewed in accordance with
City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3, Final Plat Procedure.
(10) PUD Amendments
Approved PUD's may be amended from time to time as a result of unforeseen
circumstances, overlooked opportunities, or requests from a developer. At such a
time, the applicant shall make an application to the city for a PUD amendment.
All such amendments will be processed as one of the following:
(a) Administrative Amendment — The Community Development Department may
approve minor changes in the location, placement, and height of buildings if
such changes are required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen
at the time the PUD Final Plan was approved, provided the changes are
indeed minor and conform to the review criteria applied by the Planning
Commission and City Council. Under no circumstances shall an
administrative amendment allow additional stories to buildings, additional
lots, or changes to designated uses established as part of the PUD.
(b) PUD Adjustment — an adjustment to a PUD may be made through review and
approval by a simple majority vote of the City Council with or without
referral to the Planning Commission. To qualify for this review, the minor
adjustment shall not:
(i) Eliminate, diminish or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of
sensitive site features.
(ii) Eliminate, diminish or compromise the high quality of site planning,
design, landscaping or building materials.
(iii) Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas or roads.
(iv) Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more
than five percent.
Page 76 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(v) 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 (residential lots not guided for specific structure
sizes are excluded from this requirement).
(vi) Increase the number of stories of any building.
(vii) Decrease the amount of open space or alter it in such a way as to change
its original design or intended function or use.
(viii) Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the
approval of the Final PUD Plan.
(c) PUD Amendment — any change not qualifying for an administrative
amendment or a PUD adjustment shall require a PUD amendment. An
application to amend a PUD shall be administered in the same manner as that
required for an initial PUD beginning at PUD Preliminary Plat.
(11) PUD Cancellation
A PUD shall only be cancelled and revoked upon the City Council adopting an
ordinance rescinding the ordinance approving the PUD. In any event, it shall not
be necessary for the council to find the creation of a PUD district was in error.
(12) Administration
In general, the following rules shall apply to all PUDs:
(a) Rules and regulations: No requirement outlined in the PUD process shall
restrict the City Council from taking action on an application if necessary to
meet state mandated time deadlines;
(b) Plan Certification: The City may require that PUD plans be certified at the
time of submittal and/or upon completion of construction.
(c) Preconstruction: No building pen -nit shall be granted for any building on land
for which a PUD plan is in the process of review, unless the proposed
building is allowed under the existing zoning and will not impact, influence,
or interfere with the proposed PUD plan.
City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 77
CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION REVIEWS AND PROCEDURES
Section 2.4 Specific Review Procedures & Requirements
Subsection (P) Planned Unit Developments
(d) Effect on Conveyed Property. In the event any real property in the approved
PUD Agreement is conveyed in total, or in part, the buyers thereof shall be
bound by the provisions of the approved Final PUD Plan constituting a part
thereof; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed to create
non -conforming lots, building sites, buildings or uses by virtue of any such
conveyance of a lot, building site, building or part of the development created
pursuant to and in conformance with the approved PUD.
Page 78 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance
CHAPTER 20
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
SECTION:
20-1: Purpose
20-2: General Requirements and Standards
20-3: Submission Requirements
20-4: Procedure for Processing a Planned Unit Development
20-1: PURPOSE: This chapter is established to provide comprehensive procedures and
standards designed to allow the development of neighborhoods or portions thereof
incorporating a variety of residential types and non-residential uses, recognizing that
traditional density, bulk, setbacks, use, and subdivision regulations which may be
useful in protecting the character of substantially developed areas may be
inappropriate to control development in less developed areas. Specifically, it is
intended to encourage:
[A] Innovations in residential development to the end that the growing demands
for housing at all economic levels may be met by greater variety in tenure,
type, design, and siting of dwellings and by conservation and more efficient
use of land in such development;
[B] Higher standards of site and building design through the use of trained and
experienced land planners, architects, and landscape architects,
[C] More convenience in location of accessory commercial and service areas;
[D] The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as
natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion;
[E] A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a
phased and orderly transition of land from rural to urban uses;
[F] An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets
thereby lowering housing costs and public investments;
[G] A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan;
[H] A more desirable environment than would be possible through the strict
application of zoning and subdivision regul ati ons of the City;
[I] To give the landowner and developer reasonable assurance of ulfimate
approval before expending complete design monies while providing City
officials with assurances that the project will retain the character envisioned
at the time of concurrence;
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/1
[J] Flexibility for variation from the provisions of this ordinance including
setbacks, height, lot area, width and depth, yards, etc.
20-2: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS:
[A] OWNERSHIP: Application for PUD approval must be filed by the
landowner or jointly by all landowners of the property included in a project.
The application and all submissions must be directed to the development of
the property as a unified whole, i.e., a planned unit. In the case of multiple
ownership, the approved final plan shall be binding on all owners.
[B] COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY: The proposed PUD shall be
consistent with the City comprehensive plan.
[C] SANITARY SEWER PLAN CONSISTENCY: The proposed PUD shall be
consistent with the City capital improvement program and comprehensive
utility plan.
[D] COMMON OPEN SPACE: Common open space at least sufficient to meet
the minimum requirement established in this ordinance and such
complementary structures and improvements as are necessary and appropriate
for the benefit and enjoyment of the residents of the PUD shall be provided
within the area of the PUD.
[E] OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUD
COMMON OPEN SPACE/FACILITIES: Whenever common open space or
service facilities are provided within the PUD, the PUD plan shall contain
provisions to assure the continued operation and maintenance of such open
space and service facilities to a predetermined reasonable standard. Common
open space and service facilities within a PUD may be placed under the
ownership of one or more of the following as approved by the City Council:
Dedicated to public where a community -wide use is anticipated and
the City Council agrees to accept the dedication.
Landlord control where only use by tenants is anticipated.
3. Property (homeowners) association, provided all of the following
conditions are met:
(a) Prior to the use or occupancy or sale or the execution of
contracts for sale of an individual building unit, parcel, tract,
townhouse, apartment, or common area, a declaration of
covenants, conditions, and restrictions or an equivalent
document or a document such as specified laws 1963,
Chapter 457, Section 13, shall be filed with the City of
Monticello, said filing with the City to be made prior to the
filings of said declaration or document or floor plans with the
recording officers of Wright County, Minnesota.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/2
(b) The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions or
equivalent document shall specify that deeds, leases, or
document or conveyance affecting buildings, units, parcels,
tracts, townhouses, or apartments shall bind said properties to
the terms of said declaration.
(c) The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall
provide that an owners' association or corporation shall be
formed and that all owners shall be members of said
association or corporation which shall maintain all properties
and common areas in good repair and which shall assess
individual property owners proportionate shares of joint or
common costs. This declaration shall be subject to the review
and approval of the City Attorney. The intent of this
requirement is to protect the property values of the individual
owner through establishing effective private control.
(d) The declaration shall additionally, amongst other things,
provide that in the event the association or corporation fails to
maintain properties in accordance with the applicable rules
and regulations of the City of Monticello or fails to pay taxes
or assessments on properties as they become due and in the
event the said City of Monticello incurs any expenses in
enforcing its rules and regulations, which said expenses are
not immediately reimbursed by the association or corporation,
then the City of Monticello shall have the right to assess each
property its pro rata share of said expenses. Such assessments,
together with interest thereon and costs of collection, shall be a
lien on each property against which each such assessment is
made.
(e) Membership must be mandatory for each owner and any
successive buyer.
(f) The open space restrictions must be permanent and not for a
given period or years.
(g) The association must be responsible for liability insurance,
local taxes, and the maintenance of the open space facilities to
be deeded to it.
(h) Property owners (homeowners) must pay their pro rata share
of the cost of the association by means of an assessment to be
levied by the association which meets the requirements for
becoming a lien on the property in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes.
(i) The association must be able to adjust the assessment to meet
changed needs.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/3
(j) The bylaws and rules of the association and all covenants and
restrictions to be recorded must be approved by the City
Council prior to the approval of the final PUD plan.
[F] STAGING OF PUBLIC AND COMMON OPEN SPACE: When a PUD
provides for common or public open space, the total area of common or
public open space or land escrow security in any stage or development shall
at a minimum bear the same relationship to the total open space to be
provided in the entire PUD as the stages or units completed or under
development bear to the entire PUD.
[G] DENSITY: The maximum allowable density in a PUD shall be determined
by reference to the comprehensive plan. Within that limit, the exact density
allowable shall be determined by standards agreed upon between the
applicant and the City. Whenever any PUD is to be developed in stages, no
such stage shall, when averaged with all previously completed stages, have a
residential density that exceeds twenty-five (25) percent of the proposed
residential density of the entire PUD.
[H] UTILITIES: In any PUD, all utilities, including telephone, electricity, gas,
and telecable shall be installed underground.
[I] UTILITIES CONNECTIONS:
1. WATER CONNECTIONS: Where more than one (1) property is
served from the same service line, a shut-off valve must be located in
such a way that each unit's service may be shut off by the City in
addition to the normally supplied shut-off at the street.
2. SEWER CONNECTIONS: Where more than one (1) unit is served
by a sanitary sewer lateral which exceeds three hundred (300) feet in
length, provision must be made for a manhole to allow adequate
cleaning and maintenance of the lateral. All maintenance and
cleaning shall be the responsibility of the property owners' association
or owner.
[J] ROADWAYS:
1. Private roadways within the project shall have approved curb and
gutter and an improved surface of twenty (20) feet or more in width
and shall be so designed as to permit the City fire trucks to provide
protection to each building.
2. No portion of the required twenty (20) foot road system may be used
in calculating required off-street parking space or be used for parking.
[K] LANDSCAPING: In any PUD, landscaping shall be provided according to a
plan approved by the City Council, which shall include a detailed planting list
with sizes and species indicated as part of the final plan. In assessing the
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/4
landscaping
plan, the City Council shall consider the natural features of the particular site,
the architectural characteristics of the proposed structures, the overall scheme
of the PUD plan, and the general landscaping provisions of this ordinance.
[L] URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVICE:
Residential development will be carefully phased so as to ensure that all
developable land will be accorded a present vested right to develop at such
time as services and facilities are available. Residential lands which have the
necessary available municipal facilities and services will be granted approval
in accordance with existing ordinance and development techniques.
Residential lands which lack the available facilities and services will be
granted approval for development at such times as the facilities and services
have been made available by the continuing public improvement program or
at such time when the residential developer agrees to furnish such facilities or
improvements put forth by the City or other public agency.
If it can be demonstrated by the petitioner that divergence from the points
above will not cause an unreasonable burden upon the City of Monticello in
providing services and utilities or cause a deleterious impact upon the natural
environment, then the City Council may consider granting a variance to this
policy in reviewing a proposed development.
No major PUD will be permitted in areas not having city water and sanitary
sewer available within a reasonable length of time from the date of PUD
approval.
[M] TOWNHOUSE:
1. No single townhouse structure shall contain more than eight (8)
dwelling units.
2. Minimum unit lot frontage for townhouses shall be not less than
twenty (20) feet.
3. Townhouses, cooperatives, and condominiums will be subdivided on
an individual unit bases according to the provisions of Section 20-2
[F] 3.
[N] SETBACKS:
The front and side yard restrictions at the periphery of the Planned
Unit Development site at a minimum shall be the same as imposed in
the respective districts.
2. Front yard setbacks shall be established so as to meet the general
design criteria within standard areas (zones) regulating the particular
use or structure.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/5
3. Building height(s) shall be established so as to meet the general
design criteria within standard areas (zones) regulating the particular
use or structure. (#237, 4/12/93)
20-3: SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Twenty (20) copies of the following exhibits,
analyses, and plans shall be submitted to the Planning Commission and Council
during the PUD process at the times specified in Section 20-4 of this chapter.
[A] GENERAL CONCEPT STAGE:
General Information
(a) The landowner's name and address and his interest in the
subject property.
(b) The applicant's name and address if different from the
landowner.
(c) The names and addresses of all professional consultants who
have contributed to the development of the PUD plan being
submitted, including attorney, land planner, engineer, and
surveyor.
(d) Evidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the
subject property to effectuate the proposed PUD, including a
statement of all legal, beneficial, tenancy, and contractual
interests held in or affecting the subject property and including
an up-to-date certified abstract of title or registered property
report and such other evidence as the City Attorney may
require to show the status of the title or control of the subject
property.
2. Present Status:
(a) The address and legal description of the subject property.
(b) The existing zoning classification and present use of the
subject property and all lands within one thousand (1,000) feet
of the subject property.
(c) A map depicting the existing development of the subject
property and all land within one thousand (1,000) feet thereof
and showing the precise location of existing streets, property
lines, easements, water mains, and storm and sanitary sewers,
with invert elevations on and within one hundred (100) feet of
the subject property.
A written statement generally describing the proposed PUD and the
market which it is intended to serve, showing its relationship to the
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/6
City's comprehensive plan and how the proposed PUD is to be
designed,
arranged, and operated in order to permit the development and use of
neighboring property in accordance with the applicable regulations of
the City.
4. Site Conditions: Graphic reproductions of the existing site conditions
at a scale of one hundred (100) feet. All of the graphics would be the
same scale as the final plan to allow easy cross reference. The use of
overlays is recommended for clear reference. The following shall be
included:
(a) Contours - minimum two (2) foot intervals.
(b) Location, type, and extent of tree cover.
(c) Slope analysis.
(d) Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands, and streams
and flood plains within three hundred (300) feet of the subject
property.
(e) Significant rock outcroppings.
(f) Existing drainage patterns.
(g) Vistas and significant views.
(h) Soil conditions as they affect development.
Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept, including
but not limited to the general location of major circulation elements,
public and common open space, residential, and other land uses.
6. A statement of the estimated total number of dwelling units proposed
for the PUD and a tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations
of land use expressed in acres and as a percent of the total project
area, which shall include at least the following:
(a) Area devoted to residential uses.
(b) Area devoted to residential use by building type.
(c) Area devoted to common open space.
(d) Area devoted to public open space.
(e) Approximate area devoted to streets.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/7
(f) Approximate area devoted to and number of off-street parking
and loading spaces and related access.
(g) Approximate area and floor area devoted to commercial uses.
(h) Approximate area and floor area devoted to industrial or office
uses.
7. When the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time
extending beyond a single construction season, a schedule for the
development of such stages or units shall be submitted stating the
approximate beginning and completion date for each such stage or
unit and the proportion of the total PUD public or common open
space and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during each
such stage and the overall chronology of development to be followed
from stage to stage.
8. When the proposed PUD includes provisions for public or common
open space or service facilities, a statement describing the provision
that is to be made for the care and maintenance of such open space or
service facilities. If it is proposed that such open space is owned
and/or maintained by any entity other than a governmental authority,
copies of the proposed articles of incorporation and bylaws of such
entity shall be submitted.
General intents of any restrictive covenants that are to be recorded
with respect to property included in the proposed PUD.
10. Schematic utilities plans indicating placement of water, sanitary and
storm sewers.
[B] DEVELOPMENT STAGE: Development stage submissions should depict
and outline the proposed implementation of the general concept stage for the
PUD. Information from the general concept stage maybe included for
background and to provide a basis for the submitted plan. The development
stage submissions shall include but not be limited to:
1. Zoning classification required for development stage submission and
any other public decisions necessary for implementation of the
proposed plan.
2. Twenty (20) sets of preliminary plans drawn to a scale of not less than
one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet (or scale requested by the
administrator) containing at least the following information:
(a) Proposed name of the development (which shall not duplicate
nor be similar in pronunciation to the name of any plat
theretofore recorded in the county wherein the subject property
is situated).
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/8
(b) Property boundary lines and dimensions of the property and
any significant topographical or physical features of the
property.
(c) The location, size, use, and arrangement, including height in
stories, and feet and total square feet of ground area coverage
and floor area, or proposed buildings, including mobile homes,
and existing buildings which will remain, if any.
(d) Location, dimensions, and number of all driveways, entrances,
curb cuts, parking stalls, loading spaces, and access aisles, and
all other circulation elements including bike and pedestrian,
and the total site coverage of all circulation elements.
(e) Location, designation, and total area of all common open
space.
(f) Location, designation, and total area proposed to be conveyed
or dedicated forpublic open space, including parks,
playgrounds, school sites, and recreational facilities.
(g) Proposed lots and blocks, if any, and numbering system.
(h) The location, use, and size of structures and other land uses on
adjacent properties.
(i) Preliminary sketches of proposed landscaping.
0) General grading and drainage plans for the developed PUD.
(k) Any other information that may have been required by the
Planning Commission or Council in conjunction with the
approval of the general concept plan.
3. An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for
which final development plan approval is sought.
4. A tabulation indicating the number of residential dwelling units by
number of bedrooms and expected population/housing profile.
A tabulation indicating the gross square footage, if any, of commercial
and industrial floor space by type of activity (e.g., drug store, dry
cleaning, supermarket).
6. Preliminary architectural plans indicating use, floor plan, elevations,
and exterior wall finishes of proposed buildings, including mobile
homes.
7. A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/9
layout, design, and purpose of all streets, easements, right -0f --ways,
utility lines and facilities, lots, block, public and common open space,
general landscaping plan, structures, including mobile homes, and
uses.
Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustration changes to
existing topography and natural site vegetation. The plan should
clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the
approved concept plan.
9. A final plat prepared by a land surveyor, duly registered in the state of
Minnesota, in accordance with Chapter 505 of the Statutes of
Minnesota which shall contain a notarized certification by such
surveyor that the plat represents a survey made by him and that the
monuments shown therein exist as located and that all dimensions are
correct, as required by Section 505.03, Subdivision 1, M.S.A., and a
notarized certification by owner or owners and by any mortgage
holder of record of the adoption of the plat and the dedication of
streets and other public areas as required by Section 505.03,
Subdivision 1, M.S.A.
10. A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts,
Department of Natural Resources, Soil Conservation Service, or any
other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion control
measures to be used during construction and as permanent measures.
11. A statement summarizing all changes which have been made in any
document, plan data, or information previously submitted, together
with revised copies of any such document, plan, or data.
12. Such other and further information as the Planning Commission,
Administrator, or Council shall find necessary to give full
consideration of the entire proposed PUD or any stage thereof.
13. The Planning Commission may, by a written order, excuse any
applicant from submitting any specific item of information or
document required by Section 20-3 [B] of this ordinance which it
finds to be unnecessary to the consideration of the specific proposal
for PUD approval.
14. The Planning Commission may, by written order, require the
submission of any additional information or documentation which it
may find necessary or appropriate to give full consideration of the
proposed PUD or any aspect or stage thereof.
[C] FINAL PLAN STAGE: After approval of a general concept plan for the
PUD and approval of a development stage plan for a section of the proposed
PUD, the applicant will submit the following material for review by the City
staff prior to issuance of a building permit.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/10
A detailed landscaping plan.
2. Proof of recording any easements and restrictive covenants prior to
the sale of any land or dwelling unit within the PUD and of the
establishment and activation of any entity that it to be responsible for
the management and maintenance of any public or common open
space or service facility.
3. All certificates, seals, and signatures required for the dedication of
land and recording of documents.
4. Final architectural working drawings of all structures (floor plan,
elevations, etc.; detailed plans and specs not required.)
5. Final engineering plans and specifications for streets, utilities, and
other public improvements, together with a community/developer
agreement for the installation of such improvements and financial
guarantees for the completion of such improvements.
6. Any other plan, agreements, or specifications necessary for the City
staff to review the proposed construction. All work must be in
conformance with the Minnesota State Uniform Building Code.
20-4: PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT:
[A] APPLICATION CONFERENCE: Upon filing of an application for PUD, the
applicant of the proposed PUD shall arrange for and attend a conference with
the City Planner and/or City staff.
At such conference, the applicant shall be prepared to generally describe his
proposal for a PUD. The primarypurpose of the conference shall be to
provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain
guidance as to the general suitability of this proposal for the area for which it
is proposed and its conformity to the provisions of City ordinances before
incurring substantial expense in the preparation of plans, surveys, and other
data.
[B] GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN:
PURPOSE: The general concept plan provides an opportunity for the
applicant to submit a plan at the City showing his basic intent and the
general nature of the entire development as the basis for the public
hearing so that the proposal maybe publicly considered at an early
stage. The following elements of the proposed general concept plan
represent the immediate significant elements which the City shall
review and for which a decision shall be rendered:
(a) Overall maximum PUD density range.
(b) General location of major streets and pedestrian ways.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/11
(c) General location and extent of public and common open space.
(d) General location of residential and non-residential land uses
with, approximate type and intensities of development.
(e) Staging and time schedule of development.
(f) Other special criteria for development.
2. SCHEDULE: The length of time to accomplish the following
sequence of events may vary due to publication deadlines, agenda
limitations, and/or the pre -established meeting dates of the Planning
Commission and/or City Council.
(a) Developer files application for conditional use permit and
rezoning (where applicable) concurrently with the submission
of the general concept plan (at least fifteen (15) days prior to
the Planning Commission meeting).
(b) Developer meets with the City Planner and/or City staff to
discuss the proposed development.
(c) Planning Commission formally acknowledges filing of the
application(s) for PUD, sets a public hearing, and refers the
application(s) back to City staff and appropriate commissions
for their official review.
(d) Planning Commission holds a public hearing.
(e) Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City
Council on the general concept plan.
(f) City Council reviews all recommendations and
approves/denies application(s).
3. OPTIONAL SUBMISSION OF DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLAN:
In cases of single stage PUDs or where the applicant wishes to begin
the first stage of a multiple stage PUD immediately, he may at his
option, submit development stage plans for the proposed PUD
simultaneously with the submission of the general concept plan. In
such case, the applicant shall comply with all the provisions of the
ordinance applicable to submission of the development stage plan.
The Planning Commission and Council shall consider such plans
simultaneously and shall grant or deny development stage plan
approval in accordance with the provisions of Section 20-3 hereof.
4. EFFECT OF CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL: Unless the applicant
shall fail to meet time schedules for filing development stage and final
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/12
plans, or shall fail to proceed with development in accordance with
the plans as approved, or shall in any other manner fail to comply with
any condition of this ordinance or of any approval granted pursuant to
it, a general concept plan which has been approved and a PUD
agreement signed by the applicant shall not be modified, revoked, or
otherwise impaired pending the application for approval of
development stage and final plans by any action of the City of
Monticello without the consent of the applicant.
5. LIMITATION ON GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL:
Unless a development stage plan covering at least ten (10) dwelling
units or the area designated in the general concept plan as the first
stage of the PUD, whichever is greater, has been filed within nine (9)
months from the date Council grants general concept plan approval, or
in any case where the applicant fails to file development stage and
final plans and to proceed with development in accordance with the
provisions of this ordinance and of an approved general concept plan,
the approval may be revoked by Council action. In such case, the
Council shall forthwith adopt a resolution repealing the general
concept plan approval for that portion of the PUD that has not
received final approval would otherwise be applicable. Upon
application by the applicant, the Council at its discretion may extend
for additional periods, not in excess of nine (9) months each, the filing
deadline for any development stage plan, when, for good cause
shown, such extension is necessary.
[C] DEVELOPMENT STAGE:
PURPOSE: The purpose of the development stage plan is to provide
a specific and particular plan upon which the Planning Commission
will base its recommendation to the Council and with which
substantial compliance is necessary for the preparation of the final
plan.
2. SUBMISSION OF DEVELOPMENT STAGE: Upon approval of the
general concept plan and within the time established by Section 20-4
[B] 3 of this chapter, the applicant shall file with the Administrator a
development stage plan consisting of the information and submissions
required by Section 20-3 of this chapter for the entire PUD or for one
or more stages thereof in accordance with a staging plan approved as
part of the general concept plan.
The development stage plan shall refine, implement, and be in
substantial conformance with the approved general concept plan. A
detailed plan shall be deemed not to be in substantial conformance
with an approved general concept plan if it:
(a) Departs by more than five (5) percent from the maximum
density approved for the PUD or exceeds the implied
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/13
maximum density established by the comprehensive plan for
the area in which the PUD will be located.
(b) Decreases by more than five (5) percent the area approved for
public and common open space or changes the general
location of such areas.
(c) Relocates approved circulation elements to any extent that
would decrease their function, adversely affect their relation to
surrounding lands and circulation elements, or reduce their
effectiveness as buffers or amenities.
(d) Significantly alters the arrangement of land uses within the
PUD.
(e) Delays by more than one (1) year stage of an approved staging
plan.
(f) Departs from the general concept plan in any other manner
which the Planning Commission shall, based on stated
findings and conclusions, conclude materially alters the plan
or concept for the proposed PUD.
REVIEW AND ACTION BY CITY STAFF AND PLANNING
COMMISSION: Immediately upon receipt of a completed
development stage plan, the Administrator shall refer such plan to the
following City staff and/or official bodies for the indicated action:
(a) The City Attorney for legal review of all documents.
(b) The City Engineer for review of all engineering data for
compliance with the requirements of City ordinances and
review of the City/developer agreement.
(c) The City Building Inspector for review of all building plans
for compliance with the requirements of this chapter, the State
of Minnesota Uniform Building Code, and any other
applicable federal, state, or local codes.
(d) The City Planner for review of all plans for compliance with
the intent, purpose, and requirements of this chapter and
conformity with the general concept plan and comprehensive
plan.
(e) The City Planning Commission for review and
recommendation to the Council.
(f) When appropriate, as determined by the Administrator, to the
Park and Recreation Commission for review and
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/14
recommendations.
(g) When appropriate, as determined by the Administrator, to
other special review agencies such as the Watershed Districts,
Soil Conservation Services, Highway Department, or other
affected agencies.
All staff designated in paragraphs (a) through (d) hereof shall
submit their reports in writing to the Planning Commission
and applicant.
4. SCHEDULE: The following sequence of events mayvary due to
publication deadlines, agenda limitations, and/or the pre -established
meeting dates of the Planning Commission and/or City Council.
(a) Developer makes application for subdivision (first phase of
PUD) at least fifteen (15) days prior to Planning Commission
meeting.
(b) Developer meets with the City Planner and/or City staff to
discuss specific development plans.
(c) Planning Commission formally acknowledges filing and
receipt of application, sets a public hearing, and refers
application back to City staff and appropriate commissions for
official review.
(d) Planning Commission holds a public hearing.
(e) Within sixty (60) days of the public hearing, or such further
time as may be agreed to by the applicant, the Planning
Commission shall itself review said reports and plans and
submit its written report and recommendations to the Council
and applicant. Such report shall contain the findings of the
Planning Commission with respect to the conformity of the
development stage plan to the approved general concept plan,
with respect to the merit or lack of merit of any departure of
the development stage plan from substantial conformity with
the concept plan, and with respect to the compliance of the
development stage plan with the provisions of this chapter and
all other applicable federal, state, and local codes and
ordinances. If the Planning Commission shall find substantial
conformity between such plans or that any lack of substantial
conformity merits approval and shall further find the
development stage plan to be in all other respects complete
and in compliance with this chapter and other applicable
federal, state, and local codes and ordinances, it shall
recommend approval of the plan. Otherwise, it shall
recommend denial. If the Planning Commission fails to act
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/15
within the time specified herein, it shall be deemed to have
recommended the plan for approval.
(f) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the report and
recommendation of the Planning Commission, the Council
shall grant approval, resubmit the plan to the Planning
Commission for further consideration of specified items, or
deny approval of the plan.
(g) The Administrator shall instruct the City Attorney to draw up a
PUD agreement which stipulates the specific terms and
conditions approved by the City Council and accepted by the
applicant. This agreement shall be signed by the Mayor of the
City of Monticello, City Administrator, and the applicant
within thirty (30) days of Council approval of the development
stage plan. Where the
development shall be by written report setting forth the
reasons for its action. In all cases, a certified copy of the
document evidencing Council action shall be promptly
delivered to the applicant by the Administrator.
LIMITATION ON DETAILED PLAN APPROVAL: Unless a final
plan covering the area designated in the development stage plan as the
first stage of the PUD has been filed within six (6) months from the
date Council grants development stage plan approval, or in any case
where the applicant fails to file final plans and to proceed with
development in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance
and/or an approved development stage plan, the approval shall expire.
Upon application by the applicant, the Council, at its discretion, may
extend for not more than six (6) months the filing deadline for any
final plan when, for good cause shown, such extension is necessary.
In any case where development plan approval expires, the Council
shall forthwith adopt a resolution repealing the general concept plan
approval and the development stage plan approval for that portion of
the PUD that has not received final plan approval and re-establishing
the zoning and other ordinance provisions that would otherwise be
applicable.
6. SITE IMPROVEMENTS: At any time following the approval of a
development stage plan by the Council, the applicant may, pursuant to
the applicable ordinances of the City, apply for and the Administrator
may issue grading permits for the area within the PUD for which
development stage plan approval has been given.
If in approving the development stage plan the Council expressly
authorizes it, the applicant may, pursuant to the applicable ordinances
of the City, apply for and the Administrator may issue building
permits for model homes to be constructed within the area of the PUD
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/16
provided, however, that no such permit shall be issued unless the
Administrator shall first determine that the plans for any structure
meet all applicable requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, State of
Minnesota Uniform Building Code, and/or any other applicable
federal, state, and local codes.
[D] FINAL PLAN:
PURPOSE: The final plan is to serve as a complete, thorough, and
permanent public record of the PUD and the manner in which it is to
be developed. It shall incorporate all prior approved plans and all
approved modifications thereof resulting from the PUD process. It
shall serve in conjunction with other City ordinances as the land use
regulation applicable to the PUD.
2. SUBMISSION OF FINAL PLAN: Upon approval of the
development stage plan and within the time established by Section 20-
4 [C] 5 of this chapter, the applicant shall file with the Administrator
a final plan
consisting of the information and submissions required by Section 20-
3 of this Chapter for the entire PUD or for one or more stages. The
final plan is intended only to add detail to and to put in final form the
information contained in the general concept plan and the
development stage plan and shall conform to the development stage
plan in all respects.
RECORDING OF FINAL PLAN: Within ten (10) days of its
approval, the Administrator shall cause the final plan, or such portions
thereof as are appropriate, to be recorded with the County Recorder,
Register of Deeds, or Register of Titles.
4. BUILDING AND OTHER PERMITS: Except as otherwise expressly
provided herein, upon receiving notice from the Administrator that the
approved final plan has been recorded and upon application by the
applicant pursuant to the applicable ordinances of the City, all
appropriate officials of the City may issue building and other permits
to the applicant for development, construction, and other work in the
area encompassed by the approved final plan provided that no such
permit shall be issued unless the appropriate official is first satisfied
that the requirements of all codes and ordinances which are applicable
to the permit sought have been satisfied.
5. LIMITATION ON FINAL PLAN APPROVAL: Within one (1) year
after the approval of a final plan for PUD or such shorter time as may
be established by the approved development schedule, construction
shall commence in accordance with such approved plan. Failure to
commence construction within such period shall, unless an extension
shall have been granted as hereinafter provided, automatically render
void the PUD permit and all approvals of the PUD plan, and the area
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/17
encompassed within the PUD shall thereafter be subject to those
provisions of the zoning ordinances and other ordinances applicable in
the district in which it is located. In such case, the Council shall
forthwith adopt an ordinance amendment repealing the PUD permit
and all PUD approvals and re-establishing the zoning and other
ordinance provisions that would otherwise be applicable. The time
limit established by this paragraph may, at the discretion of the
Council, be extended for not more than one (1) year by ordinance or
resolution duly adopted.
6. INSPECTIONS DURING DEVELOPMENT:
(a) COMPLIANCE WITH OVERALL PLAN: Following final
plan approval of a PUD or a stage thereof, the Building
Inspector shall, at least annually until the completion of
development, review all permits issued and construction
undertaken and compare actual development with the
approved plans for development and with the approved
development schedule.
If the Building Inspector finds that development is not
proceeding in accordance with the approved schedule or that it
fails in any other respect to comply with the PUD plans as
finally approved, he shall immediately notify the Council.
Within thirty (30) days of such notice, the Council shall either:
i. revoke the PUD permit by ordinance amendment, and
the land shall thereafter be governed by the regulations
applicable in the district in which it is located; or
ii. shall take such steps as it deems necessary to compel
compliance with the final plans as approved; or
iii. shall require the landowner or applicant to seek an
amendment of the final plan.
b. COMPLIANCE WITH CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND
DRAWINGS: All improvements to be constructed or erected
shall be subject to inspection by the City Building Inspector.
The cost attributable to all inspections required by this
subparagraph shall be charged to and paid by the owner or
applicant. Before any required inspections take place, the
owner or applicant may be required to post a deposit to cover
the cost of such inspections. The owner or applicant shall give
at least twenty-four (24) hours written notification to the City
Building Inspector prior to the performance of any of the
following work:
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/18
i. The surfacing of any roadway or street;
ii. The installation of any curbing or gutters;
iii. The grading or backfilling of any open trench or
excavation in which any utility facilities, including but
not limited to, water line, sewer lines, gas lines, and
electrical cables, shall have been installed.
improvements as
plan and
final inspection
opinion of the City
affect the performance,
of said improvements, the
notify the applicant in writing of
deficiencies, or deviations, and the owner or
If upon inspection, in the opinion of the City Building
Inspector, any work does not comply with the approved
construction plans and drawings of the approved final
plan, the City Building Inspector shall have authority to
order that all such work shall be terminated until such
time as necessary steps are taken to correct any defects
or deficiencies. The owner or applicant shall notify the
City Building Inspector and request a reinspection.
Upon completion of all required improvements within
the area covered by the approved final plan, the owner
or applicant shall notify the City Building Inspector
who shall
thereupon conduct a final inspection of all
installed from the approved construction
drawings or approved final plan. If said
reveals defects which will, in the
shall, at his sole cost and expense, correct such
deviations within six (6) months of the date of
notifications. When such defects, deficiencies, or
deviations have been corrected, the owner or applicant
shall notify the City Building Inspector that the
improvements are again ready for final inspection.
Building Inspector, adversely
suitability, or desirability
Building Inspector shall
such defects,
applicant
defects or
If a final inspection indicates that all improvements as
installed contain no defects, deficiencies, or deviations,
then within ten (10) days from the completion of such
inspection, the City Building Inspector shall certify to
the Council that all improvements have been installed
in conformity with the construction plans and drawings
and the final plan. The Council shall thereupon by
resolution formally accept such improvements at which
time they shall become the property of the City of
Monticello.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/19
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 20/20