Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 09-07-1999MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, September 7, 1999 Members Present: Dick Fric. Robbie Smith, Roy Popilek, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten and Council Liaison Clint Herbst Staff Present: Jeff O'Neill, Steve Grittman. Fred Patch and Lori Kraemer I. Chair Dick Frie called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. @nmoval of minutes of the reeular meeting held Atmust 3. 1999. ROY POPILEK MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 3, 1999 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried with Chair Frie abstaining. 3. Consideration of addine items to the aggada. No items were added. Chair Frie thanked Vice Chair Carlson for chairing the August 3. 1999 meeting in his absence. 4. Citizens comments. There were no comments from the audience. 5. Public Hearing - Consideration ofa reauest for a Rezoning from R-1. Single Family to A- O. AZiculmml-Onen Snace District and a Conditional Ilse Permit within the AA Zoning District to allow n Golf Course and Club House. finlicant: Monticello Country Club. Steve Grittman presented the staff report noting the Monticello Country Club is requesting a rezoning of its golf course property to A -O. Agricultural -Open Space to re- establish the club as a conforming use. and facilitate the expansion of the club house by Conditional Use Permit. Steve noted that the R -I zoning %%-as transferred over from the previous ordinance and needs to be changed to A -O. The expansion consists ofa two- level addition which includes lower level access to the golf course from a new pro shop. and kitchen, lounge, and banquet facilities on the upper level. The request also includes the construction ofa new maintenance building adjacent to 1-94 and County Highway 39. The A -O District sets certain standards for Golf Course or Country Club Conditional Use Permits. These include a requirement that no more than 5% of the property is covered by buildings and that appropriate buffering is considered where adjacent to residential uses. The Monticello Country Club is in conformance with the general performance standards. However, there arc a few issues which needed to be addressed. First, the parking area should be expanded appropriately. It was requested by commissioners to have 139 parking spaces. Also as noted above, the Conditional Use Permit provisions require buffering from adjacent residential uses. A landscape plan was not included in the submission packet. In order to conform to the requirements of the CUP, staff recommended that a landscape plan be prepared illustrating a plant material buffer between the commercial activity areas of the club house and maintenance buildings from the residential development to the southeast. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Idella "Ziegler. 1201 Golf Course Rd, stated she had several concerns regarding the width of the road coming into the course, options of other entrances into the course for use of the banquet facility and concerns of guests leaving the facility after consuming alcohol if a liquor license were issued. Todd Hill, member of the Monticello Country Club and Secretary for the Board, represented the Country Club. He noted that it is important for the Country Club to enlarge in order to better meet the needs of the community. Their plans are to improve the club house and put up a maintenance building for storage purposes which will also enhance the "view' by storing equipment. The course representative addressed the comments from staff and neighbors who were concerned about tmffic, hours of operation, possible public financing as well as parking problems. Mr. Hill stressed that the facility is being constructed to support golf related activity and that its specific use for banquet and as a standalone restaurant is limited. He further stated the level of traffic should not increase dramatically with the expansion of the club house. Traffic and other options for entrancetcxit to the facility were discussed again, and Mr. Hill stated as a Board they have not yet addressed this. Additional consideration has been given to entrance into the facility, however, it was noted that this is not a City owned road but a private drive. Merle Dahlheimer. 1201 Golf Course Rd, asked Steve Gritttnan to explain the rezoning and how far it will expand in regard to the borders. Mr. Dahlheimer's concern was that the City could consider a rezoning of this property at any time again in the future. Dennis Sullivan.1201 Golf Course Rd, commented that he has no objection to the expansion and that he wishes to have no screening as he enjoys his view. Genevieve Aydt, 1201 Golf Course Rd, had concerns regarding the landscaping. She was assured that the MCC would be working with staff and input from the residents. Mrs. Aydt also had a concem about the underground water service and it was questioned whether this was actually on golf course property or townhome property. I lolly Inderlee, 1201 Golf Course Rd, was concerned also with the number of parking spaces if there were a tournament and a banquet going on at the same time. Mr. Hill stated that would not be the case as they could not handle that number of people. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. The consensus of the members were concerns with parking, exterior of the proposed maintenance building, additional restrooms, screening and entrance into the course. It was noted by Rick Traver and Todd hill, representatives of the MCC, that these items are being worked on. Grading and drainage will be rcvicwcd by the City linginecr. It was also noted that the maintenance building exterior would match the club house and that it would be landscaped as well. It was noted by the Planning Commission members that language should be added to the conditions stating specifics on the number of parking stalls needed. Compliance with all performance standards of the parking lot standards should also be adhered to. There was an issue on the requirement for curbing which will be discussed with the engineer. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROY POPILEK TO APPROVE. THE REZONING FROM R-1 TO A -O, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE GOLF COURSE BETTER MEETS THE INTENT OF THIS DISTRICT, AND THAT THE FUTURE. LAND USE OF THIS AREA IS BETTER PROTECTED BY AN A -O ZONING DESIGNATION. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried unanimously. A MOTION WAS MADE. BY ROBBIE SMITH TO APPROVE THE CUP, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE STANDARDS APPLICABLE. TO THIS USE. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROBBIE SMITH AMENDED HIS MOTION TO ADD LANGUAGE TO ITEM 3 OF THE CONDITIONS TO STATE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES WILL BE 139 AND ADDING CONDITION NUMBER S STATING STAFF HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING PLANS FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND COLOR CONSISTENCY WITH NEARBY BUILDINGS. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Public Hearine - Consideration of n reauest for a Final Planned Unit Development Permit within the CCDLoninc District to allow a mixed use feed and retail orMrations, Annlicant: Little Mountain Feed. Steve Grinntan presented the stafTrcpon. Little Mountain Feed has applied for a final PUD approval to allow for the expansion of their facility between Linn and Maple Streets, north of the Burlington Northern Railroad. The applicant has shifted the building slightly to the north from the original approval. This change allows him to concentrate the truck and forklift activity to the east, resulting in less of an impact on the residential property adjacent to the north boundary of the site. 'rhe applicant is requesting that employee parking continue to be located on the grovel area adjacent to Linn Street. Asa part of the original PUD discussions, the applicant has been permitted to expand the operation in phases to minimize the economic impacts on the business. Retaining an unpaved parking area for employees may be approved as a part of the PUD, however• staff recommended some delineation of spaces to maintain a clear parking arca. It was noted that concrete curb bumpers are in place at this time. The planning commission did not feel comfortable requiring immediate paving of the drive/parking areas on the Linn Street side when the City street is not paved. Therefore, a period oftwo years after the completion of paving and curbing along the adjacent Linn Street ROW is satisfactory to the planning commission. With regard to customer parking adjacent to the retail area. the applicant shows 12 spaces to be paved, striped, and curbed in accordance with the ordinance. This area would actually require approximately 25 spaces, depending on the amount of floor space which is used for storage or material handling (as opposed to retail floor space). The City has the flexibility to permit a parking supply lower than the ordinance requirement in the CCD District, based on an agreement in which the applicant contributes to a public parking fund. The parking lot to be provided should meet standards, however. In this case, the applicant has proposed that the curb line be located on the property line. with a landscaped screen on the adjacent railroad easement (also the City's right-of-way). There is adequate room on this plan to meet the 5 foot setback. and provide the landscaping on the applicant's own property. Finally, the site plan shows an eight foot high property line fence along the north side of the site. The remaining 25 feet is to be landscaped, and serve as a buffer to the residential area to the north. Due to its height, it may be preferable to locate the fence five feet from the property line, and provide a landscaped buffer outside of the fenced area to mitigate the impact on the residential area. The Zoning Ordinance provides a list of required sizes, and other guidance for the development of the landscape plan. An additional issue was the proposed exterior grain bin which would be added to the south side of the existing building. The bin is a metal structure, apparently 34 feet high. based on the information submitted by the applicant. Staff was concerned about the visual impacts of the site from the Community Center property south of the railroad. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission members asked Jeff Bums, Little Mountain Fecd, if he was in agreement with the conditions. Mr. Bums stated he is currently working with the railroad on the ROW which would allow the required setbacks. Mr. Bums also stated that there is an 8 ft. fence on the north side of the property and would like to continue that affect as part of the buffering. Steve Grittman suggested adding language to condition number 2 C that the applicant works with the property owner regarding the landscaping. It was noted that the grain bin already exists and that the conformity of these types of bins seem to work best for the applicant as well as the City. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL STAGE. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN EXHIBIT Z, AND BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE INTENT OF THE CCD DISTRICT AND THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION. ROBBIE SMITH AMENDED HIS MOTION TO STATE IN ITEM S OF THE CONDITIONS THAT LIMITATION OF UNPAVED PARKING AREAS FOR NO MORE THAN TWO YEARS FROM THE DATE OF FULL ROAD AND CURB IMPROVEMENTS TO LINN STREET. ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. Motion carried unanimously. 7. Continued Public Hcarina - Consideration of a zoning text amendment to allow external jlluminated oroiecting wall signs. Apolicent: Citv ofMonticello. Fred Patch presented the staff report. City Council recently tabled this item for further research. Subsequently, the DAT and planning commission reviewed the ordinance again, prepared clarifications and obtained pictures showing projecting signs that would comply with the proposed ordinance. The Monticello Downtown and Riverfront Revitalization Plan encourages the design and installation of projecting signs of up to 6 square feet. Currently, the Monticello Zoning Ordinance does not recognize the CCD District for the purposes of signs. In addition, the Downtown and Riverfront Revitalization Plan Design Guidelines are inconsistent with the general regulations of the Zoning Code which specifically prohibits projecting signs. Suggested amendments made would allow externally illuminated projecting wall signs only in the Central Community District. Such signs would have to be erected at least 8 feet above grade and must not exceed 6 square feet in area. Fred Patch provided the proposed ordinance. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Pam Campbell, Chair of the DAT provided pictures of projecting signs allowed in other cities. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance and suggested language clarifications which have been incorporated into the document and will be presented to the City Council for approval. There were several concerns regarding the interpretation of the language in the ordinance relating to the distance the signs can project from the building, as well as illumination of Cthe signs. Mr. Scott Hill, resident, felt it was unfair for the City to regulate signs as this is regulating advertising as well. Fred Patch stated there would be a need for a CUP for any businesses of more than two per building. The commission also had concerns with hours of illumination. This could be addressed in ordinance. The commissioners stated there be a clause in the ordinance subject to the approval of DAT and appeal would go to the Planning Commission. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. The members clarified that this sign ordinance is in the CCD district only. A change was made in Section 6, item iii as well as the addition of items vi and vii. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE ORDINANCE. AMENDMENT ALLOWING. PROJECTING WALL SIGNS IN THE CCD DISTRICT, WITH CORRECTIONS MADE, BE APPROVED. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carred. Public Hearina - Consideration of ammine a conditional use nermit allowinq a small exonnsion to o restnumnt/bar. Applicant: Hawks Snorts Bar and Grill. Planning Commission was asked to consider granting a conditional use permit that would allow a small expansion to Hawks Bar. As you may know, Hawks was annexed to the City into a B-3 zone. The B3 District allows Bars/Restaurants as a conditional use when located in close proximity to a residential arca. When lla%%ts was annexed, the facility came into the city as o permitted use (by conditional use permit). However, the site itself is non -conforming because it was developed under County regulations. Typically, wfien such non -conforming sites are expanded, an effort is made to bring the site up to code. City staff knows of no complaints from local residents regarding the operation of the facility. The site area, not including the parcel in the Township. is 40.000 square feet. The useable building area is being expanded from 2.338 to 3.326 square feet. The expansion area is on the south side of the building and will result in 988 sq. R. of addition dining area. The parking requirement for the site is estimated by the contractor, using code requirements, at 75 stalls. Parking stalls shown on the site plan amount to 68. The site plan needs to be updated to show parking stall and drive aisle dimensions. There is no curb proposed by the owner around the perimeter of the parking area. Striping of the lot is also needed. It is suggested that the stall deficiency be accepted under the "proof of parking" provision of the "Zoning ordinance. Under this provision, the CUP could be approved under the provision that additional stalls be constructed somewhere on the property at some point in the future, if necessary, as determined by the Planning Commission. Storm water flows off the site on the north side of the parking lot onto an adjoining parcel. It may be necessary to make improvement to control this flow to avoid erosion. Currently there is minimal landscaping and no trees on site. It was suggested the site plan be adjusted to show plantings necessary to comply with city code. The site consists of three parcels. The building expansion is occurring on the middle parcel with the westerly wall located withing the setback of the adjacent parcel. Typically, this problem could be resolved simply by extinguishing the lot line. In this case, this is impossible within the developers time frame because the westerly parcel must first be annexed to the city before the lot line can he extinguished. As an alternative to removing the lot line, the owner will be placing a restriction against the lot that promises that the lot will not be sold separately. The sign system consisting ofa wall sign and pylon sign have been permitted by the City and require no updating. It was stated that it if this were a new building it would be in violation of the City code. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. There were no complaints from the audience. Carla Hunt, owner of Ilawks, stated her concern regarding curb and gutter. She asked if the Planning Commission could write something in the conditions that states curb and gutter would need to be completed in 3 to 5 years. She also stated they had made some changes to the drainage flow. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. The commissioners requested that proof of parking area be identified and that the owner needs to construct the parking area. Relaxation of this requirement to occur if the City changes the ordinance. They were also in agreement with being lenient on the time length to require curb and gutter. The commissioners added condition number 9 stating the applicant seek annexation of the adjoining township parcel. The Planning Commission recommended approval based on the conditions listed under Exhibit Z. It %vas noted that the commissioners were firm on the need for curb and gutter. but will likely be introducing ordinance language that will allow flexibility in timing of curb improvements for businesses that are upgrading facilities. If and when the code changes, the applicant will be submitting a request for consideration under the new provision governing curb installation. DICK FRIE MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING EXPANSION OF A RESTAURANTIBAR IN A B-3 ZONE CONTINGENT ON MEETING REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT Z. MOTION BASED ON THE FINDING THAT THE EXPANSION UNDER THE CONDITIONS LISTED WILL UPGRADE THE AREA AND WILL NOT RESULT IN A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE NEARBV RESIDENTIAL AREA. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried. 9. Continued Public Ilcarine - Consideration of Concent and Develonment Stave Residential Planned Unit Develonment Consistine of Five 12 Unit Anartments. Annlicant: Monticello Villaee Apartments - Monticello Village Apartments has submitted a revised Concept Plan for Planning Commission consideration pursuant to the direction of the City Council. The applicants are now requesting approval of both the Concept Plan and Development Stage PUD Plan. Changes to the original plan include the following: Revised the pond dimensions to provide a portion of the ponding area to the north of the apartment buildings adjacent to the property line. Revised the building locations to provide for better building spacing. Revised the garage structures to provide some garage stalls on the east side of the project. One item has been identified which should be incorporated into the plans for the project. Due to the number of units on the site, staff recommended that a play structure be located within the project to provide on-site recreation for young children living in the complex. The Community Center and Pinewood Elementary School are within a few blocks of the project which will provide reasonable play opportunities for school age children in the neighborhood. A suggested location would be to offset the central 10 space parking lot, and include a play area in this courtyard. The applicants were in agreement with this recommendation. Lastly, the developer is aware of the $750/unit park dedication fee and appears to be able to fund this cost. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Brian Sullivan of RLK addressed concerns of the planning commission as well as resident Scott Ifill regarding runoff from Ruffs Auto draining into the pond. It was stated that they will not be changing the flow of the runoff from what it is now. Mr. Brennan, resident, noted that they had a soil pollution test done and there was no pollution found. Signage and security were also discussed and it was noted by Mr. Bates that they will have a small ground sign. not illuminated, at the entrance of the building. The building will have secured doors as well as parking lot lighting. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. Concept PUD approval for Monticello Village Apartments ( ROY POPILEK MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REVISED CONCEPT STAGE PUD, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT, AS WELL AS ADDITION RECOMMENDATIONS MADE IN EXHIBIT Z. ROD DRAGSTF.N SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried. Development Stage PUD Approval for Monticello Village Apartments ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT STAGE PUD, SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN EXHIBIT Z. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried. 10. Public Hearine - Consideration of Rencwine the Interim Use Permit for the Monticello Public Schools'fuminq Point ALP, Applicant: Monticello Public Schools The Monticello School District is applying for renewal of an interim use permit for public school use at 1248 Oakwood Drive East, in an 1-1 Light Industrial District. Originally allowed by the City in September 1997, the interim use permit stipulated that upon the one year anniversary of the original interim use permit, the applicant must reapply to the City. Over the course of the past year staff received no complaints from adjacent property owners. The Alternative Learing Center program has been a success and staff is recommending that the interim use be allowed to continue for an additional year term. It is suggested that the interim use permit again expire on some date certain, and that the School District be required to reapply to the City on or before that expiration date should they want to continue the interim use. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Gene Garman, representative of the ALP, addressed the Planning Commission stating that this location works better for their students as it is removed from the general school property and they find that remote sites are most successful. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. Ager discussion, the Planning Commission asked that this interim use permit be extended to two years, subject to inspection by the Building OfficialfPlanning and Zoning Administrator. DICK FRIE MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO THE MONTICELLO SCHOOL DISTRICT TO OPERATE AN ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL PROGRAM AT 12411 OAKWOOD DRIVE EAST, SUBJECT TO THE C FINDINGS THAT THE PROPOSED USE WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE CITY'S LONG RANGE OBJECTIVES TO ENCOURAGE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, AND THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO THE INTERIM USE PERMIT: I. The interim use permit will expire on August 31, 2001. Extension of the use of the subject property for public school use beyond the termination date may only be allowed by re-application to the City. 2. The District agrees to expand the parking area at the direction of the City. The City will direct expanded parking based on its observation of parking demand which may cause the use of on -street parking at any time. 3. The use of the subject property will be during normal school hours only. 4. The granting of this Interim use permit shall not be effective until atter inspection and approval of the building and property by the City Building Official. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion carried. r 11. ZoningCode Violations at Lots 6 and 7 Block 3. Oakwood Industrial Park. \� City staff has compiled a partial listing and documented zoning code issues at the subject property. The list includes the following problem areas. Expansion of outside storage onto adjoining parcel has occurred recently without a conditional use permit. Also. the expansion area does not contain a principal structure. Outside storage on an individual lot is not allowed without an interim use permit. The solution here is to combine the lots and process a conditional use permit allowing outside storage. Requirements associated with outside storage CUP are not being met which include establishment of a buffer yard adjacent to residential area to the south. Storage or parking areas need to be paved or non -dust producing rock used. Other landscaping improvements as required 2. Glare. Flood lights on the south wall spill light into the adjoining residential area to the south. These lights should be relocated to poles and pointed down. Above ground tanks constructed without a permit and in violation of set -back ordinances. ( 4. No permit ever obtained for storage of blocks. It should be noted that piste trees were planted by the owner in an effort to screen blocks. This was done on his own without city involvement. 10 City Staff is looking for direction from the Planning Commission to address this issue. It was noted that there have been complaints regarding glare from the lighting recently put up. After further discussion, the Planning Commission recommended City Staff put together a letter listing all recommendationstissues and have City Attorney Dennis Dalen review and comment. City stalPwill arrange a meeting with the property owner to discuss opportunities to upgrade the site to meet code. 12. Discussion on registering erina for the tele -conference session for the Y2 Plan Conference. It was recommended that everyone look over the information provided by Jeff O'Neill and contact Jeff if there is an interest in registering for this session. 13. Consideration of signing un for the Annual Planning Association Conference. Registration forms %%vm included in packet to the Planning Commissioners. 14.AdJoutn. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED AND ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried. ri raem., ec�retary